By Anthony Zurcher
The
Special Tribunal for Lebanon’s (STL) primary mandate is “to
hold trials for the people accused of carrying out the attack of 14 February
2005 which killed 22 people, including the former prime minister of Lebanon,
Rafik Hariri.” Often
referred to as the “Hariri Tribunal,” the STL has yet to make any formal convictions,
even though it was inaugurated in 2009. This had led many to criticize it as a
waste of time, resources, and energy. Nonetheless, a compelling argument can be
made for its utility. The tribunal boasts a number of unique characteristics,
providing the international community with a concrete example of a hybrid court
that has been tailored and molded to meet precise goals.
Specificity of mandate
The
STL is “the first tribunal of its kind to deal
with terrorism as a distinct crime.”
Considering that the United Nations Security Council has described terrorism as
a direct “threat to international peace and security,” a tribunal created
specifically to address this crime is particularly constructive. The STL’s appeals
chamber used Lebanese law to define terrorism as an international crime for the
first time, a step that may lead other hybrid courts to follow suit.
