Mohamad Setayeshpur; Saeed Mokhtari
Abstract
Abstract:
The Special Tribunal for Lebanon, as an international court that is considered among the third generation of international criminal courts and has the authority to issue judgments in absentia, in 2020 in the case of Salim Jamil Ayash and others, has issued a sentence of conviction ...
Read More
Abstract:
The Special Tribunal for Lebanon, as an international court that is considered among the third generation of international criminal courts and has the authority to issue judgments in absentia, in 2020 in the case of Salim Jamil Ayash and others, has issued a sentence of conviction and punishment. In the following article, the analysis of the performance of the Lebanese special court in issuing a sentence of conviction and sentence of punishment has been discussed. hypothesis in the following lines is that the said court did not follow the legal rules as it should be for an international court. In order to verify the proposed hypothesis, the present research has been carried out with a descriptive-analytical method and with regard to collecting mostly qualitative information in a library method. The following article, through the analysis of the court's performance in the above-mentioned case, has validated its hypothesis and shown that the special Tribunal for Lebanon acted weakly and without providing legal and reasonable arguments, with a superficial look at the events and not rules and with a selective approach, it has issued a sentence for conviction and similarly, it has acted very narrowly in issuing a sentence for punishment. This has never happened before in other decisions of international criminal courts. Criticism of this court procedure is the topic of the upcoming article.
