May has been a revolutionary month for international human rights law, referring particularly to the abundance of activity on the part of the International Criminal Court located in The Hague. Although the trial of Ratko Mladic is proceeding at a less than desirable pace, May 30th signaled the end of a very important and extremely long trial for Liberia’s ex-President Charles Taylor.

Mr. Taylor was indicted by the Special Court for Sierra Leone for eleven counts of aiding and abetting rebels during the civil war in Sierra Leone spanning the years from 1991 to 2002. His trial started in 2007 and was only concluded this year. Although Charles Taylor never actually touched a victim in Sierra Leone during the crisis, he was an enabler of the gruesome acts that transpired there and consequently the ICC believed that he was deserving of blame. As Judge Richard Lussick stated when handing out the sentencing, ‘While Mr. Taylor never set foot in Sierra Leone, his heavy footprint is there.’ More information about Charles Taylor can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Taylor_(Liberian_politician).

The sentence imposed on Charles Taylor was 50 years in prison, toward which he could utilize the five years he spent imprisoned while waiting for his verdict. Since Mr. Taylor is 64 as of 2012, this means he will be in prison until he is 108, making the term effectively a life sentence. Even though there is much jubilation in reference to this judgment, a certain degree of controversy surrounds it, especially since Charles Taylor is the first former head of state to face judgment for crimes against humanity since the Nuremberg trials.

From the perspective of the defense, the ruling on Charles Taylor was unfair because of his advanced age and family status as well as the indirect role he played in the conflict. Taylor’s lawyers stated that the judgment wasn’t based solely on the evidence provided, but that there was political motivation behind the trial. Specifically, they believe Mr. Taylor is being used as a scapegoat for the acrimonious feelings that a decade of war in Sierra Leone brought with it. Furthermore, he is no longer considered a threat to society because of his advanced age, and Taylor has 11 children who will lose their father if he is jailed for an extended period of time. Finally, the defense claim that Taylor’s sentence, which will only be completed when he is 108, is in essence a life sentence, which is a measure the ICC is not permitted to impose.

On the side of the prosecution, the trial was a bit of a failure as well because they desired to impose an 80 year term on Charles Taylor. Two of the charges it wished to establish were not accepted in their entirety, including the assertion that Taylor had command of rebel forces (meaning he would have individual criminal responsibility), and that he was a part of a joint criminal enterprise. The dismissal of these two charges can have far-reaching implications, including changes in proceedings for the trials of Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Nevertheless, this trial has put an end to impunity for the enactors of horrible crimes. What’s more, since Charles Taylor was actually in power when he was indicted, the sentencing created the principle that a head of state who was still serving could be persecuted under international law. As a response to claims that he sentence was too harsh for someone who did not have first-hand interaction with victims, Judge Lussick stated that the ‘special status as head of state put Taylor in a different category of offenders for the purpose of sentencing.’

There is no doubt that Mr. Taylor will appeal the judgment made, but if it is not successful, he will serve out his prison term in the UK, where there were already cases of war criminals being abused by fellow inmates. Some call this action inhumane, citing that it is a punishment within a punishment, but given the political instability that may arise if he serves his sentence out in Sierra Leone or Liberia, it is an apt decision.

For more information:

The Special Court for Sierra Leone: http://www.sc-sl.org/

Taylor judgment (2,539 pages): http://www.sc-sl.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=k%2b03KREEPCQ%3d&tabid=53

International Criminal Court: http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC