Lebanon's hotly debated special tribunal has been launched at last in The Hague. But a verdict remains years away, Lucy Fielder reports After a four-year investigation, the tribunal to try suspects in one of the Middle East's most notorious killings was launched on 1 March at The Hague. As the first international court established on the basis of one man's murder, that of former prime minister Rafik Al-Hariri in February 2005, the tribunal sets a precedent. Other such courts have tried suspects for war crimes or genocide, for example in Rwanda or the former Yugoslavia. Add to that peculiarity those of Lebanon's uneasy sectarian make- up, and there is little wonder that political bickering has dogged the tribunal from the outset. Al-Hariri's death by car bomb, along with 22 others, on Beirut's seafront four years ago plunged Lebanon into political crisis and split its already fractured political arena into two main camps. Al-Hariri's son Saad became a prominent leader of the anti-Syrian 14 March movement with its chorus of accusations that the hand of Damascus lay behind the killing. Backed by Syria, the Shia Hizbullah group, joined by other opposition parties, focussed on allegations of US hegemonic plans for Lebanon. It saw the decision to establish the court as a breach of Lebanese sovereignty and a tool to pursue the Syrian regime. Syria has denied any involvement in the killing and President Bashar Al-Assad has said any Syrian suspects will be tried on home turf, raising the prospect of future tensions should any Syrian official be named as a suspect. Early reports by the international investigative committee, under German Prosecutor Detlev Mehlis, implicated Syrian figures. But since early 2006, subsequent prosecutors have been more circumspect. Nothing is publicly known about the evidence gathered and, as Al-Ahram Weekly went to press, no suspects had been charged. In the end, the tribunal was greeted by muted reaction, if not apathy. It has only existed on paper since the United Nations Security Council unilaterally established it in 2007, citing Chapter VII of the UN Charter, due to internal wrangling. The tribunal's registrar, Robin Vincent, said in February that a verdict could be three to five years away. Secretary-General Ban Ki- Moon has said transforming the Dutch secret services gymnasium into a court room would be finished next year. Daniel Bellemare, the Canadian who has headed the investigation for the past year, took up the post of general prosecutor at a formal ceremony in The Hague on 1 March. In the coming weeks, he will appoint the judges, reportedly chosen but kept secret. Under the court's hybrid legal system -- part Lebanese, part international -- four will be Lebanese, seven foreign. Other assassinations of anti-Syrian figures that followed Al-Hariri's can be added to the caseload on the basis of evidence linking those deaths to his. One of Bellemare's most prominent files in the coming weeks is that of four Lebanese generals who headed state security bodies when Al-Hariri met his end. Lebanese army intelligence head Raymond Azar, Mustafa Hamdan of the presidential guard, Internal Security Forces Director Ali Hajj and Jamil Al-Sayed, the head of General Security were taken into custody in 2005. They had close links to the Syrian regime, which dominated Lebanon until international and domestic uproar at Al-Hariri's killing pressured it to withdraw. But they have not been charged with a crime and their lawyers say they have not seen the evidence or allegations against them. Three civilians held in connection with the crime, two Lebanese and one Syrian, were released on bail in late February. Akram Azouri, Al-Sayed's defence lawyer, told the Weekly there was no case against the generals, held incommunicado at the Roumieh jail near Beirut, and he expected their imminent release. Bellemare has two months to request the transfer of their files, and has said he will do this if they remain in custody. But until then, the Lebanese prosecutor retains jurisdiction and can release them, Azouri said. He filed a request to the Lebanese prosecuting judge, Sakr Sakr, for their release last Monday. "It's currently a Lebanese decision to hold the generals," Azouri said. "Official statements by the ruling majority are pressuring the judiciary not to release them." In November 2007, a UN working group on arbitrary detention condemned the general's detention without charge. Azouri did not see the investigation itself as politicised, however, bar the first months under Mehlis, when the generals were arrested. He and the other defence lawyers say that decision was made upon testimony that was later discredited. "Since the beginning of 2006 I've had no indication the investigation is politicised, On the contrary, it is being conducted correctly, by international standards with the aim of finding the truth," he said. Shafik Masri, professor of international law at the American University of Beirut, said he did not expect the generals to walk free anytime soon. "This trial will see them as innocent until proven guilty," he said. "But it is clear there will be no release of suspects before then." Most in Lebanon now see the court as a fait accompli that has passed beyond their politicians' sphere of influence. More military vehicles than usual clustered at main arteries in central Beirut the day the tribunal began, particularly around Martyrs Square, Al-Hariri's resting place, but there was little sign of tension. A steady stream of visitors and dignitaries braved the February downpour to visit the tent where the self-made billionaire lies buried and add wreaths to the sea of white flowers. Talal Salman, editor in chief of the independent leftist As-Safir newspaper, seen as leaning towards the opposition, wrote this week that the Lebanese had heaved a "collective sigh of relief" now that the court had gone from a "political demand" to a "judicial and international reality". "All local reservations concerning the tribunal receded after the investigation and the tribunal distanced itself from the local scene, with all of its contradictions and complications," he wrote. With Lebanon heading towards general elections in June, there is little doubt the court issue will be treated as a victory by the 14 March camp. But it is seen as less likely to be a central focus now that it has passed from Lebanese soil. Many in the 14 March anti-Syrian camp now fear a deal will be cooked up to protect any high-ranking Syrian officials indicted by the court. In 2005, Syria found itself largely isolated. Now, all eyes are on the trump cards it holds in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon and its alliance with Iran. French President Nicolas Sarkozy's trip to Damascus last September blazed a trail for other European officials and US President Barack Obama has promised to engage with Washington's opponents, including Syria and Iran. Senator John Kerry visited in February. Damascus also hovers on the edge of the Arab fold, with a Syrian-Saudi rapprochement in the works since Obama's election. Masri said The Hague court could not be politically manipulated, since there were international as well as Lebanese judges and the court would be open. Other examples of international trials had shown no signs of political interference, he said. "Now to say that these were politically motivated, yes, any international resolution could be politically initiated or motivated, and terrorism is itself an act aiming at political objectives," he said. "But within the legal act [of the trial] itself, I don't think there will be any manipulation."
