SPECIAL TRIBUNAL FOR LEBANON

FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT (2013-2014)

1 March 2014

SPECIAL TRIBUNAL FOR LEBANON

FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT (2013-2014)

2|Page

Dear Prime Minister Salam, Dear Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon,

It is my pleasure to submit the Fifth Annual Report of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, as required by Article 10 (2) of the Tribunals Statute. The report covers the period from 1 March 2013 to 28 February 2014, and details the Tribunals achievements, challenges and overall progress in that time. The report begins with Part I: Introduction, and Part II:A an account of the activities of Chambers. For each of these sections, as well as Part III: Conclusions, I am responsible. The Principals of the other organs Registry, the Office of the Prosecutor and Defence Office have contributed Parts II:B, II:C and II:D respectively. The Tribunal has moved to the trial phase of its judicial functions. The Prosecution is presenting evidence at trial in the Tribunals first case, Prosecutor v. Ayyash, Badreddine, Oneissi and Sabra; Defence counsel, supported by the Defence Office, are actively ensuring the defence of the Accused; the interests of victims are being advanced by the Legal Representatives of Victims; the Judges are adjudicating the matters before them. The Registry is working hard to support a multitude of trial-related activities. During the reporting period, a second case came before the Tribunal. On 31 July 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge confirmed an indictment against a fifth Accused, Hassan Habib Merhi, with respect to his involvement in the attack which is the subject of the Ayyash et al. proceedings. In December 2013, the Trial Chamber determined that the conditions under our Statute and Rules of Procedure and Evidence to proceed with a trial in Mr Merhis absence had been met. The Trial Chamber has since decided that it serves the interests of justice to join the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases. The Tribunal has also engaged in other important judicial work. In April 2013, the Contempt Judge ordered a confidential investigation into three incidents which could potentially be considered interference with the administration of justice. Several decisions were issued in the El Sayed matter. At this time, everything within the Prosecutor's holdings that could be legally disclosed to Mr El Sayed has been made available to him. The Office of the Prosecutor has continued its investigations into the attacks against Messrs Marwan Hamadeh, George Hawi and Elias El Murr, which the Pre-Trial Judge previously determined fall within the Tribunals jurisdiction. Of vital importance to its judicial work is the Tribunals commitment to informing the Lebanese people and broader international public about that work, and supporting Lebanons wide-reaching efforts to promote the rule of law. The Tribunals four organs continue to engage in an array of public communications and outreach activities, with a special emphasis upon developing relationships with the legal and academic communities in Lebanon, as well as civil society groups. As we enter our sixth year and the final year of our present mandate the Tribunal will pursue the current proceedings, make whatever response is warranted to the further initiatives described by the Prosecutor and continue its outreach to the Lebanese community and others wishing to monitor our activities.

David Baragwanath President 3|Page

4|Page

Table of Contents
PART I INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................7 PART II MAIN ACTIVITIES OF THE TRIBUNAL ...................................................................................................9 A. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. B. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. C. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. D. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 5|Page Chambers ..............................................................................................................................................9 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................9 Judicial activities ...............................................................................................................................9 Regulatory activities .......................................................................................................................15 External relations, outreach and other functions ..........................................................................16 Management of resources .............................................................................................................17 The Way Forward ...........................................................................................................................18 Registry ...............................................................................................................................................19 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................19 Judicial support ...............................................................................................................................19 Immediate Office of the Registrar ..................................................................................................25 Administrative support ...................................................................................................................27 The Way Forward ...........................................................................................................................28 Office of the Prosecutor .....................................................................................................................29 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................29 The trial of Ayyash et al. the opening of the trial by the Prosecution.........................................29 Preparations throughout 2013 for the start of trial .......................................................................30 The Prosecutor indicts a fifth Accused ...........................................................................................32 Joinder seeking to bring the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases together in one trial ......................32 Connected and related cases .........................................................................................................33 Contempt ........................................................................................................................................33 El Sayed matter ...............................................................................................................................34 The Way Forward ...........................................................................................................................34 Defence Office ....................................................................................................................................37 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................37 Involvement in judicial activities ....................................................................................................37 Regulatory framework ....................................................................................................................39 List of counsel .................................................................................................................................40 Press, public affairs and outreach activities ...................................................................................40 The Way Forward ...........................................................................................................................41

PART III CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................................43 A. B. C. D. Overview .............................................................................................................................................43 Our progress .......................................................................................................................................43 Expectations for the sixth year of STL activities .................................................................................43 Final observations ...............................................................................................................................44

6|Page

PART I INTRODUCTION
Justice is one of the essential pillars of the rule of law. Alone it cannot solve the current problems in the Middle East, but justice can and must play its part in restoring peace and security to Lebanon. The condemnation of the killings that initiated the operations of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL or Tribunal) in March 2009 was followed by a merciful lull in bombings. This respite provided a reminder of the value of judicial process as among measures available to the Security Council under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. But the resumption of bombing attacks has once again imposed strains and pressures on Lebanon, a founding member of the United Nations. The STLs task is to assist the strenuous efforts of the Government and people of Lebanon to reinforce the rule of law through due process in the cases within our jurisdiction. The last year has seen reinforcement of the STLs work by the moral and tangible contributions of Lebanon, the United Nations Secretary-General, the Security Council and the international community at large. It has also seen the beginning of the trial phase at the Tribunal. The support of Lebanon, numerous other States and also the United Nations and other international institutions, has been crucial in reaching that goal. So too has the concerted effort of our personnel in Beirut, New York and The Hague. The commencement of the Tribunals first trial is a watershed in our operations and activities. The difficult path to this point has been recounted in previous annual reports. The opening of trial was postponed for several reasons - these included the need to complete the evaluation and disclosure of a mass of evidentiary material and for the Defence to be properly prepared. There has been energetic work by the Prosecution, Defence and Legal Representatives of Victims to ensure due process. The primary immediate task before the Tribunal is pursuing this initial trial, which began on 16 January 2014. The original four Accused are being tried in absentia in respect of the bombing attack of 14 February 2005 which killed 22 people and injured 226 others. A fifth Accused has since been joined to the proceedings. The Tribunals Statute applies the highest standards of international criminal procedure and requires public trial. The opening of the trial, with addresses by the Presiding Judge, Prosecutor, Defence counsel and Legal Representatives of Victims, was attended by more than 100 accredited media representatives, some 12 participating victims and numerous diplomatic and other visitors present in the courtrooms public gallery. Just as important, such trial demands reliable systems to allow it to be viewed at a distance by the people of Lebanon as well as the rest of the world. The website was visited by nearly 15,000 people from 92 countries during the opening days of trial, viewing some 54,000 pages. A quarter of these visitors were from Lebanon. About 2000 viewed the proceedings live via external video screening and many more via all but two of the Lebanese television networks. The trial has provided an opportunity for people to observe the unfolding of the process that will conclude with its verdicts. To date, members of the public have seen counsel opening the case for the Prosecution, initial addresses by counsel for the participating victims and two of the Accused, then witnesses testifying in the courtroom and by video-link from Beirut. 7|Page

Members of the public have seen the Presiding Judge and his Lebanese and international colleagues in action; their role is to manage the trial with decorum so as to ensure that each party is fairly heard and at a pace that allows all participants, including interpreters and other viewers, to follow it. It is the obligation of the Tribunal to ensure that every effort has been made, and will continue to be made, to ensure fairness in the cases which fall within its jurisdiction. The commencement of trial has also revealed something of the size and nature of the task faced by the Prosecution, Defence, Legal Representatives of Victims and the Judges of the Trial Chamber, all supported by the Registry. It has been necessary not only to master the great volume of relevant material but also to devise and apply the means to do so effectively and securely. In both The Hague and Beirut the establishment of elaborate systems of security, data recording, translation and interpretation into Arabic, English and French, as the three official languages of the Tribunal, are indicative of the wide range of activities and procedures which have been required. The trial is complemented by outreach and public affairs activities. Supplementary funding by voluntary donors sustains visits to The Hague for Lebanese Judges, practitioners, scholars and students; the STL international criminal law course opened its third year with 230 students from eight Lebanese universities participating by video; and a leading international criminal law text is being translated into Arabic. The merger of the Tribunals public affairs and outreach sections will increase both efficiency and effectiveness in carrying out these and other important activities on behalf of the people of Lebanon as the trial progresses. The Lebanese publics widespread interest in the trial confirms their aspiration to justice and to the rule of law. The STL is mandated to apply the due process to which historically, as also to both democracy and international law, Lebanon has made outstanding contributions (not least by having provided a disproportionately large share of the Roman law that underpins many modern legal systems, the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). As ever, due process requires protection. On several occasions before the beginning of the trial the identities of alleged confidential witnesses were published. These events have been met by proceedings under a Tribunal Rule which punishes wilful interference with the STLs administration of justice. The same Rule protects the Tribunal's Judges and officers against public defamation, intimidation and threats. The Tribunal has acted forcefully in defence of its judiciary in the past, and will do so in the future. The Security Council has reaffirmed the need to combat the scourge of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, and by all means in accordance with the United Nations Charter and international law. 1 As the first tribunal of its kind to deal with terrorism as a distinct crime, the STL maintains its determination to do all in its power to fulfil its statutory mandate fairly and expeditiously, and in so doing assist the people and institutions of Lebanon in their efforts to restore peace and security.

Both generally, as by SC Res. 2133, UN Doc. S/RES/11262 (27 January 2014), and specifically in relation to Lebanon (statements by the UN Secretary-General and the Security Council, 1 February 2014).

8|Page

PART II MAIN ACTIVITIES OF THE TRIBUNAL

A.

Chambers

1.

Introduction
Judicial activity in the Pre-Trial, Trial and Appeals Chambers increased markedly in the past year. Preparations for trial hearings in Prosecutor v. Ayyash, Badreddine, Oneissi and Sabra intensified, and in October 2013 the Trial Chamber became officially seized of the case. Trial opened on 16 January 2014. In July 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge confirmed an indictment in the Tribunals second case, Prosecutor v. Merhi. Hassan Habib Merhi has been charged for his involvement in the 14 February 2005 attack which is the subject of the Ayyash et al. proceedings. Decisions and orders were issued in a variety of incidental judicial matters, relating to potential instances of contempt of the Tribunal, the El Sayed litigation and staff appeals. The President, Judges and Chambers staff also played an active role in the Tribunals external relations and outreach initiatives.

2.

