RSS Feed     Twitter     Facebook

Posts Tagged ‘Defence’

Liberia’s Charles Taylor to deny war crimes

Former president stands accused at The Hague of murder, rape and torture during Sierra Leone civil war

Lawyers for the former president of Liberia Charles Taylor, who stands accused of leading a systematic campaign of murder, rape and torture during the civil war in Sierra Leone, will today claim he was “not involved”, and that he “was a peacemaker, not a warmonger”.

The 61-year old’s defence began this morning at the UN-backed special court for Sierra Leone in The Hague, where he denies charges that include enlisting and drugging child soldiers, enforcing sexual slavery and commanding and arming rebels from his presidential palace, in Monrovia, during the 11-year conflict, which ended in 2002.

Taylor, the first African head of state to be tried by an international court, has pleaded not guilty to 11 charges in a hearing that has 91 witnesses since January 2007. His defence is being led by Courtenay Griffiths, a British lawyer. Taylor will take the stand tomorrow for what is expected to be several weeks of testimony in his own defence.

The court has already heard witness testimony of radio exchanges between Taylor and the rebels, arms smuggled from Liberia to Sierra Leone in sacks of rice, and diamonds sent back in a mayonnaise jar. One former aide said he had seen Taylor eat a human liver.

“We say, and have said all along, that they are lying,” Griffiths said of the prosecution witnesses. “His case is that he was not involved – that he was a peacemaker, not a warmonger.”

The defence team has a list of more than 200 witnesses, including unnamed former African heads of state and high-ranking UN officials. Griffiths will argue that Taylor was asked by the 15-member Economic Community of West African States and the UN to help halt the atrocities in Sierra Leone.

Some 500,000 people are estimated to have been killed or systematically mutilated, or to have suffered other atrocities, in Sierra Leone’s civil war.

Some of the worst crimes were carried out by gangs of child soldiers given drugs to desensitise them to the horror of their actions. Taylor is accused of arming them in exchange for diamonds.

Taylor was forced into exile after being indicted in 2003, and was finally arrested in Nigeria in 2006. He was sent for trial in The Hague because officials feared staging the case in Sierra Leone could spark further violence.

He boycotted the start of his trial, in June 2007, and fired his attorney, holding up proceedings until January 2008, when prosecutors called their first witness.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Liberia’s Charles Taylor to deny war crimes

Former president stands accused at The Hague of murder, rape and torture during Sierra Leone civil war

Lawyers for the former president of Liberia Charles Taylor, who stands accused of leading a systematic campaign of murder, rape and torture during the civil war in Sierra Leone, will today claim he was “not involved”, and that he “was a peacemaker, not a warmonger”.

The 61-year old’s defence began this morning at the UN-backed special court for Sierra Leone in The Hague, where he denies charges that include enlisting and drugging child soldiers, enforcing sexual slavery and commanding and arming rebels from his presidential palace, in Monrovia, during the 11-year conflict, which ended in 2002.

Taylor, the first African head of state to be tried by an international court, has pleaded not guilty to 11 charges in a hearing that has 91 witnesses since January 2007. His defence is being led by Courtenay Griffiths, a British lawyer. Taylor will take the stand tomorrow for what is expected to be several weeks of testimony in his own defence.

The court has already heard witness testimony of radio exchanges between Taylor and the rebels, arms smuggled from Liberia to Sierra Leone in sacks of rice, and diamonds sent back in a mayonnaise jar. One former aide said he had seen Taylor eat a human liver.

“We say, and have said all along, that they are lying,” Griffiths said of the prosecution witnesses. “His case is that he was not involved – that he was a peacemaker, not a warmonger.”

The defence team has a list of more than 200 witnesses, including unnamed former African heads of state and high-ranking UN officials. Griffiths will argue that Taylor was asked by the 15-member Economic Community of West African States and the UN to help halt the atrocities in Sierra Leone.

Some 500,000 people are estimated to have been killed or systematically mutilated, or to have suffered other atrocities, in Sierra Leone’s civil war.

Some of the worst crimes were carried out by gangs of child soldiers given drugs to desensitise them to the horror of their actions. Taylor is accused of arming them in exchange for diamonds.

Taylor was forced into exile after being indicted in 2003, and was finally arrested in Nigeria in 2006. He was sent for trial in The Hague because officials feared staging the case in Sierra Leone could spark further violence.

He boycotted the start of his trial, in June 2007, and fired his attorney, holding up proceedings until January 2008, when prosecutors called their first witness.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Taylor starts war crimes defence

Charles Taylor 7.1.08

Lawyers for Charles Taylor, the former president of Liberia on trial for crimes against humanity, have begun his defence.

He denies 11 charges, including murder, rape and torture, at the Special Court for Sierra Leone in The Hague.

Prosecutors say he controlled rebels who carried out atrocities during Sierra Leone’s decade-long civil war.

Mr Taylor, who denies the charges, is expected to give evidence in his own defence on Tuesday.

He is the first African leader to be tried by an international court.

Claire Carlton-Hanciles, of the court’s defence office, told the BBC that Mr Taylor was ready to defend himself.

"Mr Taylor is ready and his lawyers who were employed by the office have ensured that that they have prepped him for the past month-and-a-half," she said.

TAYLOR TIMELINE

  • 1989: Launches rebellion in Liberia
  • 1991: RUF rebellion starts in Sierra Leone
  • 1995: Peace deal signed
  • 1997: Elected president
  • 1999: Liberia’s Lurd rebels start insurrection to oust Taylor
  • June 2003: Arrest warrant issued
  • August 2003: Steps down, goes into exile in Nigeria
  • March 2006: Arrested, sent to Sierra Leone
  • June 2007: Trial opens in The Hague

Profile: Charles Taylor

Q&A: Trying Taylor

"I saw Mr Taylor about two days ago. He is in high spirits."

In May, judges rejected a request by Mr Taylor’s defence team to acquit him because of a lack of evidence.

The prosecution says Mr Taylor planned atrocities committed by Revolutionary United Front rebels during Sierra Leone’s civil war, which ended in 2002.

The RUF were notorious for using machetes to hack the limbs off civilians.

Mr Taylor is accused of passing guns to the RUF in exchange for diamonds from Sierra Leone.

His lawyers are expected to argue that he in fact tried to bring peace to the region and that there is no evidence directly linking him to the RUF.

Mr Taylor started Liberia’s civil war in 1989, before being elected president in 1997.

After a period of exile in Nigeria, he was eventually extradited from Liberia in 2006.

The trial, being held by the UN-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone, was moved to the Netherlands from Sierra Leone’s capital, Freetown, amid fears it could create instability in the country and neighbouring Liberia.</p


This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

Eight UK troops dead in 24 hours

breaking news

The Ministry of Defence says five more British soldiers have died in Afghanistan, taking the total number of deaths announced on Friday to eight.

The five, from the 2nd Battalion The Rifles, were killed near Sangin, Helmand province, on Friday morning.

Their deaths takes the number killed in Afghanistan since 2001 to 184 – more than those killed in the Iraq war.

British forces are currently engaged in a major offensive in Helmand along with US and Afghan troops. </p


This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

Judges attack MoD over Iraq information

Three senior judges today delivered a blistering attack on the Ministry of Defence, accusing its officials of misleading the high court and of “lamentable” conduct over attempts to suppress information on the interrogation of Iraqi detainees.

Lord Justice Scott Baker and Mr Justices Silber and Sweeney described claims made by defence ministers in gagging orders as false. The claims led to decisions that the court had made, to suppress evidence, that were “wrong”.

Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, was forced this week to concede an independent inquiry into allegations that 20 Iraqis taken as prisoners to Camp Abu Naji, an army base in Amara, north of Basra, were interrogated and tortured before being killed. Six others were allegedly abused. The MoD says the 20 who died were killed “on the battlefield” and that only nine prisoners were taken to the camp, all of whom were left alive.

Ainsworth was forced to make his concession because of the MoD’s failure to disclose key documents.

In a move reflecting their fury at the ministry and what they have castigated as a “complete waste of time”, the judges awarded lawyers for the Iraqis an interim order of $1m. They have already ordered that the MoD must pay the total cost of the hearings – a legal challenge to claims that the MoD did not carry out a proper investigation at the time of the incident – estimated to amount to tens of millions of pounds.

In their ruling today, the judges stated: “The court was misled into making a number of rulings on a false basis all of which were wrong and should never have been made.” They said they did not blame Ainsworth, but officials advising him.

The central issue is the MoD’s claim that there would be “real harm” to national security if documents relating to the interrogation by soldiers of detainees were disclosed. The MoD admitted this week that some of the information had already been disclosed, some in evidence at a court martial, some to the public inquiry into the death of Baha Mousa, a Basra hotel receptionist, in the custody of British soldiers, in 2003.

