This is the light edition of the RNW website. Click here for the full version.
10 May, 2011 - 11:08

Antonio Cassese - President with a purpose

President Antonio Cassese of the Lebanon Tribunal data/files/cassese.jpg

In the coming months, the UN-backed Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) expects to begin arresting and putting on trial those responsible for the assassination of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
By Geraldine Coughlan
As the STL moves into its next phase the Tribunal's President, Antonio Cassese, continues to publish extensively on issues of international human rights and criminal law.
Cassese, professor of international law at the University of Florence and former President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), spoke to the International Justice Tribune (IJT):
What does your role as STL President entail?
Substantially, I would say coordinating the action of the various organs of the Tribunal (Chambers, Office of the Prosecutor, Defence Office, Registry), entertaining contacts with ambassadors of countries interested in the Tribunal or the assistance of which we need to request, and trying to ensure some leadership so as to stimulate all organs to act as professionally, quickly and efficiently as possible.
I think it is also important for the President to demonstrate by his daily action that the Tribunal is fair and intends to dispense justice without paying any attention whatsoever to politics or to pressure from Governments or the media, if any.
Is it difficult to portray the hybrid nature of the STL to the public?
No, it should not be difficult. Hybrid courts are composed of national judges (in our case, Lebanese Judges) and international judges from different countries. The latter Judges have a majority (7 to 4). In addition, our Tribunal applies Lebanese substantive law and international procedural law.
The aim is to amalgamate and blend the two systems, by looking for solutions that are in keeping both with the principle nullum crimen sine lege and respect for the rights of the suspects and accused, and the principle of expeditious administration of justice.
How have you familiarised yourself with Lebanese law?
I have tried to read as much as possible, in French or English, on Lebanese criminal law. But my best teachers have been the Lebanese Judges sitting on the STL, chiefly my excellent colleague and great judge Ralph Riachy, who, as the Tribunal’s vice-president, has immediately taken office at Leidschendam, after the establishment of the STL.
He has kindly passed on to me, almost on a daily basis, and frequently through interesting informal discussions, much knowledge about Lebanese case law, the daily functioning of the Lebanese judiciary, as well as the legal mindset of judges and practioners.
What have been the most challenging moments of your career?
When I was President of the Council of Europe Committee for the Prevention of Torture, and we managed skilfully to find in the police stations or prisons of some countries evidence of torture or serious ill-treatment, on which we quickly reported to the authorities of the countries concerned requesting them to remedy the situations.
Or when at the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia we were able to issue judgements that were fair but also made it possible for international law to progress and to become more attuned to the realities of war today.
Other challenging moments were when in Darfur, acting for the United Nations, I was able with my colleagues to find credible evidence of serious international crimes and then duly reported to the Security Council on such violations.
At present a great challenge resides in endeavouring to push forward the whole machinery of the STL, so as to start our judicial action as speedily as possible.
What do you think is the most interesting case in international law?
As for cases brought before the International Court of Justice, perhaps the Nicaragua case (1986) remains a great judgement, in spite of some flaws (such as the one of effective control that I criticised in Tadic in 1999).
As for international criminal courts, there are many: for instance, Delalic, Tadic 1995, Kristic (Trial Chamber), Brdianin (Appeals Chamber).
However, many national courts also have pronounced important judgments: the Leipzig Supreme Court in 1922 issued judgements of great legal importance.
 
Download the print version of the International Justice Tribune 128 (PDF file)

Subscribe to the International Justice Tribune
Earlier IJT editions: