Syria - belatedly - seeks redress
By Sami Moubayed
DAMASCUS - Syria took a much-anticipated yet overdue step last week, appealing
directly to the United Nations to bring its former prosecutor, Detlev Mehlis,
to justice. Mehlis, a German attorney, was the author of a dramatic UN report
issued in October 2005 that accused Syria of masterminding the assassination of
Lebanon's former prime minister Rafik al-Hariri in Damascus on February 14,
2005.
When it was released, Mehlis' 53-page report ripped through Syria and Lebanon
like a thunderstorm, reading more like an Agatha Christie novel than a legal
document.
"There is probable cause to believe that the decision to assassinate former
prime minister Rafik al-Hariri could not have been taken without the approval
of top-ranked Syrian security
officials and could not have been further organized without the collusion of
their counterparts in the Lebanese security services," said the report.
Syria appealed for a UN inquiry into the report's author in a September 17
letter to the UN, with Foreign Minister Walid al-Mouallem writing that Mehlis
and his assistant Gerhard Lehmann had tried to "implicate the Syrian Arab
Republic at any cost" in his report on the Beirut explosion that killed Hariri,
former economy minister Basil Fleiham and 22 others.
Syria has noted that none of Mehlis' findings has been authenticated by any of
the prosecutors who have succeeded him, including the most recent, Canadian
Daniel Bellemare.
Based on Mehlis' findings, four senior Lebanese officers were arrested in 2005
on charges of involvement in the Hariri case. Last April, however, all were
released by an international court, due to lack of evidence. One of the
officers, Jamil Sayyed, gave several press interviews after his release, saying
that Mehlis had tried to talk him into naming any Syrian official in the crime
- in exchange for Sayyed's release from jail - regardless of the official's
actual guilt.
The Syrian letter, addressed to the United States presidency of the Security
Council, read: "They [Mehlis and his deputy] attempted to induce Sayyed to
persuade Syria to identify an official victim who would admit to the crime and
subsequently be discovered to have committed suicide or killed in a road
accident, whereupon a settlement would be reached with Syria."
Mouallem added that Syria "greatly regrets that misuse of power" by Mehlis and
that he believes "the secretary general should investigate the matter and the
above-mentioned serious events whereby Syria was targeted through a United
Nations body".
He said Syria had the right to take legal action against the German prosecutor
and his aide, "with regard to the injury they did to Syria by using perjured
evidence and departing from the rules and principles of the investigation".
Although the International Tribunal, which has been operational since March 1,
has effectively backed out of Mehlis' claims, UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon
said this week that Mehlis would not be brought to court, based on Syria's
request.
In 2005, Syria worked hard to suppress the Mehlis report, which drew widespread
anger on the Syrian street, as many Syrians believed it had been authored under
the influence of the George W Bush White House. Riad Daoudi, legal advisor to
the Syrian Foreign Minister, said it had relied on "pre-set ideas to reach
conclusions that are of a political nature and that point to Syria as a suspect
with no evidence". He expressed deep regret that Mehlis had relied on the
witness of people who were known for their anti-Syrian stance and "ignored" the
witness of Syrian officials.
From Washington, Syrian ambassador Imad Mustapha said at the time, "The report
is full of political rumors, gossip and hearsay, and it has not a single shred
of evidence that will be accepted by any court of law. We are so disappointed
with it." He added the report was political rather than professional.
There are three key reasons the Syrians are keen to see Mehlis brought to
justice.
Reason 1:
When investigating the murder, Mehlis interviewed eight officials regarding a
meeting between Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Rafik al-Hariri, dated
August 26, 2004. These eight officials, all members of the anti-Syrian camp,
were not present at the meeting, yet they confirmed (in section 27 of the
Mehlis report) that Assad had threatened to bring down Lebanon on the prime
minister's head if he did not renew the mandate of then-president Emille
Lahhoud.
Mehlis gave a lot of weight to these accusations, without noting that all of
them were made with a political purpose by men whose argument could be biased.
Reason 2
Among other things, Mehlis said that the decision to kill Hariri was made in
July and December 2004 at the Meridian Hotel and then at the Presidential
Palace in Damascus (section 96). This information was gathered from a Syrian
witness who worked with Syrian intelligence in Lebanon, but was not identified.
Again, had this information been backed with evidence, such as recorded talks,
pictures, more than one witness, then it would have elicited some respect. The
only basis for the accusation, however, was the testimony of the unnamed Syrian
witness. This raised several questions: how would an average agent in the
Syrian intelligence services know of such a supposedly high-level meeting? And
in planning such a crime, couldn't these Syrian officials have chosen a less
public place than the Meridian?
Finally, how would the Syrian witness know so much about these meetings if he
were not a member of a very closed circle (which Mehlis claims he is not).
Surely, such a delicate crime was not public knowledge that an officer in the
Syrian intelligence in Lebanon could stumble across. This unnamed Syrian
witness said that a senior Syrian officer told him in January 2005 that Hariri
was a problem for Syria.
Reason 3
One month later, this same officer said that there would be "an earthquake" in
Lebanon that would rewrite Lebanese history (section 97). This statement, from
a legal point of view, is ridiculous. Two unknown people are talking in
ambiguities. Had the report said: Syrian officer X told witness Y said that an
"earthquake" would happen in Lebanon, then Syria would have no choice but to
question and arrest Mr Y if his answers were unsatisfactory. By not mentioning
names, the report gives the Syrians very limited room to respond or be
proactive.
The same witness says that he had visited several military bases in Lebanon and
at one base he had seen "a Mitsubishi van" and not "the Mitsubishi van" that
was used to carry the explosives to kill Hariri (section 98).
The reasons mentioned above, the testimony of Jamil al-Sayyed, the innocence of
the four officers, and the fact that nothing has been found to incriminate any
Syrian in the Hariri case, on the face of it makes Syria's case all the more
legitimate before the United Nations. Yet Moon said that investigating Mehlis'
findings was "not in his domain".
From Syria's point of view, Moon will be failing in all eight objectives if
Mehlis is not questioned for what wrote about Syria in 2005.
Sami Moubayed is editor-in-chief of Forward Magazine in Syria.
(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about
sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