The picture that emerged from the MoD’s handling of the case, and assertions its officials had made, were “truly alarming”, the judges said. The history of the case was “lamentable”, they said.

MoD officials must have known that documents they now wanted to suppress were already in the public domain, the judges added. “There have been … both systemic and individual failures within the MoD on a substantial scale in this case. Put bluntly the left hand did not know what the right hand had done, or was doing, and even when it did, nothing was done to seek to correct the situation.”

How MoD officials could make “grossly erroneous” claims remained unclear, the judges added. The MoD denies the allegations but now faces an independent inquiry to make its case.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Afghan deaths match Iraq toll as three Britons killed

Afghan conflict has now claimed lives of as many British servicemen and women as that in Iraq after MoD announces third casualty in 24 hours

The conflict in Afghanistan has now claimed the lives of as many British servicemen and women as that in Iraq after the Ministry of Defence announced today that another soldier had been killed.

Ten servicemen have died within the last nine days and the casualty rate is as high as at any point since Afghanistan was invaded in 2001 in response to the 9/11 terror attacks on the US.

The latest casualty – the third to be announced today – was a soldier from the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment. He was killed in southern Afghanistan, the MoD said. Next of kin have been informed.

Officials said the soldier was killed in an explosion during an operation near Nad-e-Ali, in central Helmand province.

“The loss of this brave Tankie has hit us all deeply,” Lieutenant Colonel Nick Richardson, a spokesman for Task Force Helmand, said.

“We grieve for him at this very sad time. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family, friends and colleagues who feel the greatest loss. His loss has not been in vain.”

The death is likely to intensify the debate about whether the Afghanistan operation is worthwhile.

Ministers still strongly insist that the deployment is vital for British security, but the Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg, this week questioned whether the government had “the will, strategy or tactics” to do the job properly.

Gordon Brown will go straight to the Northwood headquarters of the armed forces in Middlesex for a private briefing on Afghanistan with military chiefs when he returns to Britain from the G8 summit in Italy.

Speaking at the end the talks today, before the latest casualties were formally announced, the prime minister said that it was “vital” that the British mission succeeded.

He also robustly denied claims by General Lord Guthrie, the former head of the armed forces, that soldiers were dying because the military was short of money.

Earlier, the MoD announced that two soldiers had been killed in Afghanistan yesterday.

One of the men, from 4th Battalion the Rifles, was killed in an explosion while on a foot patrol near Nad-e-Ali.

The other, from the Princess of Wales’s Royal Regiment attached to 1st Battalion Welsh Guards, died from a gunshot wound following a battle with insurgents near Lashkar Gah, also in Helmand.

The latest casualties take the Afghanistan death toll to 179, equalling the total number killed in Iraq.

“This tragic milestone must be a reminder to all of us of the huge sacrifices made day after day by our brave servicemen and women and their families,” Clegg said.

“The courage and professionalism of our armed forces are second to none.

“We must never forget the massive debt we owe to those who have paid the ultimate price to ensure we can live in safety.”

The war in Afghanistan, where the British are fighting with other Nato countries to stop Taliban fundamentalists regaining control of the country, has had the backing of all the main political parties as well as the general support of the public.

But ministers are worried that, with the death toll rising and no prospect of an end to the campaign in sight, public opinion could turn.

Brown said: “This is a very hard summer, and it is not over yet.

“It is vital that we see this through. Our resolution to complete the work that we have started in Afghanistan and Pakistan is undiminished.

“It’s in tribute to the members of the armed forces that have given their lives that we should succeed in the efforts that we have begun.”

The prime minister said it was vital the Taliban were pushed back in Helmand province and al-Qaida thwarted across the border in Pakistan.

“We can’t allow the borders of Afghanistan to be lawless places,” he said. “The streets of Britain are safer places as a result of the armed forces’ work in Afghanistan.

“Our job is to secure a stable and democratic Afghanistan.”

Brown also spoke of the “sadness” he felt about young soldiers who were “incredibly professional” and “very courageous” losing their lives.

“My sympathy goes out to every one of the families who have suffered the pain of losing a loved one,” he said.

Bernard Jenkin, a member of the defence select committee, said: “It is astonishing that we are fighting high intensity operations the scale of Afghanistan on a peacetime budget without enough protection mobility and with fewer helicopters per head for armed forces than we had three years ago.”

Guthrie was quoted in the Mail today as saying the Treasury had spent “the minimum they could get away with” on defence.

