Wayne Jordash lead defence counsel for the first accused Issa Sesay in the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) trial has submitted to the Appeals Chamber that the Trial Chamber erred in law and fact in handing down sentence on their trial.
In his submission the defence counsel stated that the Trial Chamber failed to take into account the contribution that Issa Sesay made in bringing the war to an end and also the good nature and character which was clearly evident in the evidence of some paramount chiefs and also the evidence of Adeniji.
Mr Jordash said that most of the area of guilt was that of the Joint Criminal Enterprises but that his client was not present in most of the areas he was accused of and that the Trial Chamber was wrong for all without making attribution.
The lawyer further submitted that the prosecution did not place the material fact of the JCE and they served the indictment without the material fact adding that the Trial Chamber erred in the area of JCE 2 as they consider that the new notice was unimportant but that the common purpose in the JCE 2 was quite different which includes forced marriage and enslavement and that these were no longer applicable to the first accused.
Submitting on the grounds of the sentence, the counsel said that there was aggravating factors against the accused and that he was a far distance from the areas where most of the crimes were committed stressing that by the end of the war Issa Sesay was the interim leader of the RUF while Morris Kallon was the Deputy. Therefore “there should not be a 12 years difference between the two of them.”
The lawyer went on to submit to the court that there was improper pleading in relation to false marriage in Kailahun and this was manifestly inadequate. He submitted that after 59 prosecution witnesses, no explanation was given why the forced marriage could not be pleaded and why it was impossible.
The lawyer also submitted on incentives being given to witnesses who testified for the prosecution. He argued that a life in another country could be an incentive to lie.
He told the court that their appeal is not about the prosecution naming the victims but they ask and challenge the Trial Chamber as an error of law.
The defence counsel also submitted that the indictment does not contain materials of fact and that there was no material which indicated what Sesay was supposed to have done and that there was no material which indicates his superior responsibility and there was nothing in relation to the arrest of UNAMSIL personnel. He added that the indictment was misleading from beginning to end.
Mr Jordash told the court that the Trial Chamber made a mistake in the way they applied the law and the trial was unfair as the Chamber failed to compare it to other sentences. He urged the Appeals Chamber to take into account mitigating factors which the Trial Chamber failed to do.
The three accused Issa Sesay, Morris Kallon and Augustine Gbao had been found guilty by the Trial Chamber and sentenced to 52, 40, 25 years respectively.
The three have filed an in the Appeals Chamber and the prosecution also appealed against the judgment of the Trial Chamber.
By Betty Milton