Current Monitoring Reports
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 116
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
October 1 - November 30, 2010 (Monthly Report)
The Taylor Defense team formally rested its case on November 12, 2010. The Trial Chamber will not sit
again until closing arguments commence in February 2011. During this reporting period, the last
Defense witness was called and the Chamber ruled on several Defense motions. The Chamber denied a
Defense motion requesting an investigation of the Office of the Prosecutor on allegations of contempt
of court, but granted the Defense leave to appeal. Also, after ordering the Prosecution to disclose
exculpatory evidence concerning the alleged death of AFRC leader Johnny Paul Koroma, the Court
denied a Defense motion to introduce that evidence into the record. Leave to appeal this decision was
also granted. These and other legal issues are discussed below, along with a discussion of the testimony
from the final witness to testify in the case against Charles Taylor.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 115
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
August 1- September 30, 2010 (Monthly Report)
The Taylor trial began to wind down during this reporting period, with the testimony
of two Defense witnesses and three additional witnesses for the Prosecution. Issa
Sesay concluded his testimony and the Defense called DCT-008, a Liberian radio
operator for Taylor's Special Security Services (SSS) unit. The Prosecution also
called three witnesses in August, re-opening its case approximately a year and a
half after formally resting in February 2009. The Court dealt with a number of
important legal issues including, inter alia, the exclusion of custodial statements
given by Defense witness Issa Sesay; the introduction of documentary evidence; the
Prosecution's disclosure of information about Defense witness DCT-097; a Defense
motion to exclude or limit evidence falling outside the scope of the indictment; and
a motion requesting an investigation into contempt of court for the Prosecution.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 114
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
July, 2010 (Monthly Report)
Trial Chamber II at the SCSL continued to hear evidence from Defense witnesses this
month in the case against Charles Taylor. Proceedings were cut short at the end of
the month (July 19 – July 23), when the Trial Chamber entered its weeklong summer
recess. The Trial Chamber returned to the usual schedule on July 26. The Defense
introduced only one witness during this reporting period, former interim leader of
the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), Issa Hassan Sesay. This report summarizes
witness testimony heard during the month of July and identifies important issues
that have arisen at trial.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 113
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
June 1 - June 30(Monthly Report)
Trial Chamber II at the SCSL continued to hear evidence from Defense witnesses this
month in the case against Charles Taylor. Proceedings were cut short at the end of
the month (June 28 – July 2), when the Defense team asked the Trial Chamber to take
an unscheduled break, because the Defense was unable to produce a witness for this
interval (they cited scheduling conflicts and logistical issues). The Trial Chamber
resumed its usual schedule on July 5.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 112
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
May 1, 2010 - May 31, 2010 (Monthly Report)
Trial Chamber II at the SCSL continued to hear evidence from Defense witnesses this
month in the case against Charles Taylor. Witnesses, all of whom were NPFL insiders,
testified about the early days of the NPFL, and told the Court that Taylor did not
supply the RUF with arms or ammunition. Witnesses further claimed that the NPFL did
not use child soldiers or commit crimes against Liberian civilians—who, witnesses
testified, welcomed and supported the NPFL. May also saw a motion in which the
Prosecution requested to re-open its case and hear testimony from Naomi Campbell and
others about Taylor allegedly giving Campbell a large rough-cut diamond/several
rough-cut diamonds while at a fundraiser at Nelson Mandela’s house in 1997. The
motion spurred significant media coverage for the SCSL, as Campbell publicly denied
that Taylor had given her diamonds but refused to cooperate with the SCSL
Prosecution.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 111
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
April 1, 2010 - April 30, 2010 (Monthly Report)
The Defense case moved ahead steadily in April, with three new witnesses taking the
stand for Charles Taylor. By the end of this reporting period, Taylor’s Defense team
had called a total of eleven witnesses. Much of the testimony this month focused on
events occurring before the indictment period (which spans from 1996 to 2002),
including the formation and training of the RUF in 1991, its first incursions into
Sierra Leone, and the early years of the war. This testimony can help the Defense
disassociate Taylor from allegations that he created and/or supported the RUF from
1991 through the conclusion of the war in 2002. This report summarizes witness
testimony heard during the month of April and identifies important issues that have
arisen at trial.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 110
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
February 22, 2010 - March 31, 2010 (Monthly Report)
The Defense called its second witness, Yankuba Samateh, a.k.a. Yanks Smythe, on
Monday February 22, 2010. By the second week of March, the Defense had increased the pace at which it was calling witnesses, with six witnesses completing testimony
during this reporting period. The witnesses testified primarily about Taylor’s time
in Libya, the use of child soldiers, and how the RUF acquired guns and ammunition.