He said fewer soldiers would be dying if commanders on the ground had more troops and more equipment.

“I spoke to an officer the other day who said that the Treasury had affected the operational safety of our soldiers, by preventing an uplift in our numbers,” Guthrie added.

“As far as helicopters are concerned, of course they need more helicopters. If they had more, it is very likely that fewer soldiers would have been killed by roadside bombs.”

Guthrie blamed Brown directly for the state of MoD funding.

“It is an indication of the unsympathetic view the chancellor of the day [Brown] and the Treasury had of defence when Britain went into southern Afghanistan in 2006,” he said.

“They were prepared to give very large amounts of money to other departments, but the minimum they could get away with to defence.”

When asked about Guthrie’s comments, Brown said the troops in Afghanistan had twice as much helicopter capacity as they did two years ago.

“We have spent over £1bn on vehicles,” he added.

News of the latest casualties came as the bodies of another five British servicemen killed in Afghanistan over the past week – four in Operation Panchai Palang – were returned to the UK.

Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, acknowledged this week that there was “gloom and worry” about the British fatalities and admitted more lives would be lost.

But he insisted morale was high in Afghanistan and said it would be a “good thing” for Clegg to talk to some UK troops.

Around 3,000 troops are involved in the British-led Operation Panchai Palang, which began on 19 June and has seen fierce fighting and significant casualties on both sides.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds



Chelsea’s Defence Cut Down, Grant Stays Calm

Two-week break and an easy upcoming schedule could give walking wounded
time to heal

LONDON – When they won back-to-back Premiership titles under Jose
Mourinho, Chelsea were well-known as a team who refused to throw in the
towel until the final whistle.

Their campaigns in 2004/05 and 2005/06 were littered with matches where
they grabbed a goal at the death to snatch a point, and at times, a vital
three points.

On Sunday, with new boss Avram Grant in the dugout, the boot was very much
on the other foot for the Stamford Bridge outfit.

Leading Everton 1-0, Chelsea was shocked by a spectacular 90th minute Tim
Cahill equaliser which denied the home side three points and saw the Blues
go five points behind league leaders Manchester United.

It was significant that Cahill’s stylish bicycle-kick was executed without
Chelsea’s regular centre-back pairing of John Terry and Ricardo Carvalho
in attendance, or with Petr Cech in between the posts.

But, despite the mounting casualty list in his defensive department, Grant
insisted yesterday that his side would bounce back and remain contenders
for the title.

Chelsea lost Carvalho during the first-half of the clash with Everton and
the seriousness of the Portuguese international’s back injury would only
be known after a scan, but a defiant Grant said: “We have too many
injuries at the moment, and it is not easy to play without key players
like Terry and Cech, as well as Paulo Ferreira.

“But this is why we have a big squad. We have players who can come in and
replace those who are injured.”

Grant definitely cannot afford to be shorn of three of his biggest
defensive stars for too long. But his brave front is possibly due to the
current two-week domestic break for internationals. It could not have come
at a better time as Chelsea fight to regroup. Besides, the Blues will not
face a stern test for at least a month in the shape of a Champions League
clash.

Indeed, Grant is convinced his team will return to action rejuvenated for
their match with bottom side Derby County on Nov 24.

He said: “I am sure that when we come back, we will quickly start to play
the good football that we have managed to play in our recent matches.”

The trickier Champions League tie follows next with a trip to Rosenborg,
but Grant and his men know they only need a win from either one of their
remaining two Group B games to qualify for the last 16.

Following Rosenborg, Chelsea’s next four games will be at home to
Sunderland, West Ham, Valencia (Champions League) and Liverpool, in a
tricky League Cup quarter-final on Dec 18.

That will be the Blues’ next big test, followed by a trip to Ewood Park
five days later to face Blackburn Rovers in the Premiership.

By this time, Grant will want at least a couple of his big-name defenders
back in the starting XI.

After taking over from Jose Mourinho in September, Grant vowed to create a
Chelsea team that placed more emphasis on attacking flair than that of his
predecessor.

They had plenty of chances to score against Everton to extend their run of
five successive league wins, but Grant’s team found American goalkeeper
Tim Howard in magnificent form.

Said Grant: “When a team wants to play attacking football, it is normal
that they will try to score the second and third goals after they have
scored the first.

“They had one chance and scored – we scored one goal from many chances.

“I am happy with the football, but not with the result. The most important
thing is that we continued to play good football.

“We showed we have a good squad and good players. I am happy.” – Agencies