TRIAL CHAMBER I

Public Document

ORAL RULING ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF ALLEGED CONFESSIONAL STATEMENTS OBTAINED BY INVESTIGATORS OF THE OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTOR FROM THE FIRST ACCUSED, ISSA HASSAN SESAY

TRIAL CHAMBER I (“Trial Chamber”) of the Special Court for Sierra Leone (“Special Court”) composed of Hon. Justice Bankole Thompson, Presiding Judge, Hon. Justice Pierre Boutet, and Hon. Justice Benjamin Mutanga Itoe;

SEIZED of an Oral Application by the Prosecution on the 5th of June 2007 to admit alleged confessional statements obtained by the Investigators of the Office of the Prosecutor from the First Accused, Issa Hassa Sesay;

MINDFUL of the oral submissions advanced by Learned Lead Counsel for the Prosecution Mr. Peter Harrison on the one hand, and also by Mr. Wayne Jordash, Learned Lead Counsel for the Defence Team of the First Accused on the other;

MINDFUL of the provisions of Rule 92 as read conjunctively with Rules 43, 63 and 95 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence;

MINDFUL of the provisions of Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence;

HEREBY ISSUES THE FOLLOWING ORAL RULING:

1. This is the unanimous Ruling of this Trial Chamber on the issue of the voluntariness or otherwise of the statements alleged to have been made by the First Accused to the Prosecution on successive dates between the months of March and April 2003, coupled with that of the voluntariness of the alleged waiver by the First Accused of his right to the presence of Counsel during the said interviews.

2. Having heard in the course of the Voir Dire proceeding the case both for the Prosecution and for the First Accused as presented through witnesses for both the Prosecution and First Accused respectively; and having heard legal submissions by both Counsel for the Prosecution and Counsel for the First Accused on the aforementioned issue;

3. And having deliberated upon the said issue in the light of the evidence and legal submissions put forward by both sides;

4. This Chamber, taking all the facts and circumstances as gathered from the totality of the evidence into consideration, and the applicable law and jurisprudence in situations of this nature, finds that the alleged statements obtained from the First Accused during the interviews by the Prosecution were not voluntary in that they were obtained by fear of prejudice and hope of advantage held out by persons in authority, the Prosecution having failed to discharge the burden of proving beyond reasonable doubt, under the provisions of Rule 92 as read conjunctively with Rules 43 and 63 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

5. In the light of these findings, The Chamber, accordingly RULES that the alleged statements are inadmissible under Rule 95 and cannot be used even for the limited purpose advanced by the Prosecution of cross-examining the First Accused in order to impeach his credibility.

6. A detailed Reasoned Decision will be published in due course.
Hon. Justice Benjamin Mutanga Itoe appends a separate and concurring opinion to the present Ruling.