Many witnesses during this period were granted protective measures, and much of
their testimony took place in closed session. With the conclusion of testimony by
the Accused, this report marks a return to our regular monthly reporting intervals
on the Taylor trial. This report summarizes witness testimony heard during the
period of February 22 through March 31, 2010, and identifies important issues that
have arisen at trial.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 109
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
November 10, 2009 - February 18, 2010 (Cross Examination of the Accused, Charles Taylor)
This report provides an in depth review of the cross-examination and subsequent
re-examination of Charles Taylor in the Special Court for Sierra Leone case,
Prosecutor v. Charles Taylor. Taylor first took the stand in his own defense on July
14, 2009. He testified under direct examination for thirteen weeks. During his
subsequent cross-examination, the Prosecution had the opportunity to question Taylor
on the content of his testimony, and attempt to damage his credibility as a witness.
Cross-examination began on November 10, 2009, and lasted approximately eleven weeks,
concluding on February 5, 2010. The Court granted the Defense one week to prepare
for its re-examination, which lasted from February 15 - 18, 2010. On February 18,
2010, Taylor finally stepped down from the stand, ending his seven-month period as a
witness in the case against him. This report concentrates on Taylor's
cross-examination, while identifying the legal and procedural issues that have
arisen during the reporting period.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 108
Trial Chamber II - Charles Taylor Trial
July, 2009 - November, 2009 (Direct Examination of the Accused, Charles Taylor)
This report provides an in-depth review of the examination-in-chief of Charles Taylor in the Special Court for Sierra Leone case Prosecutor v. Charles Taylor. With much anticipation and media attention, Charles Taylor, former president of Liberia, took the stand in his own defense on July 13, 2009. His testimony came after ninety-one Prosecution witnesses provided evidence against him over the course of a year, supporting allegations of eleven counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Sierra Leone during a decade-long civil war. Taylor's direct-examination, conducted by his Lead Counsel, Courtenay Griffiths, QC, lasted thirteen weeks. Taylor's testimony involved a detailed account of his rise to power, West African politics, his efforts at making peace in Sierra Leone, and his ongoing struggle to retain power and promote stability in Liberia. The Defense focused on distancing Taylor from the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), and highlighted the myriad of regional and international players involved in the Sierra Leone conflict; Taylor's role as a peacemaker in Sierra Leone; the ongoing battles for control Taylor faced as president of Liberia; and the porous and uncontrolled border with Sierra Leone. The Defense also led evidence aimed at generally discrediting Prosecution witnesses. A subsequent report will take an in-depth look at Taylor's cross-examination, and regular monthly reports will recommence with the testimony of regular Defense witnesses.
Read Full Report in PDF
Special Report on the Rule 98 Motion for Acquittal on Basis of Insufficient Evidence
Trial Chamber II – Charles Taylor Trial
July 2009
This report details the submissions of the parties and Trial Chamber judgment on the recent Rule 98 motion for acquittal brought by the accused in the Prosecutor v. Charles Taylor. Pursuant to Rule 98 of the SCSL Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Trial Chamber II heard oral submissions from the parties on a motion for acquittal brought by Counsel for the Accused at teh halfway point of the trial. The Defense is entitled to bring this motion at the close of the Prosecution's case-in-chief. The premise underlying a Rule 98 motion is that the Prosecution has failed to present evidence sufficient to support a guilty verdict for one or more of the alleged crimes in the indictment. In the Taylor case, the Defense argued that the Prosecution failed to present evidence sufficient to support a conviction on all counts. Consistent with statements the Defense has made since the beginning of trial, the Accused did not contest the veracity of the crime-base evidence. Instead, the Defense argued almost exclusively that the Prosecution had failed to adduce adequate linkage evidence tying Mr. Taylor to the crimes committed in Sierra Leone. The Prosecution sought dismissal of the motion in its entirety, countering that it had led evidence capable of supporting a conviction on each count in the indictment. After hearing arguments from both sides, the Court deliberated for one week and then dismissed the Defense motion in its entirety. In a unanimous decision, delivered orally from the bench, the Judges of Trial Chamber II held that the Prosecution had led sufficient evidence, under a JCE theory of liability, to support conviction on all counts of the indictment. Despite detailed submissions from the parties, the Court declined to address the strength of the Prosecution evidence under any other mode of liability.
