Hezbollah Militant Found Guilty for the Assassination of Former Lebanese PM 

Must Read

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...
Moshiuzzaman
Moshiuzzaman
Moshiuzzaman holds a 2:1 LL.B degree from BPP University (UK). He is currently pursuing the CFA chartership and working as an independent legal researcher at the American Society of International Law (ASIL)

Follow us

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) has found Salim Jamil Ayyash guilty for co-conspiring the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and 21 others. The STL, however, acquitted three others also charged for the murder, including the attempted murder of 200 people injured in a bomb blast.

Background of the Case 

On the 14th of February 2005, former Prime Minister of Lebanon Rafik Hariri along with 21 others were killed in a bomb blast in Beirut. Rafik Hariri’s assassination took place against the backdrop of his power struggle with Syria. 

Syrian influence in Lebanese politics had become so strong that the Lebanese Parliament was almost compelled to amend its constitution to allow Émile Lahoud, at the time, who was the running commander-in-chief of the Lebanese Armed Forces to run for the presidency in 1998. This marked the beginning of the chain of events that eventually led to the assassination of Rafik Hariri. President Lahoud, who was a close ally to Syria, had a strained relationship with Prime Minister Hariri during his term in office. As a result, PM Hariri’s ability to run the government and to carry out his policies sometimes went to the point of paralysis. This consequently led to distrust against him by the Syrian regime, particularly, the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. 

When President Émile Lahoud’s term came to an end in 2004, he sought to extend his term, which by default of the Lebanese Constitution, required a Constitutional amendment. In a visit to Damascus in late August, PM Hariri informed his cabinet that President Émile Lahoud was a reflection of President Bashar al-Assad in Lebanon and that if he were to be removed from the presidency, Lebanon would be “destroyed”. Subsequently, the constitution was amended extending the presidency for another three years.

Before the vote on the extension of the presidency, the Security Council adopted resolution 1559, on the 2nd of September 2004, which called upon “all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon” and declared its support for a “free and fair electoral process in Lebanon’s upcoming presidential elections”. PM Hariri, who was close to the United States, France, and Saudi Arabia, was widely believed to have actively supported this resolution.

On the 9th of September 2004, PM Hariri announced his resignation, shortly after Émile Lahoud was sworn as President a second time. Before his resignation, those who had called for a review of the Syrian-Lebanese relations in line with the Security Council resolution 1559, mostly Christians politicians, joined the Sunni, Druze and Maronite representatives who had built a bloc of coalitions, which represented almost all political and religious communities except for the pro-Syrian Shi’ite Amal and Hezbollah. This bloc was on its way to winning a clear majority in the election. On the 14th of February, PM Hariri, the perceived architect of this new power block was assassinated. Fearing political pressure would bury investigations and result in an improper trial, the Lebanese government opted for an UN-based court, thus establishing the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in 2009.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon 

The Statute of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon establishes a narrow jurisdiction. It has jurisdiction only over individuals responsible for the attack that killed former PM Rafik Hariri, and those individuals that are responsible for carrying out other attacks connected to the attack on the 14th of February 2005. Attacks would be deemed to be “connected” if they share elements such as “criminal intent, the purpose behind the attacks, the nature of the victims targeted, the pattern of the attacks (modus operandi) and the perpetrators”.

To assist the Lebanese government in their investigation of the attack that killed PM Hariri, the Security Council had established an international independent investigation commission. 

As of March 2008, the commission has since expanded the STL’s scope to twenty other attacks, in addition to the Hariri case. The investigations in itself have involved a series of terrorist attacks that have caused deaths of 61 people and injured at least 494 people. These additional attacks also form the jurisdiction of the STL.

Unlike other international mixed tribunals that apply both domestic and international law, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon only applies the Lebanese Criminal Code as substantive law. The applicable provisions of the Lebanese Criminal Code include terrorism, crimes, and offenses against life and personal integrity, illicit association, and failure to report crimes and offenses.

The Ayyash et al verdict 

The accused were Salim Jamil Ayyash, Hassan Habib Merhi, Hussein Hassan Oneissi, and Assad Hassan Sabra. According to the prosecution, the accused participated in a conspiracy, with others, including the former accused Mustafa Amine Badreddine (reportedly dead), to commit a terrorist act – to assassinate the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. 

On the 18th of August 2020, the STL Trial Chamber pronounced its Judgment in the Ayyash et al case. The Trial Chamber unanimously found the accused Salim Jamil Ayyash guilty beyond reasonable doubt of all counts against him in the indictment. The Trial Chamber also found the other accused, namely, Hassan Habib Merhi, Hussein Hassan Oneissi, and Assad Hassan Sabra to be not guilty of all charges against them. The trial was held in absentia – the accused were not physically present in the proceedings.

The STL found the evidence connecting Ayyash with the attack on PM Hariri was his mobile phone. Without this, there would be no evidence linking him with the explosion on the 14th of February 2005. His mobile functioned as a closed network that ceased operation immediately before the attack, after having been used in the previous month in the surveillance of PM Hariri and his convoy’s movements.

Under Arts 2 and 3(1)(a) of the Statute of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, and Art 212 of the Lebanese Criminal Code, Ayyash was found guilty on 5 counts; namely, (1) – conspiracy aimed at committing a terrorist act (Arts 270 and 314 of the Lebanese Criminal Code); (2) – committing a terrorist act by means of an explosive device (Arts 314 of the Lebanese Criminal Code); (3) – intentional homicide of Rafik Hariri with premeditation by using explosive materials (Arts 547 and 549 (1) and (7) of the Lebanese Criminal Code); (4) intentional homicide of 21 people in addition to the intentional homicide of Rafik Hariri with premeditation by using explosive materials (Arts 547 and 549 (1) and (7) of the Lebanese Criminal Code); and (5) attempted intentional homicide of 226 persons in addition to the intentional homicide of Rafik Hariri with premeditation by using explosive materials (Arts 200, 547 and 549 (1) and (7) of the Lebanese Criminal Code). 

The four defendants were tried in absentia and their current whereabouts remain unknown. The investigation and the trial in itself have taken 15 years and cost roughly $1 billion. Sentencing will be carried out later though Ayyash is likely to face up to life imprisonment. The verdict, although a long-awaited one, symbolizes justice for the families of the deceased and all those affected by the attack.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments of the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -