The Special Court for Sierra Leone was set up jointly by the Government of Sierra Leone and the United Nations. It is mandated to try those who bear the greatest responsibility for serious violations of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law committed in the territory of Sierra Leone since 30 November 1996.

Thirteen indictments were issued by the Prosecutor in 2003. Two of those indictments were subsequently withdrawn in December 2003 due to the deaths of the accused.

The trials of three former leaders of the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC), of two members of the Civil Defence Forces (CDF) and of three former leaders of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) have been completed, including appeals. The trial of former Liberian President Charles Taylor is in the Defence phase at The Hague.


At the end of Wednesday’s proceedings, Charles Taylor was allowed to make a statement. “I’m very appreciative of the handling of the proceedings so far, and I have the belief that the right thing will be done by the grace of Almighty God,” he told the Judges.

This week’s hearing is the last in the Taylor case before the appeal judgement is delivered. It also marks the achievement of an important milestone as the Court nears the completion of its mandate. The Judges will now retire to deliberate and consider their judgement, expected before the end of 2013.

i. Whether the Trial Chamber correctly articulated the actus reus elements of aiding and abetting liability under customary international law. The differences and similarities between aiding and abetting, instigating and ordering as forms of liability under Article 6(1) of the Statute. Whether customary international law recognizes that certain forms of liability set forth in Article 6(1) of the Statute are more or less serious than other forms of liability for sentencing or other purposes.

ii. Whether the Trial Chamber’s findings meet the mens rea standard of purpose.

iii. Whether acts of assistance not “specifically directed” to the perpetration of a crime can substantially contribute to the commission of a crime for aiding and abetting liability. Whether the Trial Chamber’s findings meet the “specific direction” standard.

iv. Whether the acts of assistance not to the crime “as such” can substantially contribute to the commission of the crime for aiding and abetting liability. Whether the Trial Chamber’s findings meet the “as such” standard.

v. Whether the sources of law identified in Rule 76 bis (ii) and (iii) establish that uncorroborated hearsay cannot be relied upon as the sole basis for specific incriminating findings of fact.

vi. How the Appeals Chamber should apply existing jurisprudence relating to adjudicated facts under Rule 94(B) in the context of a defence motion for the admission of adjudicated facts following the close of the prosecution case.


Coalition for the International Criminal Court


The ICB wishes to inform you of the Official Announcement of the Master on International Criminal Justice created with the Rovira i Virgili University

4Th International Meeting Of Defence Offices

25 & 26 November 2016 London, United Kingdom



Defence Office of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

Dear Madam, Sir,

The Defence Office of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon thank you again for your participation in the Fourth International Meetings of Defence Offices which were held in London, on 25th and 26th of November 2016.

Please find attached the Summary report of the Meetings in French, English and Arabic. 

You will also find attached the questionnaire on Defence Investigations, which we thank you for completing in the language of your choice, and sending back to us, if you have not already done so. As Johann said during the Meetings,your answers will be very useful in that they will illustrate the Guide to Investigations with concrete examples from you experience.

Thank you again for your participation and we hope to see you again in Nuremberg for the Fifth Meetings in 2017.

Kind regards,