Judicial activities
In the past 12 months, the Pre-Trial Judge, Trial Chamber, Appeals Chamber, President, Contempt Judge and Judge for Staff Appeals have all been engaged in judicial activities. Between 1 March 2013 and 31 January 2014, they collectively issued more than 260 decisions and orders, totaling over 3,000 pages. Procedure To comply with the Statutes primary requirements of fairness and (as far as is consistent with that) expedition, the Tribunals Rules of Procedure and Evidence (Rules) draw on the best techniques of international criminal law developed over the past 20 years. As in international criminal procedure, the obligation to disclose relevant material to the Defence lies with the Prosecutor, rather than a juge dinstruction. Here it is the task of a party or of counsel, rather than the Pre-Trial Judge (more aptly explained in his French description, Juge de la mise en tat), to gather evidence. In the courtroom witnesses may, as in some civil law systems, be questioned first by the Judges and then by counsel. But if the nature of the file does not permit that course, the Trial Chamber may, in the interests of justice, direct questioning first by counsel calling the witness, then by opposing counsel, with judicial questioning at any stage but usually at the end. The latter course may be preferred where cross-examination is expected. 9|Page

Composition of the Trial Chamber On 9 September 2013, Judge Robert Roth resigned as a Judge of the Trial Chamber. The next day, the President assigned Judge Janet Nosworthy, one of the alternate Judges of the Trial Chamber, to replace Judge Roth. The Trial Judges then elected Judge David Re as the Chambers new Presiding Judge. On 4 October 2013, the President dismissed a Defence motion requesting reconsideration and rescission of his 10 September 2013 order composing the Trial Chamber. On 25 October 2013, the Appeals Chamber held an application filed jointly by the Defence teams for Messrs Badreddine and Oneissi against the Presidents order inadmissible. It further found the application frivolous and, pursuant to Rule 126 (G) of the Rules, ordered the Registrar to withhold payment of fees associated with the production of the application and the costs thereof. On 13 November 2013, the Acting Presiding Judge of the Appeals Chamber, Judge Riachy, granted leave to counsel for Messrs Badreddine and Oneissi to seek reconsideration of the Appeals Chambers 25 October 2013 decision with respect to two specific issues. On 10 December 2013, the Appeals Chamber rejected this request, for reason that the Defence had not demonstrated that the decision was erroneous and resulted in an injustice. On 7 January 2014, Judge Nicola Lettieri, having been appointed by the UN Secretary-General as a member of the Trial Chamber, was assigned to replace Judge Nosworthy as an alternate Judge. Prosecutor v. Ayyash, Badreddine, Oneissi and Sabra The trial of Messrs Salim Jamil Ayyash, Mustafa Amine Badreddine, Hussein Hassan Oneissi and Assad Hassan Sabra for their respective roles in the 14 February 2005 attack in Beirut began on 16 January 2014, after months of intense preparations. During the reporting period, written motions and decisions covered a wide array of matters, including the substance of the indictment, disclosure, pre-trial briefs, victims participating in the proceedings, witnesses, protective measures for victims and witnesses, exhibits, cooperation with the Lebanese authorities and the conduct of trial proceedings. Given the volume of decisions produced by Chambers in the reporting period, only some of the most noteworthy will be referred to in this synopsis. Amendments and challenges to the indictment On 28 June 2011, the Pre-Trial Judge confirmed the Tribunals first indictment against Messrs Ayyash, Badreddine, Oneissi and Sabra. Since then, the Prosecutor has sought leave from the Pre-Trial Judge to update the indictment on several occasions. On 12 April 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge authorised the Prosecutors requested amendments to the indictment, and made the indictment dated 6 February 2013 operative. Counsel for Messrs Badreddine, Oneissi and Sabra, on 2 and 3 May 2013, filed preliminary motions under Rule 90 (A) of the Rules alleging defects in the form of the amended indictment. On 12 June 2013, the Trial Chamber concluded that the challenges were without merit. The Trial Chamber held that the amended indictment provided counsel with sufficient detail to inform them clearly of the nature and cause of the charges against the four Accused, and to allow them to prepare a defence of the case.

10 | P a g e

The Prosecutor filed a further amended indictment before the Pre-Trial Judge on 21 June 2013, which was confirmed on 31 July 2013. A public redacted version of the 21 June 2013 indictment is available on the Tribunals website. The indictment was amended to clarify the Prosecutions allegations and to reflect aspects of the attribution of phones, to demonstrate the interrelationship between certain phone activities and to elucidate the structure of interconnected phone groups. On 13 September 2013, the Trial Chamber dismissed three further Defence motions alleging defects in the form of the 21 June 2013 indictment. On 9 October 2013, the Trial Chamber dismissed the Defences requests for certification to appeal its decision. Completion of pre-trial matters Although the Pre-Trial Judge had initially set a tentative date of 25 March 2013 for trial to commence, this date was postponed to allow Defence counsel adequate time to prepare. As explained in the Fourth Annual Report, the Pre-Trial Judge reasoned that the Prosecution had not, at the start of 2013, completed disclosing all relevant material to the Defence, and that Defence teams faced other obstacles including technical problems, translation issues and outstanding requests for cooperation from the Lebanese authorities. The trial was delayed to ensure the right of each Accused to a fair trial. After inviting and considering submissions from the Prosecution, Defence counsel and Legal Representatives of Victims, on 2 August 2013 the Pre-Trial Judge set 13 January 2014 as the new tentative date for the start of trial. The Trial Chamber later moved this date back slightly, to 16 January 2014. On 25 October 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge transferred the Ayyash et al. case file to the Trial Chamber and seized it of the case as required under the Rules. The case file comprised evidentiary material, relevant correspondence, filings, transcripts and a detailed report setting out the parties arguments, points of agreement and contention, a summary of important decisions and findings, and suggestions concerning witnesses. The purpose of the comprehensive case file was to facilitate the Trial Chambers preparations and conduct of trial. On 17 December 2013, the Trial Chamber dismissed a motion filed by counsel for Mr Sabra (which was joined by the other three Defence teams) to stay the proceedings. Counsels request was based on Lebanon's alleged failure to cooperate with the Defence by not providing certain information. The Trial Chamber held that the Defence had neither shown that the essential preconditions for a fair trial were missing nor that there was insufficient indication that the issue would be resolved during the trial process. Start of trial On 16 January 2014, the trial opened. In his opening statement, the Prosecutor expressed confidence in the strength of the case against each of the four Accused. He explained that the Prosecution case will be divided into three main parts. First, the Prosecution will present evidence about what happened in and around the area of the explosion in Beirut on 14 February 2005. Second, it will lead evidence on the preparation of the bombing, the purchase of the vehicle used in the attack and the acts and 11 | P a g e

attempts to falsely attribute the attack. Third, the Prosecution will seek to ascribe responsibility to the four Accused. The Legal Representatives of Victims made an opening statement on 17 January 2014, as did counsel for Messrs Badreddine and Oneissi on 20 January 2014. The Head of Defence Office also addressed the court. Twelve victims participating in the proceedings were present for the opening of the Ayyash et al. trial. The Prosecution began presenting evidence in Ayyash et al. on 22 January 2014. To date, the Trial Chamber has sat for 12 hearing days (in addition to three days of opening statements), and heard the testimony of 15 witnesses (either in the STL courtroom or via video-conference link). The Chamber has deemed the statements of 45 witnesses admissible, and admitted 186 exhibits into evidence (totalling 7,342 pages, as well as 29 physical objects). Prosecutor v. Merhi On 5 June 2013, the Prosecutor submitted a confidential and ex parte indictment to the Pre-Trial Judge, alleging the involvement of Hassan Habib Merhi in the same events and crimes as those charged in the Ayyash et al. case. On 31 July 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge confirmed the indictment against Mr Merhi and issued an arrest warrant against him. On 6 August 2013, the Registrar confidentially transmitted the confirmed indictment and accompanying arrest warrant to the Lebanese authorities. The indictment remained confidential following confirmation to facilitate the Lebanese authorities search for and apprehension of the Accused. On 6 September 2013, the Acting Prosecutor General of the Lebanese Cour de cassation submitted a confidential report to the President, stating that despite the exertions of the Lebanese authorities, Mr Merhi had not been located. On 24 September, 26 September, 3 October and 4 October 2013, the Acting Prosecutor General sent further reports to the President to clarify certain issues. On 10 October 2013, the President determined that the Lebanese authorities had made reasonable attempts to personally serve Mr Merhi with the indictment. On this basis, the President authorised alternative service of the indictment (including by means of public advertisement) under Rule 76 (E) of the Rules. Also on 10 October 2013, immediately after the Presidents order, the Pre-Trial Judge directed that the confidentiality of the indictment be lifted (subject to certain redactions being implemented). On 21 October 2013, the President issued a public statement, specifically addressing Mr Merhi and the people of Lebanon. He invited Mr Merhi to consider whether he was prepared to face the Tribunal with the help of the Defence Office and Defence counsel. He also sought the help and support of the Lebanese public for the Tribunal to properly perform its tasks. The President issued a follow-up public statement to Mr Merhi on 13 December 2013, reminding him of the serious charges he faces and urging him to secure legal advice and to appoint a lawyer to represent him before the Tribunal. On 25 November 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge seized the Trial Chamber with the question of trying Mr Merhi in absentia. On 20 December 2013, the Trial Chamber held that the conditions stipulated by Article 22 of the Statute and Rule 106 (A) of the Rules to try Mr Merhi in absentia had been met. On the same day, the Head of Defence Office assigned Mr Mohamed Aouini, registered at the Tunis Bar, as lead counsel to represent the rights and interests of Mr Merhi.

12 | P a g e

On 24 December 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge ordered the Prosecution to immediately disclose to counsel for Mr Merhi all documents falling within its disclosure obligations under Rule 110 (A) of the Rules, namely, copies of the material that accompanied the indictment when its confirmation was sought, and the statements of witnesses it intends to call at trial. The Pre-Trial Judge also ordered the Prosecution to file the material required by Rule 91 (G) of the Rules, including its pre-trial brief and witness and exhibit lists. Joinder The Ayyash et al. and Merhi proceedings relate to the same events that occurred on 14 February 2005. The Prosecution sought to join the two cases, so that Mr Merhi might be jointly charged and tried with Messrs Ayyash, Badreddine, Oneissi and Sabra (as permitted by Rule 70 (B) of the Rules). On 18 December 2013, the Prosecution filed a motion before the Pre-Trial Judge, requesting that he refer the matter of joinder of Mr Merhi to the Ayyash et al. case for adjudication by the Trial Chamber. Given that no single Judge or Chamber had jurisdiction over both the Merhi and Ayyash et al. cases, the Prosecution asserted that referral of the matter of joinder was necessary for its adjudication. On 30 December 2013, counsel for Mr Merhi filed detailed submissions before the Pre-Trial Judge opposing the Prosecutions application. That same day, the Prosecution filed a motion before the Trial Chamber, requesting that it grant the Prosecutions joinder motion and order that the five Accused be jointly tried. The Pre-Trial Judge granted the Prosecutions request to refer the question of joinder to the Trial Chamber on 2 January 2014. On 10 January 2014, the Trial Chamber issued a scheduling order, by which it convened a hearing on 14 January 2014 to hear preliminary submissions from the Prosecution and counsel for Mr Merhi on the possible joinder of the two cases. On 15 January 2014, the Trial Chamber instructed Mr Merhis counsel to file any response to the Prosecutions request for joinder by 31 January 2014. On 11 February 2014, after having heard the submissions of the Prosecutor, Defence counsel, Registrar and Head of Defence Office on the issue of joinder of the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases, the Trial Chamber determined that the interests of justice must favour joining the case against Mr Merhi with that against Messrs Ayyash, Badreddine, Oneissi and Sabra. At a hearing on 12 February 2014, the Chamber explored the practicalities of pursuing a joint trial, including the length of adjournment necessary to allow Mr Merhi's counsel adequate time to prepare. The Trial Chamber highlighted that its primary concern is to ensure that Mr Merhis right to a fair and expeditious trial is respected. To this end, the Trial Chamber will regularly meet the Prosecution and Defence counsel, and closely monitor the situation. The Trial Chamber issued its written decision on joinder on 25 February 2014. Contempt On 9 April 2013, the names and photographs of alleged confidential witnesses of the Tribunal were published. On 12 April 2013, the Defence Office filed a submission before the Pre-Trial Judge, asking him to refer this potential matter of contempt to the President in order to initiate contempt of court proceedings. 13 | P a g e

