Wednesday, 3 March 2010 -Former UPC soldier commences his testimony in private
The trial resumes after a break of two weeks during which, the Defence of Thomas Lubanga was to travel to the Democratic Republic of Congo to conduct additional research. Today the sixth Defence witness takes the stand, but as it happened with previous testimonies, his evidence is heard in private session. Due to security concerns, Witness 26 testifies under protective measures, with his image and voice distorted.
Just a couple of questions are put by Mr. Biju-Duval publicly. Questioned about his family members, Witness 26 explains that at the time of the conflict in Ituri, members of his family fled to the neighboring Uganda, where they remained. Only his brother returned to Ituri and settled in Kasenyi and Bunia. During that period, Witness 26 was in contact with his brother. "He did go to school. We did meet; he came to my home in order to take some money to pay for his school fees," explains the witness.
Witness 26 tells the Court that he was a soldier of the Union of Congolese Patriots (UPC), the armed group allegedly led by Thomas Lubanga. "How long did you remain in the UPC?" asks Mr. Biju Duval. "Until the year 2003," replies the witness. "I left the UPC when there was fighting between Uganda and the UPC in Bunia [March 2003]."
Prior to the adjournment of today's hearing, the Prosecution requests the Chamber for permission to meet the next Defence witness before he begins his testimony on Friday. In the view of the Defence, this submission is not "satisfactory" and should have been made long ago instead of two days before the Witness was to appear in court. This meeting with the Prosecution depends on the Witness consent, and Mr. Biju-Duval says the witness has not been informed about it. These circumstances therefore are regarded by the Counsel as not appropriate for his witness due to the short notice.
The Prosecution bases its application on the fact that the Defence has lately sent different versions of summaries on Witness 26. "The Defence was able to meet this witness for a few hours," replies Mr. Biju-Duval to Ms. Samson´s comments. "We had to prepare concise summaries about what the witness is going to say with certainty," and in his opinion, this is a hard task due to the difficulties the Defence face in the course of its investigations. "The Defence is always in a situation of uncertainty," he says. Hence Mr. Biju-Duval believes that when additional information is provided to the prosecution, it should not be used as an argument against the Defence.
The Prosecution´s application is described by Judge Fulford as "really undesirable." The meeting between Witness 26 and the Prosecution team would take place the night before the witness appears in court, a fact that may cause some stress on him. Despite these considerations, the Chamber grants the Prosecution´s request, making clear this application is adopted under exceptional circumstances.
Tomorrow Defence Witness 26 will continue his testimony.
Produced in partnership with 3 Generations