Read full report in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 107
Trial Chamber II – Charles Taylor Trial
December 2008 - February 2009
After 205 days—or 41 full weeks—of court sessions, examination of the Prosecution's 91st and final witness concluded on January 30, 2009. Prosecutor Stephen Rapp said his team had "achieved was [they] set out to do."1 Proceedings ran smoothly and efficiently in these final weeks. The Defendant missed a single day of trial on the last day of the session, but he gave consent for the trial to proceed in his absence. The trial session extended several days past the original schedule in December so the Defense could finish cross-examining witness TF1-274, Dauda Fornie, before the winter recess (December 12, 2008 — January 12, 2009). Fornie, a radio operator in the RUF, provided the last strong linkage testimony heard in open session. Upon resuming hearings in January, the Court heard the remaining seven Prosecution witnesses. Hassan Bility, a Liberian journalist, testified that Taylor had him tortured for authoring newspaper articles about Taylor's involvement with the RUF in Sierra Leone. Special Court for Sierra Leone employee Tarik Maliq testified about how documentary evidence is processed at the SCSL. One witness gave testimony entirely in closed session. The Prosecution closed the session with four crime-base witnesses. These witnesses provided testimony about the atrocities allegedly committed by the RUF and AFRC forces in Sierra Leone from 1996 to 2002.
Read full report in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 106
Trial Chamber II – Charles Taylor Trial
October 1 - October 31, 2008
The trial against Charles Taylor rushed ahead in the month of October: the Prosecution called 32 witnesses in 17 days of trial, and the parties litigated several noteworthy procedural issues. The witnesses (all crime-base or victim witnesses) provided harrowing testimony about mass atrocities they claim to have experienced or witnessed in Sierra Leone. Nearly half of the witnesses testified under Rule 92bis, which allowed them to submit prior written statements in lieu of undergoing direct examination. Pursuant to court order, however, the Defense was granted the right to cross-examine any 92bis witness it wished to question in open court. After Defense made clear that it intended to call all proposed 92bis witnesses to The Hague for cross-examination, the Prosecution reduced the total number of witnesses it intends to call from 144 (72 viva voce and 72 via Rule 92bis), to about 95, nearly 50 witnesses fewer than originally slated. By the end of the reporting period, the Prosecution had called a total of 80 witnesses. The focus this month on victim witnesses also gave rise to litigation over several procedural issues in court, including the rescission of protective measures, the general well-being and treatment of victim witnesses, and WVS redactions of confidential information executed without a court order. There was also an unsuccessful Defense motion to disqualify the Bench from presiding over the testimony of a particular witness.
Read full report in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 105
Trial Chamber II – Charles Taylor Trial
August 18 - August 29, 2008
Following the Court's scheduled summer recess from July 21 to August 18, the trial of Charles Taylor got off to a slow start. The accused refused to appear in Court for the first two days of trial, in protest of heightened security measures imposed on Mr. Taylor at the detention facility by the Dutch prison authorities. On Wednesday, the accused appeared in Court, yet the scheduled cross-examination of witness TF1-375 could not begin because Mr. Munyard, the cross-examining Defense attorney, was out ill. Instead, the Prosecution began its examination-in-chief of witness TF1-367, with the understanding that the Court would interrupt his testimony and Mr. Munyard would resume cross-examination of TF1-375 upon recovery from his illness. Mr. Munyard returned after two days of testimony by witness TF1-367. Witness TF1-375 concluded his testimony during the second week of the reporting period. Cross-examination of Witness TF1-367 continued into the next reporting period. The Prosecution has called 35 out of a planned 72 viva voce witnesses.
Read full report in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 104
Trial Chamber I – RUF Trial
June 2 - June 24, 2008
This report offers a thematic overview and analysis of the evidentiary, legal, procedural, and court management issues that arose during the final session of the Revolutionary United Front ("RUF") trial,1 during which the Defense for third accused Augustine Gbao presented its case-in-chief. Taken together with similar reports provided by the War Crimes Studies Center during the past four years,2 it hopes to constitute a helpful record to those who would like to compare each side's recently-completed final briefs and arguments, as well as the Court's forthcoming judgment, to the evidence presented. Researchers interested in issues ranging from the evidentiary to the procedural to the administrative will also find it useful. Although the Gbao Defense case was not lengthy, the evidence provided therein has important implications for the RUF trial as a whole (and indeed, the historical record of the war that the Court is creating).
Read full RUF report in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 103
Trial Chamber I – RUF Trial
September - December, 2007
The following report is intended to provide the reader with an overview of the RUF's recently completed tenth trial session (the 'Tenth RUF Trial Session' or the 'Session'). The case against the alleged senior members of the Revolutionary United Front is arguably the most complex case the Special Court will try, but international focus on the trial has largely been waning. The War Crimes Studies Center hopes that this report will reinvigorate research and reporting interest in the RUF trial, as well as assist those currently analyzing the work of the Special Court by providing them with an update on proceedings that, for reasons explained below, are almost entirely inaccessible to an international audience.
Read full RUF report in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 102
Trial Chamber I – RUF Trial
June26 - June 29, 2007
Early this week, the Prosecution concluded its cross examination of the first accused, Issa Sesay. After Mr. Sesay stepped down, the Defense called its next two witnesses, both civilian women from Kailahun district testifying under protective measures. They were designated DIS-302 and DIS-301. Both women concluded their testimony before court adjourned on the 28th of June. This week's proceedings brought the summer trial session to a close. As announced earlier this month, the Trial Chamber adjourned a full month earlier than originally anticipated. At close of proceedings, the Presiding Judge announced that trial will resume the 11th of September, 2007.
Read full report on Issa Sesay in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 101
Trial Chamber I – RUF Trial
June19 - June 22, 2007
This week, Trial Chamber One concluded its voir dire inquiry into the post-arrest custodial interrogation of first accused, Issa Sesay. Defense called three witnesses and the Chamber heard brief closing submissions from each party. On Friday morning, the Bench ruled against the Prosecution—excluding Mr. Sesay's statements as involuntary on the grounds that OTP investigators took them in breach of the fundamental rights of the accused. Immediately following the Trial Chamber's oral decision, the main trial resumed, Mr. Sesay returned to the stand, and the Prosecution began its cross-examination.
Read full report on Issa Sesay in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 100
Trial Chamber I – RUF Trial
June12 - June15, 2007
The Investigations Section of the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) came into serious disrepute this week during a special voir dire hearing to determine the admissibility of post-arrest statements made in 2003 by first accused, Issa Sesay. The four investigators called by the Prosecution to testify in this "trial within a trial" denied any professional misconduct or procedural rights violations during Mr. Sesay's arrest, detention, and interrogation. However, they went on to give evidence in direct and cross examination which, to varying degrees for each witness, largely corroborated the Defense allegations that Mr. Sesay's statements were taken in breach of Article 17 of the Statute of the Court and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The testimony further confirmed numerous irregular, unexplained investigative practices of the OTP unit.
Read full report on Issa Sesay in PDF format
Special Court Monitoring Program Update # 99
Trial Chamber I – RUF Trial
June 8, 2007
Trial Chamber I spent this week hearing detailed oral arguments on the admissibility of prior statements made by the first accused, Issa Sesay. The statements in controversy were taken by OTP Investigators during ten days of custodial interviews in March and April of 2003, immediately following Mr. Sesay's initial detention. At issue was the voluntariness of Mr. Sesay's statements and his alleged waivers of the right remain silent and the right to counsel. Prosecution sought to admit the transcripts, arguing that Investigators legitimately obtained the waivers and questioned Sesay in accordance with the procedural rights of the accused. Defense counsel argued that trickery, threats, and other improperly coercive methods were used to obtain the waivers and further elicit involuntary statements from the accused in breach of Rules 42, 63, and 92.
Read full report on Issa Sesay in PDF format
