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

Well, your Honours will recall that I chose not to read out the name of the witness's wife and mother. I simply established from him they both had identical names. I did that because I had obvious concerns about the accuracy of the information here. But as we go down the list, and I won't read out what hasn't been read out so far, we have his family name and his first name already established; we have his father's, his mother's and his wife's names, not so far established; his place and date of birth already established; the age written on this form that was drafted last year, as I understand it, is given as 52. I don't know who is responsible for the mathematics but clearly it's wrong. His sex is noted; his nationality; his ethnic origin; his religion; his current and his conflict occupation are all established. Telephone says nil, so that's of no interest. His current address is given, that's not been established, but his conflict address has been established. Civil status married, that's been established. Languages spoken Fullah, Krio and a little English, that's been established. Alternate contact, direct contact, that's irrelevant and then the final two entries nil. So the only things that we haven't had in open court already are the names of his parents and his wife and his current address.

Now, it's a matter for the Court, in my view, if you think that for some reason it would be proper not to have the three people's names on the record, although frankly I can't see how that could be of any help to anybody because the witness's own name and location and date of birth are far more relevant to anyone who might want to enquire about him than his mother's and father's first names, and again it's a matter for the Court if you think that for some reason his current address should not be made public. I don't have a strong view one way or the other, but of course in open court it would have been permissible for me to ask for those details. I chose not to as a matter of discretion. I don't see why somebody's mother alive or dead, that their name needs to be read out if the only purpose of me looking at it was to check the accuracy of what had been recorded. But that's a different matter from should this be confidential. I can't see his mother's first name being a matter of confidentiality.

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech