Interview with STL Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare

NOWLebanon brings us an exclusive interview with STL Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare.  Excerpts from the interviewee below:

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) will not file an indictment in the case of the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in September, said Daniel Bellemare in an exclusive interview with NOW Lebanon. The Canadian prosecutor, who has not spoken to the media for almost a year, reacts to some recent rumors that have been circulating in the Lebanese media and states clearly that he never said he would file the indictment next month.

Let me state clearly that the indictment has not been drafted yet. As I have previously said, I will only file the indictment when I am satisfied that there is enough evidence."

"Currently I am working on what I would call the evidentiary process; I have to make sure that the evidence I will produce is admissible in court."

I want to make sure there is as much convincing evidence as possible.

Almost daily, new articles pop up in the Lebanese media quoting “sources close to the STL,” “exclusive secret reports” or “anonymous diplomatic sources.” What do you say to that?

Bellemare: I think it is sad for the people who read those newspapers [citing “sources close to the STL,” “exclusive secret reports” or “anonymous diplomatic sources.”] ... They are purely speculations, ... some of them are truly outrageous. ... Sometimes I wonder, “Why do they do this?” But of course, I am not going to speculate myself.

The one who knows about the case is me. People should remember this. Unless they can read into my brain, everything else is just speculation.

... the day I am faced with political interference I cannot deal with, I will resign. To those who say I am influenced by this or that person, I will tell them, “Sorry, but I am not!”

The position I have taken is that I do not have tunnel vision, meaning that when you have a theory, you try to fit all the evidence you have to that theory. This is something we have to get absolutely away from. If somebody comes to me with credible evidence that shows me that I may not be on the right path, whatever path I am on, then of course I will look at that material. That is exactly what we are doing. Mr. Nasrallah says I have material, and we are looking at it. But in order to make an assessment you need to work with a complete record. That is why we asked for the rest.

... The fact of the matter is we are not politicized. We operate in a political context, no question about that. But the decision that will be made is not a political decision. It would be a political decision if the decision would be influenced by politics. The decision that will be made is completely out of these things. It is made independently; nobody will tell me what to do.

The pace of the investigation is fairly steady at this point. We have made huge progress. You have to put things in context. Look at other large investigations: the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia or the Oklahoma bombing. They all took time.

The Hariri case is probably one of the biggest murder investigations currently under development. Look at the Lockerbie trial; it took years before the whole process was finished. Even though I have to be very careful when I compare the Hariri case with something else.

... At the end of the day, we will talk through our indictment. That would be our response to everything.

I will not comment on what Mr. Siddiq says. Basically, he is not somebody we will produce in court as a witness.

Who stamped him [Hussam Hussam] and Siddiq false witnesses? I never used that expression. At this point, he is not a suspect. Just like Siddiq. I will just leave it to that.

Bellemare: [The Lebanese justice minister] was tasked by the Lebanese cabinet [to look into the issue of the false witnesses]. We have to respect the decision of the Lebanese government. Of course, I have the primacy over the investigation. So we will see where this leads.

Many people have told me that justice has to be transparent. I agree with that. But the question is: What has to be transparent? Not the investigative process. It is the judicial process that has to be transparent. I think many people are confused with that.

Update: Michael Young gives his assessment of the interview.