On 15 and 16 April 2013, the Legal Representatives of Victims and the Prosecutor respectively filed submissions, which included additional allegations of contempt with respect to other instances where names of purported confidential witnesses were publicised in the media. On 19 April 2013, the Registry expressed its support for the initiation of contempt of court proceedings, indicating its preparedness to appoint an amicus curiae if ordered to do so, and highlighting that it may be in the interests of justice and judicial efficiency to investigate the allegations together. On 24 April 2013, the President issued an order confirming that the matter had been transferred from the Pre-Trial Judge to the President and that, in accordance with an existing roster, the President himself was to serve as Contempt Judge on the case. On 25 April 2013, a public hearing took place to consider whether proceedings should be initiated. On 29 April 2013, the Contempt Judge ordered that: (i) an investigation be initiated to probe three incidents which could potentially be considered interference with the administration of justice and (ii) the Registrar appoint amicus curiae (selected with the Contempt Judge's approval). To preserve the integrity of the investigation, the Contempt Judge ordered that the proceedings remain confidential until further notice. On 5 June 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge requested the Lebanese Acting Prosecutor General to take any measure to prevent or, if applicable, to stop the dissemination of information in breach of the Pre-Trial Judges previous orders prohibiting the dissemination of specified confidential information. The PreTrial Judge further requested the Acting Prosecutor General to ensure the public distribution of his 5 June 2013 order in Lebanon (through the media or other channels) and to serve it on the officials of major media outlets in the country. El Sayed On 17 May 2013, the Appeals Chamber issued a decision on the partial appeal of Mr El Sayed against the Pre-Trial Judge's decision of 22 March 2013, which rejected an application for the disclosure of information relating to nine confidential witness statements. The Pre-Trial Judge had previously held (and the Appeals Chamber had affirmed) that these witnesses were at a high or very high level of risk and, consequentially, that their statements and other documents relating to these witnesses could not be disclosed. Mr El Sayed then sought summaries, lists and certificates attesting to the content of these documents. The Appeals Chamber held that Mr El Sayed's appeal was admissible, but unanimously dismissed it on its merits. The Appeals Chamber further dismissed the additional forms of relief that Mr El Sayed requested on appeal. On 4 November 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge denied a request from Mr El Sayeds counsel for disclosure, in un-redacted form, of the Prosecutions documents concerning certain witnesses risk evaluations. Everything within the Prosecutor's holdings that could be legally disclosed to Mr El Sayed has been made available to him. Additional material will only be released to Mr El Sayed if future risk assessments indicate that such disclosure would not place protected individuals at risk of harm.

14 | P a g e

Staff appeals The Tribunals Judges adjudicated a number of staff appeals during the reporting period. These appeals related to certain administrative and disciplinary decisions of the Registrar. Chambers and Registry personnel are working to make staff appeal judgments available to the Tribunals staff members (with redactions, as appropriate, to protect the privacy of affected individuals). The aim of publicising staff appeal decisions is to enhance transparency and to promote understanding of the legal principles grounding decisions.

3.

Regulatory activities
The President and other Judges reviewed and, where necessary, amended the Tribunals Rules and ancillary legal texts in an effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of judicial activities.

(i)

Rules of Procedure and Evidence

On 8 March 2013, a number of amendments to the Rules came into effect (after having been approved by the Judges at a plenary meeting on 25 February 2013). A further amendment was published on 9 April 2013. The amendments were designed to improve and streamline the Tribunals procedures. Amongst other things, they limited the time for filing certain motions, and facilitated the swifter disposal of proceedings for contempt, obstruction of justice and joinder. Minor changes were implemented to ensure harmonisation between the updated Rules and the Tribunals various Practice Directions and internal codes. On 28 October 2013, the Judges in plenary declined to approve further proposed amendments to the Rules. The Judges maintained that Rule changes should only be implemented when absolutely necessary.

(ii)

Practice Directions, internal guidelines and codes

On 11 March 2013, the President issued the Practice Direction on Designation of Judges in Matters of Contempt, Obstruction of Justice and False Testimony. On 23 April 2013, the President issued a Practice Direction on Procedure for the Filing of Written Submissions in Appeal Proceedings before the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. This document was updated on 13 June 2013. On 14 June 2013, the President implemented revisions to the Practice Direction on Filing of Documents before the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. At the plenary meeting on 28 October 2013, the Judges approved certain revisions to the Directive on Victims Legal Representation.

15 | P a g e

4.

External relations, outreach and other functions

(i)

General
On 12 July 2013, the Judges of the Appeals Chamber unanimously re-elected Judge Sir David Baragwanath of New Zealand as President of the Tribunal for a period of 18 months (starting 1 September 2013) and Judge Ralph Riachy of Lebanon as Vice-President, for the same time period. The re-election of the President and the Vice-President was pursuant to Article 8 (2) of the Statute and Rules 31 and 33 of the Rules. In January 2014, the UN Secretary-General appointed Judge Nicola Lettieri of Italy as an alternate Judge of the Trial Chamber. Judge Lettieri was sworn in as a Judge of the Tribunal on 15 January 2014, and assumed his duties on a full-time basis on 25 February 2014. Throughout the year, the President regularly met the Registrar, Prosecutor and Head of Defence Office under Rule 38 (B) to ensure the coordination of the activities of the organs of the Tribunal. With the help of the Vice-President, the President also pursued his administrative roles under Article 10 of the Statute.

(ii)

External relations
Over the past year, the President regularly met members of the legal and diplomatic communities in The Hague, Beirut and other capitals, and attended conferences and receptions relevant to the Tribunals work. In April and December 2013, the President visited Lebanon. On each occasion, he met leading political and diplomatic figures, including the President of the Republic of Lebanon, the caretaker Prime Minister, the Prime Minister designate and representatives of the Tribunals Management Committee. He also met members of the judiciary, including the President of the Lebanese Cour de cassation, the Acting Prosecutor-General of the Cour de cassation and the Btonnier and members of the Beirut Bar Association. On 6 May 2013, the President met the new Secretary-General of the China Education Association for International Exchange (CEAIE). The CEAIE and the Tribunal had signed a Memorandum of Understanding in December 2012 to increase opportunities for Chinese law graduates to intern at the Tribunal. On 14 May 2013, the President met in New York the UN Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and the Chair of the Management Committee. The purpose of these meetings was to provide updates on the Tribunals current and upcoming activities, their expected duration and necessary resources. On 30 May 2013, the President attended in The Hague a meeting with the President of Germany and leading representatives of the international courts and tribunals. 16 | P a g e

On 19 and 20 June 2013, the President met in Switzerland the Legal Advisor of the Swiss Foreign Ministry, the Chief of the Rule of Law and Non-Discrimination Branch of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross. The purpose of these meetings was to increase awareness of the Tribunal amongst Geneva-based international and inter-governmental organisations, and to explore avenues of cooperation and coordination. On 28 August 2013, the President, Prosecutor, Registrar and Head of Defence Office briefed the UN Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs on the Tribunal's activities. On 27 September 2013, the President gave an address at the Special Court for Sierra Leone's diplomatic briefing. On 29 November 2013, the Tribunals diplomatic briefing was hosted by the Canadian Ambassador at his residence. On this occasion the President thanked the diplomatic community for its support and outlined the Tribunals objectives in the approach to its first trial.

(ii)

Outreach activities
In April 2013, the President and two Judges of the Trial Chamber, Judge Janet Nosworthy and Judge David Re, engaged in a number of significant outreach activities in Beirut. When on mission in Beirut in December 2013, the President and Vice-President took part in further outreach events, including round table discussions and presentations on the STLs work. (See page 23 for further information.) On 5 November 2013, the Vice-President made a presentation in Beirut to a delegation of 80 Iraqi lawyers from the Baghdad Bar Association. As in previous years, on 13 November 2013, the President gave the inaugural lecture of the Third Inter-University Programme on International Criminal Law and Procedure. This programme (which is detailed on page 23) is a joint initiative of the Tribunal, the Asser Institute in The Hague and eight Lebanese Universities. On 6 December 2013, the President attended the annual opening ceremony of the Paris Bar. Throughout the reporting period, the Judges and Chambers staff gave numerous presentations on the Tribunals mandate and activities to lawyers, students and others visiting the Tribunal. The Judges and Chambers staff also prepared a fully-indexed summary of the Tribunals most important decisions of 2012. The 2012 Casebook will soon be available online and in print, in the Tribunals three official languages. The 2012 Casebook was preceded by Casebooks for 2009-2010 and 2011, which are both available on the Tribunals website.

5.

Management of resources
The demands upon Judges and Chambers staff increased significantly during the reporting period. Despite this, Chambers did not seek additional financial, human or other resources to meet its expanding workload. Chambers judicial activity will inevitably increase further in the next reporting period with the regular presentation of evidence in the Ayyash et al. case. 17 | P a g e

Despite Chambers growing workload, the Presidents long-established policy of fiscal prudence will not be relaxed. The Judges are assisted by small teams of legal officers and support staff; additional staff members are only and will only be hired on temporary contracts when absolutely necessary.

6.

The Way Forward

In the next reporting period, the President and other Judges plan to: (i) advance trial proceedings against the five Accused in Ayyash et al., whilst carefully balancing considerations of expedition and the rights of the Accused; (ii) fairly and swiftly dispose of judicial activities which are subsidiary to the Tribunals core mandate (eg, contempt proceedings and staff appeals); (iii) expand Chambers role in outreach initiatives, in order to promote deeper understanding of the Tribunals work in Lebanon and beyond; (iv) maintain and strengthen relationships with the Tribunals legal, political, academic and civil interlocutors in Lebanon; (v) engage with States to ensure continued financial and political support for the Tribunals work; and (vi) encourage the wider availability of the Tribunals jurisprudence in all three official languages by various means, including the publication of annual casebooks.

18 | P a g e

B.

Registry2

1.

