Defense Lawyers Say Prosecution Has Not Addressed 'Motive' behind Hariri Assassination
The defense lawyers of the four suspects accused of carrying out the assassination of late Prime Minister Rafik Hariri stated on Friday that the crime is still “motiveless,” complaining also about the “noncooperation” of Lebanese authorities.
“Until this day, the General Prosecutor has not given any motives that could have triggered carrying out the assassination of Hariri,” suspect Mustafa Badreddine's lead counsel Antoine Korkmaz said at a press conference in The Hague.
He elaborated: “There is no evidence to prove that there was a conspiracy to assassinate Hariri and the former premier was in contact with Hizbullah then regarding the elections. We can't understand how a group can kill its ally while there was a complete trust between Hariri and Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.”
“There was a 13-member network that claimed responsibility for the operation and a name of a suicide attacker was discussed. All these facts were ignored and as defense lawyers, we cannot find any motive to support the theory presented by the prosecution,” Korkmaz added.
Hussein Oneissi's lead counsel Vincent Courcelle-Labrousse agreed with Korkmaz, expressing that he was “surprised that no motive for carrying out the assassination of Hariri has been given to date.”
“The prosecution did not come forward with any reason to explain the crime,” he said.
The lawyers criticized the tribunal for “not offering any new evidence in the investigation,” adding that what has been presented so far is a “mere observation.”
“We are still at the beginning of the trial and I think that we have not been exposed to any new information in the prosecution's statement. All what has been given are observations and not facts,” Courcelle-Labrousse said.
“A court cannot issue a ruling based on observations.”
“This case is not based on strong foundations but has developed based on phone data,” Courcelle-Labrousse pointed out.
“The prosecution is talking about phone calls that are allegedly related to the assassination but the main question here concerns the content of these conversations and nothing yet has been revealed about them,” Korkmaz said.
He added: “The name indicators used in the prosecution's presentation are not clear and what surprises us is that the red network is formed of people but the General Prosecutor until this day has not revealed who committed the crime.”
"As defense lawyers, we are not convinced by the stance taken by the General Prosecutor because he did not present any concrete evidence and is only basing his argument on the telecom data. These are not acceptable from a logistic or from a legal point of view.”
Korkmaz announced that Colonel Ghassan Toufaili was the first person to uncover the story behind the phone numbers and that he was asked not to probe this matter.
“The Lebanese state then transferred the case to (slain top communications analyst with the police intelligence bureau) Wissam Eid. But who killed Wissam Eid? No one knows and the General Prosecutor must expand his probe,” he noted.
Oneissi's other lawyer, Yasser Hassan, said the tribunal is using the phone calls as circumstantial evidence, declaring that these can be refuted.
The conferees also complained about the “lack of cooperation” form Lebanese authorities.
" We have to present counter-evidence to the tribunal and if Lebanese authorities don't cooperate with us, we would not secure the proof and this is a big problem,” Courcelle-Labrousse noted.
“We have asked for the help of Lebanese authorities regarding several issues and we have experts in several ministries that can help us. But until this day, we haven't gotten any response,” the defense attorney revealed.
Korkmaz added: “When the General Prosecutor requests information, it is provided on the spot but when we ask for any data, we have to go through complicated procedures.”
“We have only asked about one document but Lebanese authorities did not respond to our request, and this document that can change the course of history.”
Korkmaz criticized former chief United Nations investigator Detlev Mehlis for basing his investigation on the testimony of Mohammed Zuhair Siddiq.
He, however, turned out to be a “false witness,” the lawyer said.
“And we know the party behind these witnesses, and which lead to the imprisonment of four generals,” he added.
“We can conclude from what has been presented that the tribunal did not investigate why the false witnesses withdrew their testimonies. The issue of the false witnesses is affecting the tribunal's work and this fact is ignored by people refusing the prosecution of these witnesses.”
The Special Tribunal for Lebanon held a second day of deliberations on Friday in the trial of four Hizbullah suspects in ex-Premier Hariri's Feb. 14, 2005 assassination.
The STL held its first in absentia hearing at the Hague on Thursday.
The suspects were absent as they have not been arrested. Hizbullah denies involvement in the murder and the group's leader Nasrallah has denounced the court as a conspiracy by his archenemies — the U.S. and Israel.
The four suspects are Mustafa Badreddine, Salim Ayyash, Assad Sabra and Hassan Oneissi.
A fifth Hizbullah member, Hassan Habib Merhi, was indicted later than the other four suspects and is not currently on trial.
Source: Naharnet
| Copyright © 2012 Naharnet.com. All Rights Reserved. | https://mobile.naharnet.com/stories/en/114485 |