Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:50:09.882Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In re Akhbar Beirut & Al Amin

Review products

In re Akhbar Beirut & Al Amin. STL-14-06/S/CJ. Athttps://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-06. Special Tribunal for Lebanon, August 29, 2016.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2017

Monica Hakimi
Monica Hakimi*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On August 29, 2016, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (Tribunal) sentenced a corporate media enterprise and one of its employees for contemptuously interfering with the Tribunal's proceedings in Ayyash, a prosecution concerning the February 2005 terrorist attack that killed former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. The contempt decision is significant for two reasons: (1) it adopts an expansive definition of the crime of contempt to restrict a journalist's freedom of expression; and (2) it is the first international judicial decision to hold a corporate entity criminally responsible.

Keywords

International criminal lawcontemptinterference with prosecutionliability of corporate entitiesdefinition of “person”
Type
International Decisions: Edited by David P. Stewart
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 111 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 132 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 by The American Society of International Law 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See In re Akhbar Beirut & Al Amin, Case No. STL-14-06/S/CJ, Reasons for Sentencing Judgment (Spec. Trib. Leb. Sept. 5, 2016), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-06/filings-stl-14-06/other-filings-stl-14-06/5190-f0265. Documents concerning Ayyash are available at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/stl-11-01.

2 In re Akhbar Beirut & Al Amin, Case No. STL-14-06/T/CJ, Public Redacted Version of the Judgment, para. 111 (Spec. Trib. Leb. July 15, 2016), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-06/judgments-stl-14-06/5092-f0262prv (quoting Al Akhbar article) [hereinafter Judgment].

3 STL Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Rule 60bis(A), STL-BD-2009-01-Rev.8 (as amended and corrected on April 3, 2017), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/documents/rules-of-procedure-and-evidence.

4 See In re Al Jadeed/New TV & Al Khayat, Case No. STL-14-05/A/AP, Public Redacted Version of Judgment on Appeal (Spec. Trib. Leb. Mar. 8, 2016), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-05/filings-stl-14-05/appeal-1/judgments-stl-14-05/4823-f0028.

5 See also Judgment, para. 120 (finding that the articles “received widespread and negative attention in Lebanon by the public in general [and] … that the lives of Tribunal witnesses had been put at risk by the disclosures”).

6 See also Judgment, para. 146 (“[T]he content and tone of the 15 and 19 January Articles fail to demonstrate objective reporting of a journalistic investigation, but rather, manifest the views of a political advocate who paints purported STL witnesses in a negative light and portray them as counter to Hezbollah… .”).

7 In re New TV S.A.L. & Al Khayat, Case No. STL-14-05/I/CJ, Decision on Motion Challenging Jurisdiction and on Request for Leave to Amend Order in Lieu of an Indictment (Spec. Trib. Leb. July 24, 2014), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-05/filings-stl-14-05/main-case/orders-and-decisions-stl-14-05/3375-f0054.

8 Id., para. 71.

9 Id., paras. 74–75.

10 Id., para. 76.

11 In re New TV S.A.L. & Al Kayaht, Case No. STL-14-05/PT/AP/AR126.1, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Concerning Personal Jurisdiction in Contempt Proceedings (Spec. Trib. Leb. Oct. 2, 2014), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-05/filings-stl-14-05/main-case/orders-and-decisions-stl-14-05/3515-f0012-ar126-1 [hereinafter New TV Appellate Decision on Jurisdiction].

12 See also id., para. 26.

13 Id., para. 67.

14 Id.

15 Id., para. 68.

16 Id., para. 71.

17 In re Akhbar Beirut & Al Amin, Case No. STL-14-06/PT/CJ, Decision on Motion Challenging Jurisdiction (Spec. Trib. Leb. Nov. 6, 2014), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-06/filings-stl-14-06/orders-and-decisions-stl-14-06/3593-f0069 [hereinafter Akhbar Beirut Decision on Jurisdiction].

18 In re Akhbar Beirut & Al Amin, Case No. STL-14-06/PT/AP/AR126.1, Decision on Interlocutory Appeal Concerning Personal Jurisdiction in Contempt Proceedings (Spec. Trib. Leb. Jan. 23, 2015), at https://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-06/filings-stl-14-06/orders-and-decisions-stl-14-06/3742-f0004-ar126-1.

19 Id., paras. 72–74 (summary).

20 New TV Appellate Decision on Jurisdiction, supra note 11, para. 67.

21 Akhbar Beirut Decision on Jurisdiction, supra note 17, para. 71.