Jadeed, Khayat Contempt Case not Unprecedented

إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية
  • W460
  • W460

The contempt case of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon against Al-Jadeed S.A.L. and Karma Khayat is not unprecedented because international criminal courts and tribunals have rules under which persons can be held responsible for contempt.

At the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, for example, there have been 25 such cases involving different kinds of prohibited behavior. Several individuals –including journalists - were convicted of knowingly and wilfully interfering with the administration of justice by disclosing confidential information about protected witnesses.

Some individuals were also found guilty for refusing to appear as witnesses, for refusing to answer a question as a witness before a Chamber or for providing false statements.

Two Defense counsel were convicted of procuring false witness statements and for bribing witnesses by encouraging false statements in exchange for payment. (See http://www.icty.org/action/con temptcases/27#casetabs for an overview of the contempt cases at the ICTY)

The Special Court for Sierra Leone issued judgments in seven contempt cases. Individuals were charged with threatening and intimidating a protected witness and/ or tampering with witnesses who had given evidence in prior proceedings by offering a bribe to him/her. (See http://www.rscsl.org/contempt2005-01.html)

In 2013, six individuals – including members of a Defense team - were charged before the International Criminal Court for corruptly influencing witnesses, attempting subordination of witnesses and witness tampering. (See http://www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/ situations%20and%20cases/situations/situation%20 icc%200105/related%20cases/ICC-0105-0113/Pages/ default.aspx)

On Friday, STL Judge Nicola Lettieri found both Khayat and Al-Jadeed S.A.L. “not guilty with respect to the charges under count 1 of the order in lieu of indictment,” said the court.

But Lettieri found Khayat guilty and Al Jadeed S.A.L. not guilty with respect to the charges under count 2.

The charges of contempt include having allegedly broadcast information relating to purported confidential witnesses in a series of programs. In addition, they are charged with having allegedly violated a court order by failing to remove that information from Al Jadeed TV’s website and YouTube channel despite an order by the STL PreTrial Judge to do so.

Comments 14
Default-user-icon mowaten (Guest) 18 September 2015, 12:27

I don't believe it ! The STL is corrupted and is against the resistance.

Default-user-icon easy.rider (Guest) 18 September 2015, 13:39

well said @bus.driver

Default-user-icon saturn (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:16

milk is not always white
coffee is not always black
honey is not always sweet
the sky is not always blue
barbie is not a doll
orange is the new yellow

Default-user-icon Law Expert (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:28

30 minutes ago Khayyat: A law expert is not entitled to interfere in journalism.

How would a so called journalist know what a law expert is entitled to or not?

Default-user-icon Abu Nuss Lsein (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:38

stop pretending you know something about nothing. You can hardly read or write let alone give a legal opinion and compare International Criminal Cases. M'3attar Maskeen

Default-user-icon illegitimate & illiterate.southern (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:39

Not only are you Special, but you are also a Limited edition.
Bravo for this well thought of analysis

Default-user-icon strange really strange (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:40

43 minutes ago Khayyat: A law expert is not entitled to interfere in journalism.

but a paid journalist is entitled to interfere with the Law.

Default-user-icon Amal Clooney (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:42

Hey Southern; have you considered working for the International Criminal Court?

Default-user-icon Karma Is A Bitch (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:50

I believe the court's decision is Fair.

Default-user-icon the_roar (Guest) 18 September 2015, 14:52

To Whom It May Concern
I, the_roar, a well respected, heavily voted, liked, and admired shia poster with 55 fake accounts (3rd generation Australian) on naharnet hereby declare that until further notice I suspend my membership in this forum similar to what MP Emile Rahmeh ( who got the highest votes in the last elections ) did when he suspended his membership in the Lebanese Parliament in SOLIDARITY with the unlawful, unjustified, and oppressive decision by the administration of this forum to ban my fellow shia poster Flamethrower.
Let it be know to all that such practices by management contradict with the basic fundamentals of the Iranian constitution and free speech in North Korea.
I remain,

Default-user-icon southern huthi (Guest) 18 September 2015, 15:09

who cares about your opinion southern, no one;)

Default-user-icon Most Westerners (Guest) 18 September 2015, 16:02

we agree with you bigjohn. Please, come visit us in January.

Missing un520 18 September 2015, 17:13

LOL, two wrongs doesnt make one right. Hezbollah screwed its assasination operation up big times by using one or more phones in a very stupid and amateurish way. They are afterall mostly southern farmers, not sophisticated, intelligent agents. Some of the assasination circle might be smart, but there was always bound to be a donkey in there somewhere. When he made that call outside the network, the secrecy was all blown. Now the indicted member doesnt even dare to face the proofs in court, how revealing is that?

Thumb eagledawn 18 September 2015, 18:28

Once convicted by the STL, will Karma Khayat become Lebanon's first female Saint.... remains to be seen.