Introduction
According to Article 12 (1) of the Statute, the Registry, under the direction of the Registrar, is responsible for the necessary administration and servicing of the Tribunal. The Registry is mandated to provide support to the Chambers, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) and the Defence Office in order to facilitate their functioning and ensure that the Tribunal is in a position to expeditiously carry out its mandate in the most cost-efficient fashion. In the past 12 months, the Registrar focused on ensuring that all sections under his responsibility were ready for the start of trial. In addition, the Registry continued to assist the Chambers, the OTP and the Defence Office in areas including translation and interpretation, administration, information technology, security, press and information and outreach, as well as to facilitate their preparations for trial. The Registry also supported the on-going contempt investigation currently before the Contempt Judge. Finally, the Registry ensured that fiscal restraint was exercised throughout the Tribunal in order to operate with utmost efficiency and with minimal costs. The Tribunal was able to continue its work thanks to the contributions of Lebanon, other donor States and the European Union.

2.

Judicial support

(i)

Court management
The Court Management Services Section (CMSS) supported the Chambers, the OTP, the Defence Office and other participants in the proceedings with the filing of submissions and orders in the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases, the Matter of El Sayed and the connected cases. CMSS was also responsible for the organisation and smooth running of the hearings. Finally, CMSS continued drafting documents detailing internal procedures to be followed for the efficient administration of justice. During the reporting period, CMSS processed 996 filings, corresponding to 213,976 pages of official court documents. Many of those filings were translated into all three official languages of the Tribunal. In 2013, CMSS provided support for four status conferences and two pre-trial conferences in the Ayyash et al. case, three meetings convened pursuant to Rule 91 (D) and (E) of the Rules3 and one contempt hearing. CMSS also provided support for two plenary meetings in February and one in October 2013. In total 29 transcripts were produced and distributed.

2 3

This section has been prepared by the Registrar. Rule 91 of the STLs Rules relates to the Preparation and Implementation of Working Plan during the pre-trial phase of the judicial proceedings.

19 | P a g e

In 2013, following a partial Registry restructuring, the Archives, Records and Library Unit was placed under the responsibility of the newly created Information Services Section, whilst a new document management team was created within CMSS. The aim of that team is to process translation requests ensuring accurate prioritisation and duplication avoidance. The team cancelled translation requests for 12,869 pages, thus saving 4340 translator working days or EUR 817,488. In 2014, CMSS started providing regular hearing support for the trial which started on 16 January. In order to be in a position to ensure the necessary organisational and logistical support for court proceedings with minimal staff, CMSS continued to pursue a flexible combination of staff recruitment, cross-training of staff to cover multiple functions and outsourcing of courtroom support, such as court reporting.

(ii)

Language Services Section

The Tribunals Language Services Section (LSS) operates at the seat of the Tribunal and at the Beirut Office. LSS provides language services to all organs in the Tribunals three official languages (Arabic, French and English) and other languages, as required. During the reporting period, interpretation services were provided in support of on-going investigations in the field, courtroom hearings, as well as outreach, press and training events. Over the last year, those services amounted to 384 interpreter-days. LSS also assisted with the transcription of audio recordings totaling 9,488 audio-minutes and provided language assistance in various forms on a large scale. Demand for translation considerably exceeded expectations over the reporting period. Translation amounting to 39,055 pages was delivered by LSS based on a translation prioritisation scheme set by the Registrar. Activities were also conducted to ensure LSSs preparedness for the commencement of trial. These included: restructuring the section; consolidating (technical) terminology for use at trial; conducting a comprehensive programme of short, targeted training sessions for LSS staff; relocating an additional Beirut-based staff interpreter to the seat of the Tribunal; recruiting three additional staff interpreters; conducting a two-week induction programme for staff interpreters; large-scale testing, selecting and ensuring security-clearance of external corporate and individual language service providers; expanding the LSS roster of qualified, security-cleared freelance language professionals to 243; implementing encryption software to facilitate processing of confidential material off-site; cooperating with other international courts and organisations, in the areas of training, staff loans (from both the United Nations Offices in Geneva and New York) and policy development. LSS has continued to face challenges in recruiting competent senior language staff, particularly those with Arabic language skills, but it has been striving to overcome those difficulties with the support of the Human Resources Section.4

All figures provided by LSS are accurate as of 28 February 2014.

20 | P a g e

(iii)

Victims and Witnesses Unit

The Victims and Witnesses Unit (VWU) supported the Tribunals proceedings by ensuring the secure and timely appearance of 12 victims and 15 witnesses during the opening weeks of trial, eight of whom testified via video-conference link. The Unit benefitted from the support and cooperation of States approached to assist in this regard. The VWU maintained its operational capability to provide protection and emergency response services to victims and witnesses and others at risk on account of their interaction with the Tribunal, and continued to actively seek the cooperation and support from States in this field. The increasingly fragile security situation in Lebanon and in the region, the demanding operational environment and the potential risks to victims and witnesses remained a key challenge, particularly with the onset of trial activities. The support from States to ensure effective and sustainable witness protection and support arrangements, in the form of relocation agreements and other types of operational assistance, remains of vital importance for the success of the Tribunal. In addition, the VWU developed and further consolidated its analytical and risk assessment procedures enabling the Unit to independently review and assess requests for procedural protective measures introduced in the proceedings by the Prosecutor, the Defence or the Legal Representatives of Victims.

(iv)

Victims Participation Unit

The Victims Participation Unit (VPU) supported and monitored the work of the Legal Representatives of Victims participating in the proceedings (LRVs). The LRVs currently represent 65 victims participating in the Ayyash et al. case. In addition, the VPU administered the Tribunals legal aid policy for victims, disbursing legal aid resources to the LRVs and their team and taking decisions on all legal aid requests. In order to better enhance the VPUs legal aid work, an Assistant Administrative Officer (Legal Aid) was recruited, and a database for legal aid decisions and documents was created with the assistance of the Defence Office. The VPU led efforts to ensure that Victims Participating in the Proceedings (VPPs) were supported b y the Tribunal to attend parts of the trial proceedings. This involved substantial collaboration with other sections of the Registry, especially the Victims and Witnesses Unit, in order to ensure that appropriate facilities and support would be available to meet the needs of visiting VPPs. During the delivery of the opening statements, 12 victims were able to attend the proceedings. The VPU also continued to develop necessary internal policies and regulations and to update existing ones. During 2013, Standard Operating Procedures were developed to regulate LRVs missions, VPP attendance at Tribunal proceedings and the reimbursement of VPP travel expenses relating to meetings with their LRVs. Amendments were made to the Directive on Victims Legal Representation. Finally, the VPU has also undertaken a number of other projects, including the creation and implementation of a database for managing information about the VPPs, and the creation of a secure website designed for and accessible by VPPs.

21 | P a g e

(v)

The Information Services Section

In 2013, the restructured Information Services Section (ISS) assumed responsibility for Information Management, Information Technology and Information Security. Having the three pillars of information services under the umbrella of one section allowed the Tribunal to better address the challenges associated with the beginning of daily trial activities. The Legal Workflow System, which manages the information and processes of the Tribunals judicial functions, was enhanced to include several new modules directly related to judicial activities, such as: i) Evidence Handling Module, used for preparation, presentation and recording of evidence and exhibits within the courtroom; ii) Case Management Module for analysis of case-materials and entities with a view to preparation of a 'Final Brief; iii) Introduction of Reporting Facilities Module; iv) Transcript and Oral Order Modules to record and distribute transcripts and oral orders. A new multi-channel/multi-lingual 'location-flexible' remote witness testimony system was deployed. This new system can facilitate interpretation, collaboration and protective measures for witnesses testifying from a remote location. In order to support the high number of translations and improve information security during transfers, a new 'Secure File Transfer' system was put in place to enable the LSS to exchange work related materials in a secured, controlled and audited manner. During the reporting period, the ISS also began establishing an Information Management plan for the Tribunal, including the Official Records and Digital Preservation strategy. This effort was conducted in consort with the four organs of the Tribunal and great progress was made in moving closer to the vision of the Tribunal's future legacy. During the reporting period, the Library carried out its preparations for the start of trial. This included a review and update of its Lebanese legal collection, both in print and digital form. At the same time, the Library continued to strengthen its collection of international law publications that currently provides access to 6,617 books and articles. Furthermore, in order to provide efficient access to its growing collection, the Library carried out a complete redesign of its intranet site. To maximise the use of resources, the Library participates in the UN System Electronic Information Acquisition Consortium. The Library has also cooperated with the STLs effort to make its jurisprudence as wid ely available as possible and participated in activities aiming to provide all STL public documents for inclusion in the International Criminal Courts Legal Tools database.

(vi)

Public Information and Communications Section

In October 2013, the Registrar, in consultation with the other Principals5, decided to combine the Public Affairs Section and the Outreach and Legacy Section. This merger was intended to improve coordination and generate operational efficiencies that will allow the Tribunal to more effectively communicate its messages and to reach out to its primary target audience: the Lebanese people.

The Principals of the Tribunal are the President, the Prosecutor, the Registrar and the Head of Defence Office.

22 | P a g e

The new section, called the Public Information and Communications Section (PICS), encompasses all the activities that were previously carried out by the Public Affairs Section and the Outreach and Legacy Section. Channels of communication built in previous years will be maintained, strengthened and extended to include all segments of Lebanese society. PICSs objective is to understand the concerns and expectations of the local stakeholders, identify misconceptions about the Tribunals work and to clarify, or correct, them where necessary. Outreach and Legacy Throughout the past year, Outreach continued its strategy of explaining the work of the STL within the broader context of international justice. In coordination with all organs, a number of activities were organised in Lebanon. Those were often timed to coincide with visits by the Principals or Judges in order to minimise costs. In January, the then Registrar Mr von Hebel held a round table with lawyers and members of the Beirut Bar Association Executive Council. He also gave a lecture about international criminal justice to approximately 80 Judges. In April, Judges took part in several events in Beirut including a round table on international criminal tribunals at the Beirut Bar Association and a discussion meeting with around 70 Lebanese Judges about the role of the judiciary in international and hybrid tribunals and in domestic courts. In May, the then Acting Registrar, Mr Mundis, met with representatives of Lebanese NGOs. In December 2013, the President and the Vice-President held a lecture at the Notre Dame University. The President also participated in a conference entitled Dialogue between Judges at the Universit Saint Esprit de Kaslik (USEK). The Inter-University Programme on International Criminal Law and Procedure, launched in November 2011, continued for a second and third academic year. The programme is aimed at law students in Lebanese universities and is provided at no cost to them. It is organised by the Tribunal in cooperation with the Asser Institute in the Netherlands and eight universities in Lebanon.6 In February, the President launched the second academic year with a lecture on the history of the law of international tribunals and, in November, the third academic year began with another lecture by the President. A graduation ceremony was held in July for 109 students and the 26 best students visited the Tribunal later in the year. The Tribunal also hosted a visit to The Hague by 13 deans and professors from the Lebanese universities that participate in the programme. Screenings of a video on international criminal proceedings started in October in an attempt to familiarise audiences in Lebanon with the various stages of the proceedings in international courts and tribunals, including the Tribunal. In 2013, three screenings took place for academics and legal practitioners and included presentations by the Vice-President of the Tribunal.

