The transcripts of the trial of Charles Taylor, former President of Liberia. More…

  • Good morning. Good morning, Mr Koumjian. Your appearances, please.

  • Good morning, your Honours. Counsel for the Prosecution this morning, Alain Werner, Maja Dimitrova and myself Nicholas Koumjian.

  • Good morning, Madam President, your Honours, counsel opposite. For the Defence today are myself, Courtenay Griffiths, and my learned friend Mr Terry Munyard.

  • Thank you. Mr Koumjian, I note there is no witness on the stand.

  • [Open session]

  • [The accused present]

  • [Upon commencing at 9.30 a.m.]

  • The witness is available, but we simply want to go through the procedure of revoking previous protective measures. This is witness TF1-263.

    After discussions with us here he has agreed to go open without the use of his pseudonym. This is a witness that, consistent with our position on other witnesses, we believe falls into the general category of the decision of July 2004 of the Sesay Trial Chamber. The witness has also from the same Trial Chamber earlier decisions some general protective measures and pseudonym.

    We ask that those be revoked except for the address and current whereabouts not being made public. So the only information that the Prosecution is requesting remains confidential is in the order of Trial Chamber I of 23 May 2003. That is in paragraphs (b) and (c) it indicates that identifying information be sealed by the Registry - excuse me. Paragraph (e) of that order of May 2003 says that the names and other identifying data or information on file with the Registry which would reveal the identity not be disclosed. We are simply asking that the address and current whereabouts of this witness not be disclosed.

  • Mr Koumjian, just for purposes of record and to ensure that I know what I am talking about, you are referring to the decision of 23 May 2003 in the Prosecutor v Sesay; is that correct?

  • That's correct. And I'm sorry, my earlier references were to the July 2004 where paragraphs (b) and (c) --

  • Yes, I had that. So are you in effect referring to two decisions, Mr Koumjian?

  • And I believe, to be open with the Court, this is a witness that falls into the category that your Honours have previously ruled that this July 2004 decision does not apply to. That's, I think, the subject of an appeal. But that has been the consistent position. This is a witness who was a child at the time of the events in question but is not now.

  • Would he have come under Category B?

  • To be open with the Court, as I read the Court's order it does not define a child, but, from the logic of it, it seems to be referring to persons who were minors at the time they testified.

  • Mr Griffiths, you have heard Mr Koumjian's application.

  • Once again, Madam President, we welcome recision of the protective measures subject of course to the caveat ventilated in particular by Mr Anyah on previous occasions.

  • Your Honours, just for the record, I do not mean to imply that the Prosecution also has changed its position. I understand your Honours have ruled and I believe it is the subject of appeal. The Prosecution position remains that this general category of witnesses is covered by the July 2004 decision, but it is the same issue we've previously discussed.

  • I understand.

  • [Trial Chamber conferred]

    Mr Koumjian, just to make sure that we are all talking about the same thing, because you've referred to two orders and to other paragraphs, you are asking for (e) of the order of 23 May 2003. I'm going to read that out into the record to ensure we are all clear on what you are asking. That is that:

    "The names and any other identifying data or information on file with the Registry or any other information which could reveal the identity of witnesses and victims shall not be disclosed to the public or the media and this order shall remain in effect after the termination of the proceedings in this case."

    That is what you are seeking the Court to enforce today.

  • Only in part, your Honour. I am asking the Court simply to order part of the identifying data, meaning the specific information regarding the witness's address and current whereabouts to remain non-public and confidential. Obviously the name - he will testify and state his name for the record.

  • So it is his address and current whereabouts?

  • [Trial Chamber conferred]

  • Mr Griffiths, for purposes of record, in the light of the preceding rulings of this Court, we are of the view that this is tantamount to a fresh application for protective measures that identifying data, i.e. the address and current whereabouts of the witness is tantamount to a fresh application. Have you any objection to that application?

  • I have no objections to that application.

  • Thank you. As has already been ruled by majority in this Chamber, and the parties having knowledge in the course of this application and prior applications, the application for recision of protective measures as provided in the decision of July 2004 are redundant.

    However, the application coming before Court today is a fresh application that part of the identifying data of the witness, i.e. his address and current whereabouts not be disclosed to the public or the media is a fresh application, and we grant that application.

  • Thank you. I believe the Court Officer will bring the witness in. The witness will be testifying in the Kono language.

  • Mr Interpreter, have we a Kono interpreter in position?

  • Yes, your Honours.