Site icon Civitas Maxima

Week in Review – Week 7

Week in Review – Week 7

Introduction to Week 7’s hearings and witnesses

The seventh week of the Gibril Massaquoi trial ended on 26 March 2021, after three days of hearings in Monrovia, Liberia. Hearings focused on the testimony of eight witnesses. As with prior witnesses, their identities were concealed.

The witnesses were heard in the following order and are described as follows:

Trial Monitoring Day 19 (22 March 2021)

Trial Monitoring Day 20 (24 March 2021)

Trial Monitoring Day 21 (26 March 2021)

Commonalities in Witness Testimony

The witnesses testified about different events around Lofa County in 2001. The following commonalities emerged about the events and these particular witnesses’ interactions with the Finnish police:

Events in Lofa County

Identification 

Connections to prominent figures

Interactions with the Finnish police

Emerging themes for Prosecution and Defense

The first two days of testimony saw the Prosecution and Defense undertaking similar strategies to prior weeks. The Prosecution called a series of civilian witnesses who had firsthand knowledge and experience of several atrocities that occurred in Kamatahun Hassala. Witnesses 31, 32, 33, and 35 spoke to the crimes of murder and rape, while Witness 34 described murders. The Prosecution sought to elicit testimony from these civilian witnesses that Gibril Massaquoi ordered these crimes to occur, and directly perpetrated some of them himself. Witness 33 testified that “Angel Gabriel” killed a woman he had taken as his wife, and several other witnesses saw the commander follow his men as they took seven naked women to a place referred to as a “blacksmith’s kitchen”, where they were raped and ultimately murdered. The witnesses all described a “Gabriel” as having ordered the murders, and ordered, or at least allowed, the rapes. Witness 31 remembered a “General Gabriel” giving the orders, while the other witnesses referred to an “Angel Gabriel.” All civilian witnesses said that this person spoke Krio.

The Prosecution also worked to establish that the events in Kamatahun Hassala occurred in 2001. The witnesses uniformly testified as such, often relying on planting and harvesting cycles to place the time somewhere in the spring or summer of 2001. Several witnesses also described an NGO coming to Kamatahun Hassala to undertake restorative justice efforts, most notably in constructing a palava hut over the site of a mass burning. The Prosecution also established how each witness came into contact with the Finnish police. 

The Defense spent much of the first two days of testimony highlighting alleged inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimony. It used Finnish police summaries and recordings of prior interviews to show that Witnesses 31 and 32 had initially given years other than 2001 when asked by the police when the events occurred, although in court these witnesses reaffirmed their belief that 2001 was the correct year. The Defense also pointed out alleged inconsistencies regarding the level of involvement of various commanders from RUF and other groups, as well as details of RUF troop placement and other details. The civilian witnesses consistently stood by their testimony at trial, explaining the alleged inconsistencies by noting how hard it is to remember details after so many years.

The Defense also focused on the manner in which the civilian witnesses were contacted. Many of the civilian witnesses dealt with  [FNM-078], whom the Defense pointed out is involved in some way with the ongoing trial. The Defense further inquired about the NGO that built the palava hut, asking about the nature of its involvement with the Finnish or other investigations. Witnesses consistently indicated that the NGO’s involvement in Kamatahun Hassala was limited to building the palava hut and organizing a few multicultural ceremonies honoring the dead. 

The third day of testimony saw different strategies for both parties. The Defense called Witnesses 36 and 37, both former ATU soldiers, in an effort to show that there was another Massaquoi active in the higher ranks of the RUF. The Defense asked these two witnesses about the 2003 death of Sam Bockarie, an RUF leader, seeking to establish that a Massaquoi was present when Bockarie was killed, or alternately when his body was delivered to Charles Taylor. The Defense was ultimately unable to establish this. Witness 36 had difficulty recalling the given name of the Massaquoi he was discussing. Witness 37 said that Massaquoi was not present when Bockarie died; he incidentally stated that he had met Gibril Massaquoi in 2000 and 2001. Both witnesses recalled Massaquoi speaking Mende. Finally, both witnesses were put in touch with the Finnish police by other former soldiers. 

The Prosecution questioned a different former soldier, Witness 38, who testified to some of the actions of Gibril Massaquoi during 2000 and 2001. These actions included the trading of gold and diamonds to Charles Taylor for weapons and ammunition, as well as committing violence against Liberians to the frustration of [FNM-161]. Through Witness 38, the Prosecution was able to corroborate key facts including Massaquoi’s role as RUF spokesman and his role in the burning of Kamatahun Hassala in 2001. The Defense again raised alleged discrepancies between the day’s testimony and what Witness 38 had told the Finnish police  (specifically his failure to mention the burning in Kamatahun Hassala or the year 2001); the Witness again attributed weak memory to the passage of time.

Exit mobile version