Not an infringement
The international community needs to support justice in Lebanon
No one could have anticipated the far-reaching consequences of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri on February 14, 2005. The full force of international outrage at the massive blast that killed the flamboyant businessman and politician, and 21 others, set a precedent in the history of the UN international criminal court system. A fact-finding mission to determine the cause, circumstances and fallout from of the assassination was dispatched by February 25, 2005, eleven days after the crime. It was the first time the international community investigated a political crime targeting an individual.
Yet, as an article in the current issue of Atlantic by Joshua Hammer reminds American readers, it has been close to four years since the tribunal was established and the international community has yet to bring charges against a person or persons. Hammer suggests that justice for the fallen Prime Minister should not get in the way of any peace deal between Israel and a Syrian regime, whose leaders are prime suspects in the Hariri murder and a slew of subsequent targeted killings in Lebanon. But the choice should not be between justice and peace, but rather between a Middle East where murder has become the default setting in score settling and creating a precedent that will put an end to the Middle East’s shameful era of impunity for crimes against humanity.
The story so far
The original fact-finding mission, headed by Irish deputy police commissioner, Peter FitzGerald, presented its report on March 24, 2005, stopping short of directly accusing Damascus. This month, the International Independent Investigation Commission, headed by its third investigating prosecutor, Daniel A. Bellemare, has submitted its eleventh collection of findings and concluded that “the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is fully on track to commence functioning on March 1, 2009.”
The fact remains that nothing will stop the Special Tribunal for Lebanon; the Hague has been chosen as the court’s location, while the Lebanese Supreme Judicial Council has sent a list of 12 judges to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to be considered for appointment to the tribunal. According to UN officials, a delegation will travel to the Netherlands in the coming weeks to work out the latest details of the tribunal.
In Lebanon, the tribunal has been a major source of controversy. The opposition March 8 bloc has criticized it, both in content and form, while conspiracy theorists see it as an imperialist or Zionist tool designed to bring down the Lebanese Resistance. Others, including Nabih Berri, the speaker of the Lebanese parliament, believes it infringes on Lebanese sovereignty and hampers Lebanon’s reconciliation process. Sadly, the opposition has consistently failed to remember that Lebanon’s sovereignty, not to mention its institutions, were infringed, if not raped, during nearly 30 years of Syrian occupation.
Happily, among the majority of Lebanese, those who want freedom, independence, sovereignty and democracy, the tribunal has support, as demonstrated by the historic March 14, 2005 rally, at which nearly 1 million marchers demanded to know the truth. The tribunal also has official legitimacy with the support of the Lebanese government, which has sought its assistance in the pursuit of justice.
Why Lebanon needs a tribunal
Unfortunately, Lebanon is also a country where five judges can be gunned down in court in broad daylight in front of dozens of witnesses, such as happened in Sidon on June 8, 1999 and no one is charged. If Lebanon is to achieve justice in the killing of Hariri and dozens of others, including pro-independence politicians, journalists, security officials as well as innocent civilians, an international tribunal is a necessity.
I also stress that the tribunal, which is, for the first time, investigating a political assassination, will also make the whole Middle East more accountable. Dictators will be served notice that they can no longer use murder as a tool to eliminate political opponents and silence opposition. In Lebanon, political killings have been used by regional powers to assert their dominance over the country and protect their interests.
It is a culture well known to those Lebanese who have lived under Syrian domination; who are aware of the sinister shadow their neighbor casts over their country and who have seen the ultimate price paid by those politicians and intellectuals who have dared to oppose, first Syrian occupation of, and then Syrian interference in, Lebanon. We are not surprised that no one has been brought to justice for any of these murders through the years but if we are to put a halt to this bloody trend then an international tribunal is a necessity. The murderer must know that there will be no escape this time.
The international tribunal will also send a message to those brave Arab dissidents that they have another layer of protection, that their safety is a matter of international concern. This should help the opposition in several oppressed societies to summon the courage break out of the cycle of fear created by tyrants and dictators and help bring democracy to the region. Finally the international tribunal has created a new dynamic in relations between the international community and a sovereign state. In the case of Lebanon, it is backing the demand of the majority of Lebanese and their government for protection.
Lebanon, and by extension the rest of the Middle East, can now expect the assistance and protection that only the international community can provide, especially when local justice cannot deliver. This is not an infringement, this is a human right.
Getting away with murder is not an option.
Elie Fawaz is Executive Director of the Beirut-based Lebanon Renaissance Foundation