Universities participating include American University of Science and Technology, Beirut Arab University, Notre Dame University, American University Beirut, Universit La Sagesse, Universit Libanaise, Universit Saint-Esprit de Kaslik and Universit Saint-Joseph. The course was delivered via video-streaming with lecturers in The Hague and students in the auditoriums at one of the participating universities.

23 | P a g e

Press Office During the reporting period, the Tribunal remained of particular interest to the Lebanese media. There continued to be spikes in coverage at the time of substantial developments in the Tribunals work most notably when an indictment against Mr Merhi was confirmed, when a trial date was set in Ayyash et al. and in the weeks leading up to the start of trial on 16 January 2014. The Tribunal remains at all times a topic of discussion in the press and on TV news shows. The Press Office estimates that journalists asked approximately 1,500 questions to the spokesperson in 2013. The vast majority of these came from Lebanon. This was in addition to hundreds of email exchanges with reporters, and several visits by press office staff to Beirut and the region. Press briefings were also held in Paris and Geneva as part of a broader strategy to increase the offices engagement with the Francophone media. In preparation for the start of trial, from 6 to 13 January 2014, the spokesperson traveled to Beirut to meet with journalists and senior editors. On 6 January 2014, the Press Office held a seminar for journalists in Beirut to provide information on the judicial procedures, as well as practical information to assist journalists with their reporting of the start of trial. The Press Office also facilitated interviews held by the Prosecutor and the Registrar in the weeks prior to the start of trial. On 16 January 2014, the STL welcomed more than 100 media representatives and 80 other visitors to the STL building for the opening of trial proceedings. Dozens of interviews were held by the STLs spokesperson on that day with journalists from Lebanon, the region and international press. Public Affairs The Tribunal website received more than 231,000 visits in 2013. The highest number of these visitors came from the Netherlands, followed by Lebanon. On 16 and 17 January 2014, during the opening statements of the Tribunals first trial, the website was visited by nearly 15,000 individuals. Of these a quarter came from Lebanon, with two other countries from the MENA region in the top ten. In addition, 2,000 people from 92 countries followed the Tribunals proceedings through the websites external streaming feature on the first day of trial. In Lebanon, the opening statements were also broadcast live on most Lebanese TV networks. The Tribunal also continued to develop its social media strategy. In addition to our already existing social media tools (Twitter, YouTube, Flickr, and Scribd) an official Tribunal Facebook page was launched in February 2013. This has allowed the Tribunal to reach out directly to the Lebanese general public. The Tribunal Twitter account continued to be one of the most potent devices for communication and it doubled its followers during the year. Printed publications Due to the increase in judicial activities PICS started producing a Judicial Brief, a regular report which summarises the latest judicial developments at the Tribunal. The Brief is widely distributed in Arabic, English and French and is particularly geared to the press, as well as members of the diplomatic and legal communities. 24 | P a g e

A series of publications was also finalised in 2013, in preparation for the start of trial. Those documents, which are available on the Tribunals website, cover a wide range of information about the Ayyash et al. case, including case information sheets, the actors in the courtroom, the rules of the public gallery and guidelines for journalists covering the trial. Visits The Tribunal continued to welcome hundreds of visitors to the seat of the Tribunal. In 2013, the Tribunal organised visits for more than 60 groups, including universities from Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Tribunal also hosted other groups, including of Libyan, French and Spanish magistrates, a delegation of magistrates and Government lawyers from the Algerian Diplomatic Academy, and a delegation of Russian and Chinese professors.

3.

Immediate Office of the Registrar

Mr Daryl Mundis was appointed as Registrar of the Tribunal in July 2013. He had been serving as Acting Registrar since 18 April, following the departure of Mr Herman von Hebel. Ms Amelie Zinzius was appointed as Deputy Registrar in December 2013.

(i)

External relations
Throughout the reporting period, bilateral meetings were held by the Office of the Registrar with representatives of the diplomatic community in The Hague, Beirut, New York and elsewhere to update on the Tribunals work in the lead up to trial and to seek continued cooperation and support. In May 2013, the Acting Registrar, Mr Mundis, travelled to Beirut to introduce himself to Tribunal staff in the Tribunal Office, the Lebanese authorities and members of the diplomatic community. Mr Mundis discussed the Tribunals recent developments and expressed his appreciation for the continued cooperation and support provided by the Government of Lebanon. In addition, he participated in a number of outreach activities. Follow up visits took place by the Registrar in mid-September, and at the end of October 2013. In The Hague, regular briefings were held with representatives of the diplomatic community, including a diplomatic briefing hosted by the Canadian Ambassador on 29 November 2013. In addition, on 6 June 2013, Mr Mundis traveled to Brussels to meet with representatives of the diplomatic community, including the European Union, and to brief NGOs and members of the press on the Tribunals work. In April 2013, Mr Von Hebel and Mr Mundis traveled to New York to provide updates on the Tribunals work, including its financial situation. In October 2013, Mr Mundis traveled to New York to present the Tribunals 2013 budget to the Management Committee. During both missions, a total of 45 meetings were held with Management Committee members, Regional States, UN Departments, the Group of Interested States and the European Union. 25 | P a g e

The Registry also enjoyed the continued cooperation of the Government of the Netherlands, including support in relation to the Tribunals premises, external security, the issuance of visa and residency permits and other matters.

(ii)

STL premises outside the Netherlands

Beirut Office In the past year, the number of Tribunal staff members posted in Lebanon remained at 60, in order to cater for the continued high pace of work in the Beirut Office. Regular missions to Lebanon by Haguebased staff and Principals of the Tribunal ensured that all four organs of the court were represented in the Beirut Office during the year. The Office supported visits by Principals and staff from the Chambers, the Registry, the Office of the Prosecutor and the Defence Office, as well as the amicus curiae team. In addition, the Registry in Beirut continued to provide the necessary administrative and security assistance to the work of resident Prosecution and Defence staff. Finally, the Registry's own Beirut-based activities continued to expand in the areas of Outreach, Victims Participation and the Victims and Witnesses Unit. The Beirut Office also supported the Court Management Services Section, as preparations were made to hear evidence remotely from the Beirut Office during the trial. Throughout, the external relations function of the Beirut Office remained a key element of the Registrys work in Beirut. The announcement of a trial start date also increased attention on the Tribunal which in turn led to heightened external relations activity in addition to the numerous regular meetings and background briefings held with the diplomatic community, government officials and UN representatives. New York Liaison Office Throughout the reporting period, the Tribunals New York Liaison Office supported the Management Committee in its consideration of the Tribunals financial and administrative matters, including by providing background information and responding to the queries of the Management Committees members. The Liaison Office also regularly updated the Committees members about the progress of the Tribunals judicial proceedings and other relevant developments. The Liaison Office continued to offer political advice to the Registrar and to coordinate fundraising and diplomatic efforts in New York. It also ensured that interested States, UN departments and NGOs were informed of the work and challenges of the Tribunal. Finally, the Liaison Office organised and supported visits of representatives of the Registry and the Chambers to New York and Washington throughout the year.

(iii)

Inter-tribunal cooperation
The Tribunal enjoyed the continued cooperation of the international courts and tribunals based in The Hague, including the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Court of Justice. Areas of cooperation included the joint organisation of various training sessions and outreach events, loaning staff members on a reimbursable basis, 26 | P a g e

providing technical support, assisting in language services as well as inter-library loans. Such mutual assistance contributed to internal cost efficiencies. The Tribunal also assisted the Special Court for Sierra Leone, which co-located in the Tribunal building for the Charles Taylor trial, with its transition into the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone.

4.

Administrative support

(i)

Budget and funding

The approved Tribunal budget for the period 1 January - 31 December 2013 amounted to EUR 59,972,672. The approved budget for 1 January - 31 December 2014 is just under the 2013 amount, totaling EUR 59,891,848. As in previous years, the 2014 budget is based on a number of parameters that have been formulated following intensive consultations with the Principals of all organs. While the 2014 Budget contains a number of activities which would have led to an increase (such as additional hearing days, additional legal aid costs and the contempt case), these have been completely offset by a number of measures aimed at reducing costs or limiting further cost increases. These measures focused on areas that would have the least negative impact on judicial activities and related support operations thus allowing the Tribunal to commence trial on 16 January 2014. Since the Tribunals inception, 28 countries and the European Union have contributed to the Tribunal, either through voluntary contributions or in-kind support. The countries that have contributed, in addition to Lebanon, include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Regional States, the Russian Federation, Sweden, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States and Uruguay. In the first half of 2013, the Tribunals External Auditor conducted its fourth audit of the Tribunal. In June, the External Auditor issued its report, providing an unqualified audit opinion on the Tribunals 2012 financial statements. In 2013, the Tribunal also established a framework for Enterprise Risk Management, establishing high level risk registers for each organ, and the organisation as a whole.

(ii)

Recruitment of staff
As of 31 December 2013, a total of 394 staff were employed by the Tribunal, of whom 60 are located in the Beirut Office. Over 60 nationalities are represented at the Tribunal. Fifty-eight staff are of Lebanese nationality, representing 15% of the staffing total. The staffs gender distribution is 41% female and 59% male. In addition, a total of 74 interns participated in the work of the Tribunal during the year. Efforts continue to increase the interest of Lebanese students to apply to the programme. Out of the 74 interns, 48 were unfunded.

27 | P a g e

In 2013, the National Visiting Professionals programme continued successfully, with four Lebanese lawyers participating in the programme during the year.

5.

The Way Forward

In the coming year, the Registrars priorities will remain as ensuring that the Tribunal receives the financial support and cooperation required to fulfil its mandate. In particular, he will focus on: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) ensuring that the Registry sections responsible for providing support to the judicial proceedings continue to support trial activities; continuing to provide support to the Chambers, OTP and Defence Office; ensuring that fiscal responsibility is exercised throughout the Tribunal and ensuring that the Tribunals operations are undertaken with utmost efficiency and with minimal costs; implementing the Tribunals fundraising strategy; continuing to seek arrangements with States on the relocation of witnesses and the enforcement of sentences; and enhancing press, outreach and legacy activities in Lebanon and elsewhere with a view to providing accurate and timely information about the next stages in the Tribunals work.

28 | P a g e

C.

Office of the Prosecutor7

1.

