IRIN Web Special on Civilian Protection in Armed Conflict in Armed Conflict

IRIN interview with David Crane, Prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone

FREETOWN: The Special Court for Sierra Leone was created through an agreement between the United Nations and the government of Sierra Leone to try people responsible for violating international humanitarian law during Sierra Leone's 10-year rebel war.

In an interview with IRIN in Freetown, capital of Sierra Leone, Prosecutor David Crane discussed its mandate, jurisdiction and other issues.

QUESTION: What is the mandate of the Special Court for Sierra Leone?

ANSWER: The mandate of the Court is really quite simple and quite specific: to try those who bear the greatest responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity in violation of international humanitarian law.

Q. What is the extent of your jurisdiction? In other words, whom can you prosecute?

A. The statute of the Court gives us a rather broad jurisdiction [geographically] and is not held within the limits of Sierra Leone. We have a broad statutory jurisdiction. Our current jurisdiction limits us to crimes that took place after 30 November 1996 to the present.

The statute very clearly allows us to follow the evidence where it may lead, to investigate those who bear the greatest responsibility in Sierra Leone, the region and internationally.

Q. How then would you compare this Court with the International Criminal Court (ICC)?

A. The ICC is a very important institution and has very broad-based jurisdictions that are wide but are, of course, defined in the statute. Each Tribunal is currently working - be it the ones of Rwanda, Yugoslavia, here in Sierra Leone or the ICC - and their jurisdictions, plus their limits, are statutorily based. The international community writes into the statute the jurisdictional limits of whatever tribunal it may be.

[...] The Special Court for Sierra Leone war crimes should not be perceived just as a Sierra Leone-specific war crimes tribunal but [as one mandated] to try those who bear the greatest responsibility for the tragedy that took place there for the past 10 years. We've been investigating these, certainly in the regional as well as the international context.

Q. How independent is the Special Court?

A. Absolutely independent. I work for no one other than the 4.5 million people of Sierra Leone. My job as a Chief Prosecutor is to represent those who are not with us any more: 100,000 or so dead; 250,000 maimed, raped [or otherwise violated] and 2.5 million people who were forcibly displaced.

I represent them and I represent the other citizens of this country. I am an absolutely independent international prosecutor.

Q. What would you say about the cooperation you are receiving from various arms of government in doing your work?

A. The cooperation we are getting within the law and within the reality has been good and very helpful. The United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) has been very helpful and the government was certainly helpful in the question of setting up the Court: its physical creation. It has also been working very closely with the registrar in the trials and the administration of the court.

But as far as my work as the prosecutor is concerned, I have no links with the government of Sierra Leone. It is very judicious about the court and is trying to avoid any appearance that they are trying to involve themselves in it. And this is very important for the Court.

We get support from them and also from other countries. The Special Court exists because of contributions from other countries from all over the world and the government of Sierra Leone. We appreciate the work that our contributors have done for us.

Q. Investigations are ongoing. Is the Court working to a particular timetable? Do you have a set number of persons you would like to try and is there a time frame for this?

A. There is a court strategy that we began to develop last summer. Then, in August, we began to refine that strategy. We began to follow the evidence wherever it might lead. It is important to realise and understand that we had no set agenda as far as who we were looking at was concerned.

It became very apparent, quickly, that we were looking at those who bear the greatest responsibility, so we began to develop our cases around them. Then we narrowed our field down to possible defendants. Now, we have a very set timetable as to when we are doing things.

The execution of our operation of justice on 10 March [when the Special Court made its first indictment, that of seven people who are to stand trial for crimes against humanity] was a specifically planned operation, which was started back in October last year. So we have a very specific timetable and we are meeting this timetable.

Q. What is the Court's life span?

A. The Court was set up to finish its mandate in three years. So we have a very set time to do this [work]. We don't have a lot of time but, if we properly manage our assets as we work with the plan, we can get to the end as scheduled.

Q. With some indictees at large and who knows how many more likely to follow suit, how feasible is this timetable?

A. We know there are people we are not going to get our hands on immediately but again, over time, I'm sure we will. You know, whoever is indicted of war crimes, international law requires that the countries in which they are either prosecutes them for those crimes themselves or turns them over for prosecution.

So, if we know where somebody is, we can put maximum pressure on the UN Security Council to exert diplomatic pressure on such countries. Harbouring an [alleged] international war criminal is a very dangerous thing for a country to do and they will pay a heavy political price to harbour somebody [under indictment and at large].

Continued?