Search: Complementarity SAIF GADDAFI

Libya has filed yet another brief concerning the admissibility of the case against Saif Gaddafi. The new brief is more than 50 pages long, so it’s going to take some time to digest. But we really don’t have to go beyond pages 22-24, because Libya’s admissions in those paragraphs doom — or at least should doom, if the Pre-Trial Chamber would ever actually rule — its admissibility challenge: 48. The Libyan Government does not deny that Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi remains in Zintan (one of the largest cities in north-western Libya)...

the ICC that arrangements were being made to transfer Mr. Gaddafi to Tripoli. At the beginning of March 2012, the ICC focal point assured the OPCD that Mr. Gaddafi would be transferred from Zintan to Tripoli in a matter of two weeks. In the May 2012 admissibility challenge, the Government indicated that it was “focused on negotiating the safe and orderly transfer of Mr. Gaddafi from a secret location to a specially constructed prison facility in Tripoli”. 271. During the October admissibility hearings, the Government expressed its view that it...

to Mr. Gaddafi. Upon his return, the Coordinator indicated that Mr, Gaddafi wanted to talk to him about the Libyan procedures against him and about the possibility to have a lawyer. He mentioned that Mr. Gaddafi had requested to have an interview with him as a condition to speak to the Court. Dr. El Gehani added that he advised him to appoint a lawyer… 17. Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi appeared smiling and willing to talk to the Court. It was difficult to assess whether he had lost a lot of weight...

...Now, after the capture of Saif Ghadaffi, the meaning of this obligation is being put to the test. Saif is wanted by the ICC for war crimes; but the Libyan authorities want to prosecute him in the country’s own courts. The ICC prosecutor, Luis Moreno Ocampo, takes the view that Libya has a right handle on Saif’s trial, provided its courts are up to the task. Ocampo is relying on a principle of the ICC’s Statute, known as “complementarity”—the principle which allows for a challenge to ICC jurisdiction on the...

[Jennifer Trahan is an Associate Clinical Professor, The Center for Global Affairs, NYU-SPS, and Chair, International Criminal Court Committee, American Branch of the International Law Association.] On July 28, 2015, a domestic court in Libya announced death sentences against Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, and Abdullah al Senussi, who served as intelligence chief. In total, 32 former Gaddafi-era officials were convicted, including 9 who were sentenced to death. Yet, observer accounts suggest the trials were deeply flawed, lacking key fair trial protections. The possibility...

position to select counsel himself He does not know any lawyers, his family did not have any retained lawyers to his knowledge, and he does not have the ability to call lawyers to interview them or ascertain their availability. 41. Mr. Gaddafi requested the OPCD to either select counsel or help him in this matter. [Redacted]. Mr. Gaddafi is also willing for the OPCD to continue to represent him before the ICC, until a counsel is appointed. Saif’s statements about the status of the investigation into his actions obviously need...

(para. 96): Libya is clearly “able to obtain the accused or the necessary evidence and testimony”. Mr. Gaddafi is under custody in Libya and an extradition request to Mauritania for Mr. Al-Senussi is pending. I’m less confident than the authors of the motion. Saif is indeed “under custody in Libya” — but he is not under the custody of the NTC. On the contrary, as the Registry’s report notes, Saif is being held by a Zintani militia that is not loyal to the NTC (para. 11): The city of Zintan...

Things are getting ugly at the ICC. The Office of Public Counsel for the Defence, which has been appointed to protect Saif Gaddafi’s interests at the Court, has now moved to disqualify Moreno-Ocampo from Saif’s case on the ground that he “lacks the requisite impartiality to direct the investigations and prosecutions” because of his “repeated failure to respect the presumption of innocence and rights of the defendant under the Statute, and an objective appearance that [he] is affiliated with both the political cause and legal positions of the NTC government”...

complementarity has been stretched to take on broader strategic considerations that article 17 cannot sustain. De Vos’s book is not of course limited to the ‘same person/same conduct’ test, and considers a host of related issues, including those of process and potential scope for interpretation within the existing framework, but it offers a compelling guide through the twists and turns of complementarity, it effects, and perceptions in three situation countries, its focus and its blind spots, and in so doing, invites reflection on the very purpose and goals of complementarity....

the final sentence in the quote above, Libya openly acknowledges that there is no relation between the charges in the Zintan case and the charges in the Tripoli case (para. 7): Libya has already confirmed in relation to Mr. Al-Senussi’s submissions that “the case relating to crimes against the person (which forms the basis of Libya’s admissibility challenges for both Mr Gaddafi and Mr Al-Senussi) and the national security case against Mr. Gaddafi are completely separate trials which are being dealt with in entirely distinct national proceedings.” Third, Libya continues...

2011. There is no reason to revisit the ridiculousness of the charges involving Melinda Taylor and the OPCD — the fact that they are at the heart of Saif’s domestic prosecution simply serves as a reminder of Libya’s contempt for the ICC. It is important to emphasize, however, that Libya’s complementarity challenge can succeed only if Libya’s domestic prosecution of Saif is based on the “same conduct” as the ICC proceedings. That is obviously not the case. Libya could argue, of course, that it is continuing to investigate Saif for...

...Jon Heller CM, That is incorrect. The national judicial system is "unavailable" in Saif's case, because the national government does not have control over the entire territory of Libya and, in particular, does not have control over the territory where Saif is being held. As a result of that unavailability, the national government has no means to ensure that Saif is transferred to the national judicial system for trial. Hence Libya is, at least at present, "unable" to try Saif. raad thanks to your inquire: actually we don't forget the...