Introduction
The period from March 2013 February 2014 has been an extremely busy and productive one for the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP). The Prosecutors opening statement on 16 January 2014 initiated the beginning of trial and the start of the presentation of the Prosecutions case in Prosecutor v. Ayyash et al. The opening of trial was the culmination of the considerable work undertaken during 2013 to ensure the trial could begin. The Prosecutor clarified certain aspects of the Ayyash et al. indictment to facilitate understanding of the allegations, and filed substantive amendments involving the identification of a co-conspirator. The Prosecution streamlined its case, deciding on more efficient ways to present the evidence, thereby reducing the number of witnesses by approximately 160 persons and removing approximately 9,200 exhibits from the list of documents to be presented in court. Further, the Prosecution prepared and submitted evidence in written form, in the anticipation that the admission of such written evidence will save considerable court time. In conjunction with these efforts, the Prosecution completed its disclosure to the Defence, in June 2013, of potentially exculpatory material. In June 2013, the Prosecutor finalised the work necessary to indict a fifth Accused person, Mr Hassan Habib Merhi. Upon confirmation of the indictment, and the Trial Chambers decision to proceed with a trial in absentia, the Prosecution prepared and provided the necessary material to the new Defence counsel. The Prosecution continues to ensure that material is provided so that the case can proceed as expeditiously as possible in conformity with the rights of the Accused. In an effort to bring the two cases together, and to have one trial, the Prosecutor immediately asked the Chambers to join the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases. The Prosecutor established a separate team to further investigate and analyse material concerning other attacks found to be within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal (the connected cases) and other related cases, which focused its efforts on these attacks.

2.

The trial of Ayyash et al. the opening of the trial by the Prosecution
On 16 January 2014, the Prosecutor delivered his opening statement in the case of Prosecutor v. Ayyash et al. before the Trial Chamber. The Prosecutor outlined that the evidence presented at trial would fall into three general categories: the attack itself; the acts undertaken by the four Accused and their co-conspirators in 2004 and 2005 to prepare for the assassination of Mr Rafik Hariri; and the respective roles of each of the Accused in preparing and perpetrating the attack and preparing the

This section has been prepared by the Prosecutor.

29 | P a g e

false claim of responsibility. In a further three-part opening statement of almost one and a half days, the Prosecution provided details of the evidence it intends to present at trial. On 22 January 2014, the Prosecution started presenting evidence for the first part of its case concerning the effect of the explosion on 14 February 2005 on the victims, as well as the results of the forensics investigations into the cause of the explosion. The Prosecution has indicated its intention to rely on the evidence of approximately 100 witnesses for the first part of its case, and set out the order in which they will be called or their evidence relied upon. At the time of submitting the Annual Report, 15 witnesses had testified in person either in court or via video-link. At the Prosecutions request, the Trial Chamber has also admitted the written evidence of 45 witnesses.

3.

Preparations throughout 2013 for the start of trial

In preparation for the start of trial, the OTP undertook a number of steps in 2013. These included clarifying the Prosecution's case by amending the indictment, streamlining the case by removing approximately 9,200 exhibits and over 160 witnesses, consolidating and preparing the evidence for presentation in court and completing substantial disclosure to the Defence for their preparation. Further details are provided. First, the Prosecutor amended the indictment in the Ayyash et al. case on two occasions. The Pre-Trial Judge, on 12 April and 31 July 2013, granted the Prosecutors amendments. As found by the Pre-Trial Judge, the procedural amendments clarified the allegations and thereby allowed the Accused to better understand the indictment. In relation to the amendments proposed on the second occasion, the Prosecutor indicated that the substantive proposed amendments to the indictment reflected certain aspects of the attribution of phones, the interrelationship between phone activities and the resulting impact on the structure of the phone groups. The Prosecutor submitted prima facie evidence in support of the proposed amendments, and submitted that none of them would cause prejudice to the Accused. In authorising these substantive amendments, on 31 July 2013, the Pre-Trial Judge observed that these amendments, which met the prima facie test, did not fundamentally alter the roles of the Accused; indeed, he noted that the counts of indictment issued against them in the earlier version of the indictment remained largely unchanged. Following confirmation by the Pre-Trial Judge on 31 July 2013 of the Prosecutors indictment against the Accused Hassan Habib Merhi, the Prosecutor sought and immediately received authorisation to amend the indictment in the Ayyash et al. case to include his name as a co-conspirator. In the meantime, the Prosecution was engaged in pre-trial litigation brought by the Defence challenging the Prosecutors amended indictment, authorised by the Pre-Trial Judge on 31 July 2013, on the basis of alleged defects in its form. The Prosecution opposed the challenges, which were found by the Trial Chamber to be without merit and dismissed. Second, the Prosecution undertook numerous steps to streamline the presentation of evidence, and reduce the court time required. In addition to reducing the witnesses by approximately 160 persons and removing approximately 9,200 exhibits, the Prosecution sought to present written evidence which 30 | P a g e

would save court time. The Prosecution sought to present the evidence of more than 75 of its witnesses for the first part of its case through witness statements and documents instead of viva voce testimony. At this stage, the Chamber has accepted the written evidence of 45 witnesses. This should shorten the court time needed to present the Prosecution evidence. In addition, the Prosecution has sought to work with the Defence to identify areas of non-contentious evidence which can be presented in a shorter and more succinct format. This, too, would save court time. The Prosecution will continue to do so. Third, considerable efforts were made to ensure the proper presentation of evidence. These included: consolidating the evidence; confirming the availability of witnesses; requesting permission for a number of witnesses to testify via video-link; seeking protective measures for witnesses, if necessary; requesting the admission of written witness statements of other witnesses, so they do not have to attend in court; and requesting the admission of certain evidence of probative value from the bar table, without requiring a witness to produce or identify it. Such requests included a request to admit photographs and videos of the crime scene, maps of Beirut and three-dimensional models of the crime scene location, to assist the Tribunal in understanding the scene at the time of the explosion and immediately thereafter. In the range of 20 missions were carried out in relation to trial preparation. In addition to missions from the Office in Leidschendam, a large number of interviews were conducted by OTP investigators based in the Beirut Office. This resulted in a more efficient use of resources and the undertaking of missions from Leidschendam only when absolutely necessary. Cooperation by States has been, and remains, an important aspect of the OTPs work. Much of the OTPs trial preparation requires State support, for example, to interview witnesses or obtain forensics or other technical expertise. As the OTP embarks on the trial, securing the full and timely cooperation of States is even more critical to the successful implementation of its mandate. As part of this effort, formal Requests for Assistance were sent to Lebanon and other States. The OTP also continues to count on the support of witnesses and victims who have provided evidence in this case. In this regard, witnesses have been contacted in order to address whether, and if so, what, protective measures might be required at trial. On 23 August, the Prosecution filed an updated pre-trial brief, which reflected the indictment of 21 June 2013, as well as amendments made to the Prosecutions lists of witnesses and exhibits. Fourth, during the reporting period the Prosecution also engaged in an extensive and resource intensive exercise to ensure that all relevant material was provided to the Defence. During the first part of the reporting period, the Prosecution focused as a priority on completing its disclosure to the Defence of potentially exculpatory or mitigating material under Rule 113. As indicated to the court, the Prosecution met the deadline of 17 June 2013 by a comprehensive review of the Offices evidentiary holdings through a realignment of resources within the OTP, including the redeployment at times of up to 40 staff dedicated to searching, reviewing and processing a huge volume of evidentiary material for disclosure purposes. The Prosecution continues to meet its disclosure obligations to date. The Prosecution also responded during the reporting period to more than 200 separate written requests by the Defence for the inspection of evidence within the OTP holdings considered by the 31 | P a g e

Defence to be material for their preparation for trial. These requests are often extensive and take considerable resources and time to undertake, compile and provide to the Defence.

4.

The Prosecutor indicts a fifth Accused

In parallel with preparing for trial in the Ayyash et al. case, the OTP continued to use investigative resources to identify those alleged to be involved in the commission of the attack on 14 February 2005 and articulate their roles in the attack. This led to the filing by the Prosecutor of a confidential indictment on 5 June 2013 against a fifth individual for his alleged role in the attack. The Accused, Hassan Habib Merhi, is charged with a number of crimes, including the crime of conspiracy aimed at committing a terrorist act. In this regard, he is alleged to have acted in a conspiracy with the four indictees in the Ayyash et al. case in relation to the 14 February 2005 attack. The indictment was confirmed by the Pre-Trial Judge on 31 July 2013, and transmitted, together with the arrest warrant, to the Lebanese authorities. At the Prosecutors request, the confidentiality of the indictment was partially lifted on 10 October 2013. As a result, the material facts of the Prosecutions case and charges against Mr Merhi were outlined at that stage in a public redacted version of the indictment. Immediately following the decision of the Trial Chamber on 20 December 2013 to proceed to trial in absentia in the Merhi case, and the appointment that day of Defence counsel, the Prosecution took steps to expedite its disclosure to ensure the Defence had everything they need to prepare for trial. To that end, on 23 December 2013, at the Prosecutions request, the Pre-Trial Judge issued an Order to prohibit the public dissemination of confidential information, thereby establishing a protective measures regime for material provided to the Defence. With such protections in place, and pursuant to an Order of the Pre-Trial Judge of 24 December 2013, the Prosecution immediately disclosed to counsel for Mr Merhi all supporting material, completing that disclosure on the same day. By 2 January 2014, the Prosecution had commenced the disclosure of the statements of those witnesses it intends to call at trial; the majority of statements were disclosed in early January. On 8 January 2014, the Prosecution filed its provisional pre-trial brief. On the same date, 8 January 2014, the Prosecution filed its witness and exhibit lists in the Merhi case, and by 31 January 2014, the Prosecution had disclosed the evidence it intends to rely on at trial. By 24 January 2014, the Prosecution had completed the disclosure of potentially exculpatory material. Advancing disclosure significantly constituted an important preparatory step in the context of the Prosecutors request to join the two cases into a single trial.

5.

Joinder seeking to bring the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases together in one trial
Even before a decision by the Trial Chamber on whether the Merhi case would proceed in absentia, the Prosecutor informed the Pre-Trial Judge and the Trial Chamber of his intention to seek joinder of the Merhi case with the Ayyash et al. case, if the case proceeded. On 18 December 2013, the Prosecution sought an expeditious order from the Pre-Trial Judge to refer to the Trial Chamber its request that Mr Merhi be jointly charged and tried with the Accused in the Ayyash et al. case. At the same time, the Prosecution filed a notice of its referral request before the Trial Chamber. Shortly after 32 | P a g e

the Trial Chambers decision to try Mr Merhi in absentia, the Prosecution seized the Trial Chamber with a parallel joinder request in the Ayyash et al. proceedings. The Prosecutor set out the reasons why joinder would be the best way for the Tribunal to move forward, including: joinder would serve the interests of justice given that the factual allegations against the five Accused comprise one inherently connected case, and given the existence of a shared conspiracy charge against the five Accused; allowing joinder would avoid the massive duplication of evidence that would otherwise occur if the Merhi indictment were tried separately; and joinder would also serve to advance other important interests, by minimising the hardship to victims and witnesses and ensuring the consistency of findings with respect to identical factual allegations. The Prosecution's request for joinder was granted by the Trial Chamber, which found that the interests of justice would best be served by joining the two cases together. The Trial Chamber also accepted that a joint trial would minimise the trauma and hardship to victims and witnesses and any risk of loss of witnesses for a second trial. The Trial Chamber found, moreover, that running two trials relating to the same incident would have a major negative impact on the Tribunals resources. The Prosecutor informed the court that the Prosecution would adjust its schedule to accommodate the needs of the Merhi Defence lawyers so that they have the time to prepare for trial.

6.

Connected and related cases

In parallel to the work on the trial and the fifth Accused, the OTP continued its investigations in relation to the three other targeted attacks that occurred in Lebanon between 1 October 2004 and 12 December 2005 which the OTP has been able to connect with the 14 February 2005 attack and which have been deferred to the Tribunal. These attacks involved: the attempted assassination of Marwan Hamadeh, Minister of Economy, on 1 October 2004; the assassination of George Hawi, former leader of the Communist Party, on 21 June 2005; and the attempted assassination of Elias El Murr, outgoing Deputy Prime Minister and former Defence Minister, on 12 July 2005. During the reporting period, the OTP also continued to review and assess whether other targeted attacks that occurred in Lebanon within the Tribunals temporal jurisdiction or that occurred after 12 December 2005 are connected with the 14 February 2005 attack in the manner required by Article 1 of the Statute. The Prosecutor has created a dedicated Related Cases Team, comprising lawyers, investigators and analysts, to prepare a factual and legal assessment as to whether these attacks may fall within the Tribunals jurisdiction. If there is prima facie evidence that an attack is connected, the Prosecutor may seek to bring the case within the Tribunals jurisdiction under Rule 11 or 12 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

7.

Contempt
On 16 April 2013, the Prosecutor filed a request before the Pre-Trial Judge to refer to the Contempt Judge three matters involving the publication of the names or identifying information of alleged witnesses. In making this request, the Prosecutor stressed that the Prosecution considers that publicising the names of individuals and identifying them as witnesses associated with the Tribunal is a serious matter regardless of whether or not the named individuals are actually witnesses in 33 | P a g e

proceedings before it. He underlined that these acts of intimidation put individuals at risk and cannot be tolerated by the Tribunal. On 19 and 24 April 2013, respectively, the Prosecutor filed submissions on whether contempt proceedings should be initiated and, if so, whether they should remain confidential. The Prosecutor supported initiating an investigation into the allegations that had been referred by the Pre-Trial Judge to the President in accordance with Rule 60 bis (D) of the Rules. He submitted that there was more than a sufficient basis to initiate an investigation and that the Contempt Judge should consider all three matters together because the evidence indicated that they were factually linked. The Prosecutor submitted, moreover, that in light of the sensitive nature of the very serious allegations, it would be prudent to maintain the confidential nature of the proceedings. Following the Contempt Judges decision of 29 April 2013 to initiate contempt proceedings, the Prosecutor has made it a priority to provide assistance and information to the court-appointed Amicus Curiae investigating the events that are the subject of allegations of contempt, as required.

8.

El Sayed matter
In accordance with the Pre-Trial Judges Order of 8 October 2012, the Prosecution submitted in April and October 2013 updated risk assessments for a number of individuals whose statements Mr Jamil El Sayed had requested be disclosed.

9.

The Way Forward

The next year will be as busy as this past year, if not more so, for the Office of the Prosecutor. In the coming year, the OTP is committed to moving ahead expeditiously with the presentation of its evidence-in-chief in the Ayyash et al. case, against the five individuals accused of criminal responsibility for the attack against former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Emphasis will continue to be given to presenting evidence as expeditiously as possible and streamlining the proceedings. This includes presenting evidence through witness statements and documents instead of viva voce testimony, and continuing to try to obtain the agreement of the Defence on non-contentious matters. The presentation of the Prosecutions case will utilise considerable resources and require considerable time depending on the nature and availability of the evidence. In light of the joinder of the Merhi case to the trial of the other four Accused, the Prosecution took all necessary steps to provide the Defence team with the evidence and material related to the case in an expedited manner. The Prosecution has informed the Merhi Defence counsel and the court that it is prepared to provide assistance, to the extent possible, to the Defence counsel in their preparation for trial. As indicated, the Prosecution is willing to adjust the presentation of its case, where possible, to ensure the timely and expeditious proceeding of the joined case. The investigative and legal work arising from trial will continue apace. The OTP will continue investigations necessary to support the Prosecutions case and to consider any evidence regarding 34 | P a g e

others who may be responsible for the 14 February 2005 attack. It will also continue to provide support, as necessary, for contempt proceedings. With regard to the three other targeted attacks that have been found to be connected with the 14 February 2005 attack and which have been deferred to the Tribunal, the OTP will continue to investigate them as part of its mandate. The Prosecutor is considering the prospect of further indictments if the evidence so warrants. During the coming year, a decision will be taken in this regard. The OTP will also continue to review and assess whether other targeted attacks that occurred in Lebanon within the Tribunals temporal jurisdiction or that occurred after 12 December 2005 are connected with the 14 February 2005 attack in the manner required by Article 1 of the Statute. A dedicated Related Cases Team will further analyse and assess whether these attacks may fall within the Tribunals jurisdiction. If there is prima facie evidence that an attack is connected, the Prosecutor may seek to bring the case within the Tribunals jurisdiction under Rule 11 or 12 of the Rules. If, on the other hand, Rules 11 and 12 of the Rules are not considered applicable, the Prosecutor will share the material gathered and the analysis undertaken, where possible, with the Lebanese judicial authorities as assistance to their domestic investigations within their jurisdiction. At the end of 2013, the Prosecutor commenced an office re-structuring to establish a dedicated trial team to consolidate the necessary investigative, analytical, legal and administrative skills in one team which would focus exclusively on the trial functions. As noted, another dedicated team was established to focus exclusively on the connected and potentially related cases. The new structure of the Office reflected the new functions required to both conduct a full international trial and continue its investigative responsibilities. Resources within the Office were re-aligned to meet the tasks that arose. The goals that were reached in 2013, based on the team approach, were achieved in the context of an international organisation where staff turnover is a constant possibility and often the reality in staffing and managing the Office. The functional approach to management and the targeted use of resources will continue in 2014. The Prosecutor will continue to re-align resources within the Office to meet the current and future needs. Though the focus for the next year will be on the activities outlined above, the Prosecutor will not lose sight of the need for renewed and continued efforts to arrest the Accused. The Prosecutor will provide whatever assistance possible, in the expected continuation by the Lebanese authorities to take all necessary measures to arrest and transfer the five Accused to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.

35 | P a g e

36 | P a g e

D.

Defence Office8

1.

Introduction
With the Trial Chambers decision to start the trial in the Ayyash et al. case, the reporting period saw major developments for the Defence Office, in particular with respect to its duty to provide legal and administrative support and assistance to Defence counsel. Within the reporting period, second cocounsel were assigned to assist lead counsel in Ayyash et al. with the preparation and representation of the Defence. Moreover, counsel have gone through a series of important procedural steps forming an essential part of their preparations for trial. Following the confirmation of the indictment against Hassan Habib Merhi and the Trial Chambers decision of 20 December 2013 to conduct trial proceedings in absentia, the Head of Defence Office assigned a lead counsel and two co-counsel to represent the rights and interests of Mr Merhi. The Defence Office also provided all necessary logistical and legal support to assist the Defence team to fulfil a variety of tasks, such as composing their teams of support staff, identifying experts and filing motions and observations. The Defence team also started receiving disclosure and initiated their own analysis of evidence and investigations. Overall, the reporting period presented formidable challenges for Defence counsel and the Defence Office providing support to them. At the same time, regular Defence Office activities continued. Chief amongst these were the Defence Offices outreach activities and relations with Lebanese stakeholders, aimed at promoting a greater understanding of the Defence Offices work and the importance of the Defence in the interests of justice.

2.

Involvement in judicial activities

The Defence Office activities for the Ayyash et al. and Merhi proceedings can be summarised as follows: Assignment of counsel and persons assisting counsel Ayyash et al. On 31 December 2013, the Head of Defence Office assigned second co-counsel for the four in absentia Accused with a view to ensuring an effective presentation and preparation of the defence during the trial.

This section has been prepared by the Head of Defence Office.

37 | P a g e

The new second co-counsel for Mr Baddredine is Mr Iain Edwards, from the United Kingdom. Mr Edwards is an experienced international criminal defence lawyer. The new second co-counsel for Mr Ayyash is Mr Thomas Hannis, from the United States. Mr Hannis has more than 20 years of experience working in criminal law systems at the local, state and federal levels in the USA and more than ten years of experience as a prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The new second co-counsel for Mr Oneissi is Mr Philippe Larochelle, from Canada. Mr Larochelle is an experienced international criminal defence lawyer. The new co-counsel for Mr Sabra is Mr Geoffrey Roberts, from the United Kingdom. Mr Roberts has significant experience in international criminal law. Merhi First and foremost, the Defence Office assigned permanent lead counsel and two co-counsel for the in absentia Accused Mr Merhi. The Head of Defence Office endeavored to assign a team of counsel with complementary skills and experiences. On 20 December 2013, the Head of Defence Office assigned Mr Mohamed Aouini from the Tunisian Bar as lead counsel to represent the interests of the Accused Mr Merhi. Mr Aouini, who was one of the first Defence counsel before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, immediately commenced his duties during the Christmas recess, and was sworn in on 30 December 2013. Also on 30 December 2013, the Head of Defence Office decided to assign two co-counsel to assist Mr Aouini, in order to ensure that he would be able to prepare and present the case for the defence of Mr Merhi in the most effective and expedient way possible. The assigned co-counsel are Mr Jad Khalil, an experienced lawyer from the Beirut Bar (Lebanon) and Ms Dorothe Le Fraper du Hellen, an experienced national and international criminal lawyer from the Montpellier Bar (France). Legal Aid Unit All counsel are assisted by a team, composed generally of a legal officer, case manager and analyst. Depending on their specific requirements, lead counsel have also recruited other persons assisting counsel, such as evidence review assistants, legal officers or local resource persons (such as Mr Omar Nashabe, a Lebanese expert consultant). Moreover, Defence teams have brought onboard expert consultants and evidence review assistants to assist with the analysis of the Prosecutions case. Decisions to assign persons assisting counsel are made by the Head of Defence Office and implemented by the Legal Aid Unit. In the reporting period the Legal Aid Unit responded to around 600 requests from counsel, including requests for travel on mission, assignment of staff or experts and for payment of legal fees. Each request involves a decision-making process prescribed by the Legal Aid Policy, and weighs the interests of the Accused against the constraints of the available budget to determine whether the request is reasonable, and necessary for the preparation and presentation of the case.

