Fransen explains inner workings of STL via Youtube video

3^min

STL Pre-Trial Judge Daniel Fransen explained in a recorded speech broadcasted via Youtube entitled: "why have the pre-trial proceedings been conducted almost entirely confidentially", whereby he explained the inner workings of the procedures paving the way to the main trial.

The judge's words came as follows:

First of all, I do not believe the pre-trial stage is being conducted almost entirely confidentially; rather, on the contrary, it is largely public.

In fact, we should make a differentiation between two phases: the one prior to the confirmation of the indictment, which took place on 28 June 2011, and the stage which followed that confirmation.

With regard to this last stage, which is the preparatory stage for the actual trial, I repeat, it is essentially public. So, for example, the majority of the decisions have been made public, the status conferences are conducted in public or in any case public transcripts have been provided, and the preliminary motions examined by the Trial Chamber have been heard in public session. At this stage, therefore, confidentiality is the exception.

Moreover, confidentiality can also sometimes prove necessary to ensure the protection of the witnesses and of the victims participating in the proceedings.

However, you are right in saying that the stage prior to the confirmation of the indictment took place mainly confidentially. There are several reasons for that. Firstly, there is the presumption of innocence and the protection of the suspects. We are in fact at the judicial investigation stage.

The Prosecution will probably examine a whole series of lines of enquiry and end up deciding on one of them. If the Prosecution identifies any suspects, it will investigate them and see if those suspicions are confirmed or not.

If all that work had to take place publicly, if all the lines of enquiry and the names of the persons implicated in them had to be made public, and then it were found that those lines of enquiry were not the right ones, the fact that those names were revealed could be prejudicial to those people.

Secondly, witness protection is also a matter for which confidentiality is required. If the names of all those people were to be made public at this stage in the proceedings, it is easy to imagine the risks that they might face. Finally, there are the needs of the investigation.

Indeed, I think everybody understands that in order to be effective, a judicial investigation has to be able to be discreet, to be conducted with discretion and benefit from a surprise element. Those then are some of the reasons which explain why the investigation stage has to be confidential, but, as I said, from the start of the preparatory stage of the trial, the principle has been to make it public.

STL

To watch the full speech, please click on the video above

Lebanon News

explains

inner

workings

Youtube

video

Lebanon’s State Security hails troops’ efforts in new year security plan