Tuesday, 19 April 2011- The Defence called its last witness, Witness 36. Chief Mate was the 'head' of the first avenue in the Simbiliabo neighborhood in the town of Bunia. The witness, who gave most of his testimony in private session, denied that children from his district had been child soldiers in the UPC.
The Simbiliabo neighborhood in Bunia is mostly inhabited by the Hema-North ethnic group, the same community as the leader of the UPC, Thomas Lubanga. As the witness explained, as head of avenue he is responsible for ensuring the safety of people living in the neighborhood, reporting any problems and submitting to his hierarchy. People also go to him looking for guidance to resolve their conflicts, so he exerts certain degree of influence on his community.
The witness told the judges that as part of his functions every six months he made a list of inhabitants in his avenue, and he checked whether or not the children in his neighbourhood had been part of an armed group. "They have never been child soldiers," said the witness referring to the list he made in 2007.
The prosecution asked the witness about the demobilization programs carried out in his neighborhood to disarm and reintegrate young people. Prosecutor Nicole Samson suggested that Mr. Kordo, a prominent figure in the UPC and the president of seven of the twelve neighborhoods in Bunia - including Simbiliabo - , provided the training program and worked closely with the chiefs of avenues to demobilize youth. According to Ms. Samson, some of those youngsters who participated in the demobilization program as part of the UPC were 12, 13, 14, 15 years of age. "No, no. That was not the case," said the witness.
Ms. Samson maintained that children under the age of 15 from the witness' neighborhood had been trained in the UPC military camp in Mandro. "I know few young people who went there," explained the witness, but insisted none of them were under the age of 15.
The prosecution, in attempt to diminish the witness' credibility, suggested that he had never been to a military training camp and therefore it is unlikely that he would be able to determine accurately whether or not there were underage soldiers in the UPC camps.
On 27 January 2010, Lubanga's lawyers opened their case with a serious allegation: a substantial part of the trial has been based on false testimonies. "The Defence´s intention is to prove that many of the prosecution witnesses came to testify knowing they were giving inaccurate information and that some of these false testimonies were fabricated by intermediaries that collaborated with the prosecution," said Catherine Mabille. Following the initial statement, Mr. Lubanga called parents and friends of the "so-called child soldiers", representatives of various schools and people who themselves had supposedly took part in this process of fabricating false testimony to support the allegation of abuse of process by the prosecution. It was Mr. Lubanga's first bet: to halt the trial.
Throughout its case, the defence submitted that four intermediaries employed in the DRC by the Office of the Prosecutor incited witnesses to lie and that they demonstrated other forms of inappropriate behaviour. It is also been said that members of the OTP knew that there were doubts as to the integrity of these individuals and thereafter failed to investigate whether the relevant evidence was reliable.
On 8 March 2011, the Chamber decided to refuse Thomas Lubanga's Defence application to halt the trial. The judges said that ordering a permanent stay of the proceedings for abuse of process is an "undoubtedly drastic remedy to be reserved strictly for those cases that necessitate [it]" and that the prosecutorial misconduct alleged by the Defence has not breached the rights of the accused to a fair trial by disabling "the accused from properly defending himself." The judges were of the view that "the Chamber had responded comprehensively to the Defence submissions so as to ensure that the totality of the available evidence on the relevant intermediaries is explored during the trial."
After the Trial Chamber decided to reject the Defence's application on the abuse of process, Mr. Lubanga's lawyers focused on two fundamental arguments: firstly, that their client played no active role in the creation of the UPC military forces and therefore did not take part in a common plan to recruit child soldiers, and secondly, that Thomas Lubanga, "at the time he was responsible for them," did all he could to demobilize the minors.
Closing statements scheduled for 25 and 26 August
All parties and participants will present their closing oral statements in public hearings on 25 and 26 August 2011. The Prosecution and the Legal Representatives of Victims are to file their written closing submissions no later than 1 June 2011, to which the Defence may reply, no later than 15 July 2011. The Prosecution may file a reply to the Defence by 1 August, and the Defence will have until 15 August to file its final reply.
These final submissions shall address all the relevant legal and factual issues arising in the case as for example whether there was an armed conflict in Ituri between 1 September 2002 and 13 August 2003 or what is the meaning of the terms "conscripting" or "enlisting" children under the age of fifteen years into the armed groups.