38 | P a g e

Legal Advisory Section The Defence Legal Advisory Section monitored the proceedings in the Tribunal and other international courts for the benefit of counsel and responded to over 40 formal requests for legal assistance from the Defence teams (in the form of advisory opinions, memoranda and draft submissions for counsel in the Ayyash et al. case). Often the advice is produced for a specific team, with a short turn-around time, but where possible the product is shared with all Defence teams. The Defence Legal Advisory Section also provided legal support to the newly appointed Defence team representing the rights and interests of Mr Merhi, notably by providing information on the Tribunals applicable law, relevant case law and practice. Moreover, the Section has provided a significant number of internal opinions to the Head of Defence Office in relation to specific aspects of the proceedings and regulatory documents. Over the reporting period, the Defence Legal Advisory Section attended hearings in the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases and assisted the Head of Defence Office in the preparation of oral and written submissions. Operational Support Unit The Operational Support Unit handled six official requests for assistance to the Lebanese government. There were also a number of missions performed by Defence counsel. In the background, significant work was performed on a variety of IT projects, including development of the disclosure and case management modules of the Legal Workflow system, the acquisition of critical (analytical) software packages, database projects for telecommunications analysis and evidence handling. With the assignment of the Defence team for Mr Merhi, a significant amount of work was done to assist the team to become operational as soon as possible, including the assignment of support staff, assistance in planning Defence investigative missions to Lebanon, the allocation of offices, computers and access to the Legal Workflow system and the acquisition of software. Observations filed The Head of Defence Office filed a number of observations to the court pursuant to Rule 57 (F) of the Rules, including on matters of disclosure, working languages before the Pre-trial Judge, reconsideration of a sanction against Defence counsel, the possibility of assignment of ad hoc Defence counsel and on the alleged violation of the rights of an Accused. Cooperation Upon requests from Defence teams, the Defence Office has entered into contacts with the Embassies of various States to request their cooperation and to provide specific assistance to the Defence.

3.

Regulatory framework
A number of crucial documents in relation to the work of Defence counsel and the Defence Office were adopted or amended during the reporting period. The Head of Defence Office adopted a revised version of a Directive, now entitled the Directive on Appointment and Assignment of Defence Counsel. The revisions mainly concerned the modalities of 39 | P a g e

appointment of retained counsel, as well as the assignment and status of persons assisting counsel, possible rights of audience for persons assisting counsel and some procedural matters. The Head of Defence Office submitted a motion to the Pre-Trial Judge bringing to his attention certain information in relation to potential contempt of court under Rule 60 bis of the Rules. Following the motion, the Defence Office participated in a hearing on the matter, which resulted in the Contempt Judge launching an investigation into alleged witness intimidation. During the reporting period, the Defence Office worked in cooperation with the Registrar on an internal regulation on security clearances. A special operating procedure on Defence missions to Lebanon was also adopted. The Defence Office was also involved in the Rules Committee, making and commenting on proposals to amend the Rules. In this, it acted on its own behalf and at the behest of Defence counsel.

4.

List of counsel
In the reporting period, 16 new applications were received and the panel held 16 interviews. As a result, 14 counsel were admitted to the list of counsel, of which nine can be selected as lead counsel and five as co-counsel. In the reporting period, no counsel withdrew from the List. At the end of the reporting period, 153 counsel are included on the list. They practise in 37 different national jurisdictions. Training for the fifth Defence team was organised in January and February 2014 to inform the team about the services provided by the Defence Office and other organs of the court, as well as to debrief them on a variety of technical and legal issues.

5.

Press, public affairs and outreach activities

In the reporting period, the Defence Office continued with its public affairs activities, in particular with the Lebanese bar associations and academic institutions. Two missions to Lebanon were organised by the Defence Office in May 2013 and January 2014. Defence Office personnel met with a plethora of stakeholders such as government officials, members of the Beirut and Tripoli bar associations, the academic community, non-governmental organisations and the media. Apart from the Head of Defence Offices continuing efforts to relay the Defence Offices mandate, the Defence missions centred on providing supportive mechanisms for Defence counsel in the preparation for their pre-trial and future trial activities and their proper investigations. In March 2013, the Head of Defence Office travelled to New York to meet with the members of the Management Committee, as well as the Lebanese representative of the Security Council and the Head of UN Legal Affairs. In May 2013, the Acting Deputy Head of the Defence Office briefed 11 deans and professors of Lebanese universities visiting the STL on the Defence Offices mandate and Defence counsels role at the Tribunal. 40 | P a g e

In September 2013, the Head of Defence Office participated in a conference at the Ecole nationale dAdministration in Paris, France. In November 2013, the Head of Defence Office participated in a conference on international criminal law at the Ecole Nationale de la Magistrature in Paris. He also made a presentation on victims participation in international criminal procedure at the Assembly of States Parties of the ICC and another one in international criminal law at the Cour de cassation in Paris. In addition, several members of the Defence Office attended the Legacy Conference of the Association of Defence Counsel at the ICTY. The Head of Defence Office also participated in a conference at the London Bar Association in the United Kingdom. On 4 and 5 December 2013, the Defence Office and the Paris Bar Association organised the First Meeting of Defence Offices. This meeting was aimed at bringing together offices involved in defence matters from all international courts and tribunals in order to exchange lessons learnt and discuss topical issues. The meeting was hosted by the Paris Bar. The presence of the Presidents of the Beirut and Tripoli bar associations demonstrated their interest in these topics.

6.

The Way Forward

The next reporting period is set to be one of further intensified judicial activity. The pre-trial procedure has been a very compact one for the Defence, in which they tried to overcome many difficulties. The absence of the Accused and of any communication between them and counsel, together with difficulties in obtaining full cooperation of the Lebanese authorities, constitute serious challenges for the Defence. The Prosecutions case is complex and voluminous and in many aspects very technical. The activities of the Defence Office in 2014-2015 will be focused entirely on providing all possible support to the Defence in the Ayyash at al. case at the trial stage, as well as full support to the Merhi Defence team in the preliminary and trial stages, so as to ensure that Defence counsel can provide effective representation of the rights and interests of the Accused. To that end, additional resources may be made available to the team to ensure expediency of preparation. Undoubtedly, the continuation of the trial proceedings in the Ayyash et al. case will raise a large number of procedural questions, in which the Defence Legal Advisory Section will assist. From the perspective of legal aid, we anticipate that available resources will be fully utilised in 2014-2015, which will likely present a challenge. The operational support section is likely to see increased activity of the Defence in Lebanon, as well as increased needs for operational support for trial proceedings. Where appropriate, the Head of Defence Office will continue to support the Defence. Moreover, the Head of Defence Office will coordinate activities with the other organs, especially though the Senior Management Board, in order to streamline the court proceedings to ensure that the mix of legal traditions generates both fair and efficient justice.

41 | P a g e

42 | P a g e

PART III CONCLUSIONS

A.

Overview
The efforts of all involved in the burdensome task of preparation for the first trial are now being realised. Despite certain attempts to derail the legal processes, the STL is determined, with the support of Lebanon and the international community, to see the case through to conclusion. Concurrently work is proceeding on the three connected cases (Marwan Hamadeh, George Hawi and Elias El Murr) over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction; the Prosecutor advises that he will make a decision whether to indict later this year. There remain for consideration other matters of enquiry, as to others roles in the attack of 14 February 2005 and related attacks, including those following 12 December 2005 over which the Tribunal does not at this stage possess jurisdiction.

B.

Our progress
The sustained efforts of the Pre-Trial Judge allowed the Trial Chamber to receive from him a comprehensive file together with his report to facilitate its operation. Particulars of the Ayyash et al. trial were provided at pages 10-13. In deciding to join the Ayyash et al. and Merhi cases, the Trial Chamber held that it was in the interests of justice to adjourn the proceedings. The proceedings will resume once the Trial Chamber is satisfied that Mr Merhis counsel have had adequate time and resources to properly prepare the Defence case. Throughout the adjournment, the Chamber will closely monitor the work of the parties and the progress of Mr Merhis counsel.

C.

Expectations for the sixth year of STL activities

The continuing work of the Office of the Prosecutor will determine the nature and direction of the STLs further operations. In the meantime, the current trial will proceed as expeditiously as the interests of justice will permit. As cooperation is central to the progress of the STLs work, it is crucial that it intensify. Important in that regard, the Tribunal has the power to order trials in absentia. Such trials are a familiar feature of the Lebanese legal system. In instances where accused have evaded arrest or refused to surrender, the option of trying them in absentia confers important advantages, including the preservation of evidence and the unimpeded progress of criminal proceedings. However, any trial in the absence of an accused is a second best alternative. Last year I urged the Lebanese authorities to review and intensify their efforts to search for the Accused. This year I repeat that request - mindful, of course, of the determined efforts that the Lebanese authorities have long been making and the myriad challenges they face. It is in the public interest that the Accused face trial before the Tribunal in person, as soon as possible. I therefore urge the Lebanese authorities to make every feasible further effort to locate and apprehend them. 43 | P a g e

D.

Final observations
By resolution 1757 (2007), the Security Council saw fit to apply Chapter VII of the UN Charter to attacks within Lebanon, on the basis that they put at risk international peace and security. This further recognition that the dignity and worth of the human person within a State should receive protection by the international community by assistance in giving effect to domestic criminal law is a significant development in realising the policy of the UN Charter. As the STL moves through the stages of investigation and trial to fulfilling its mandate, its example may warrant consideration of a permanent international tribunal charged with assisting States to give effect to domestic criminal laws dealing with terrorism and the like. But that is for the future. For now the task of the STL is to increase its efforts to complete the task given to it by the Security Council on behalf of the people of Lebanon.

44 | P a g e

Special Tribunal for Lebanon Geographical Representation of International Staff Recruited at the Professional Level and Higher and in the FS Categories
As of 25 February 2014
State Argentina Australia Austria Bangladesh Barbados Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Canada China Denmark Egypt Fiji Finland France Germany Guyana Hungary India Iraq Ireland Italy Jamaica Japan Total Staff Number of State nationals 1 11 1 1 1 5 3 18 1 1 1 1 1 21 5 1 1 1 2 10 4 1 1 State Jordan Kenya Latvia Lebanon Montenegro Nepal The Netherlands Philippines Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Serbia Sierra Leone South Africa Spain Sudan Sweden TFYR of Macedonia Tunisia Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom United States of America Number of State nationals 1 2 1 22 1 1 13 1 1 5 4 2 1 6 5 1 2 1 2 1 2 31 15 214

45 | P a g e

Special Tribunal for Lebanon Geographical Representation of General Services Staff

As of 25 February 2014
State Albania Australia Belgium Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Cameroon Canada Croatia Egypt Ethiopia Finland France Ghana India Iran Iraq Ireland Italy Jordan Kenya Total Staff Number of State nationals 1 3 2 5 2 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 12 2 1 1 2 4 1 1 3 State Latvia Lebanon Nepal The Netherlands New Zealand Pakistan Romania Russian Federation Serbia Sierra Leone South Africa Spain Sudan Sweden TFYR of Macedonia Tunisia Uganda United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Uzbekistan Number of State nationals 1 37 1 49 1 3 8 1 5 8 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 12 2 4 1 192

46 | P a g e