The Trial Chamber confirmed the Special Tribunal for Lebanon's jurisdiction to try those accused of committing the February 14, 2005 attack and connected cases, in a decision published on Monday, it announced in a statement.

It said: “The Trial Chamber dismissed all the motions of the defense counsel, who argued that the tribunal was set up illegally, violates Lebanese sovereignty, has selective jurisdiction and does not guarantee the accused a right to fair trial.”

The European Union expressed on Monday its readiness to continue providing assistance to Lebanon in coping with the burden of harboring refugees fleeing the unrest in neighboring Syria.

It said in a statement after a council meeting on Lebanon: “The EU commends the Lebanese authorities for their efforts to support those fleeing the violence in Syria, and encourages the government of Lebanon to continue meeting its responsibilities in this respect.”

A YouTube video uploaded on Sunday showed Hussam Hussam -- who has claimed to be a witness in the 2005 assassination of ex-PM Rafik Hariri – in the custody of a group of Syrian rebels.

The group said it was part of the “brigades” that “stormed” the Syrian capital Damascus.

Special Tribunal for Lebanon spokesman Marten Youssef hailed on Friday a decision by an STL judge to set March 25 as the tentative date to start the trial in absentia of four suspects and stressed new evidence should be provided to ask for a change in that date.

In remarks to al-Joumhouria daily, Youssef said Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen’s decision “is a unique opportunity for the international tribunal and the Lebanese people and is an important step on the road to trials.”

Special Tribunal for Lebanon Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen issued on Thursday an order setting March 25, 2013 as a tentative date for trial to start in the Ayyash et al case, announced the tribunal in a statement.

“The order provides the parties and the victims' legal representatives with a concrete starting date allowing them to continue preparing for trial,” explained the statement.

The Appeals Chamber of the U.N.-backed Special Tribunal for Lebanon issued Wednesday a decision rejecting the request of the Defense to reconsider its ruling of February 16, 2011, “which defined terrorism for the first time in international law,” the STL said in a statement.

The Defense argued that the content of the decision should be revisited. They also challenged the procedure followed to issue that decision.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon commemorated on Tuesday International Criminal Justice Day and observed the 10th anniversary of the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which opened its doors on 1 July 2002 in the Netherlands, announced the STL in a statement.

“This day marks the anniversary of the adoption of the Rome Statute in 17 July 1998, which founded the ICC, creating a historic milestone in the move towards ending impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of international concern – genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression,” it added.

Prime Minister Najib Miqati slammed on Friday the sides that have criticized the manner in which the Special Tribunal for Lebanon was funded, saying that their campaign “against me reflects their spite and lack of reason.”

He said in a statement: “The critics’ statements prove beyond a doubt that they do not seek justice or the truth in the assassination of former Premier Rafik Hariri.”

The government suspended medical assistance to Syrian refugees in northern Lebanon pending negotiations with international agencies on supporting the Lebanese cabinet in guaranteeing the source of funding, Premier Najib Miqati’s circles said.

“Not a single international agency is helping the government in this burden,” they told As Safir newspaper published on Thursday.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon Trial Chamber rejected motions by the defense counsel for the four accused to suspend or reconsider in absentia proceedings, it announced in a press release on Wednesday.

“The defense counsel had argued in their motions that in absentia trials are a violation of human rights and that the accused were not properly notified of the charges against them,” it explained.