Dalal specifically points the finger at Meir Dagan, former head of Israel’s intelligence services (Mossad), accusing him of engineering Hariri’s murder on 14 February 2005. The former prosecutor classified his document as an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”), detailing what he believes is strong circumstantial evidence that the Israeli government was involved in the crime.
STL spokesman Martin Youssef, in turn, confirmed to al-Akhbar that Fransen received the document. Youssef added that Fransen “will look into it,” but set no time frame for his response.
Dalal is a Palestinian from Haifa, but he identifies himself in the document as a “lawyer and citizen in the State of Israel,” pointing out that his legal expertise is in criminal, administrative, and constitutional law, in addition to international and humanitarian law. He also says that he practiced law in Israel from 1997 to 2007, and was involved in cases in the supreme court.
Notably, Dalal worked in the general prosecutor’s office in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia from 2002 to 2010. He says that his legal experience, which includes working in an international court, qualifies him to submit the legal document.
He writes, “The proposed amicus brief would assist the Special Tribunal for Lebanon to properly determine the case before it.” In it, he lays out his reasons for submitting the document. For one, he believes the investigation did not seriously consider the possibility of Israeli involvement in the planning and perpetration of the attack that led to the assassination. This omission has taken place notwithstanding an established Israeli interventionist policy in Lebanese affairs, particularly when Ariel Sharon — the Israeli Prime Minister during the Hariri assassination — had been in office.
According to the brief, public Israeli sources suggest potential Israeli involvement in the Hariri assassination. These indicators, together with the history of several Israeli officials and Israel’s strategic interests — as they are perceived by some Israeli officials — require the STL investigate Israeli citizens, as well as past and current Israeli officials, to advance the Tribunal’s investigation.
Given these circumstances, Dalal argues, the best way to provide this information is through a writtenamicus brief. Rule 131 of the STL’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence provides that leave can be granted to submit a written amicus brief “on any issue.” Rule 92 empowers the pre-trial judge to collect evidence in exceptional circumstances in the ‘interest of justice.’
Dalal divides his brief into four sections. The first is a general overview of the circumstance of the case. He then presents instances of Israel’s involvement in the investigation. The third section lays out his reasons for accusing Israel of the Hariri assassination. He concludes his brief by asking Fransen “to seek the cooperation of the relevant citizens and officials in Israel in order to advance the implementation of the Tribunal’s mandate.”
In the third and perhaps most important section titled “Probable Israeli involvement in the Hariri assassination,” Dalal argues the Mossad’s involvement in the crime. “The ability of Meir Dagan, head of the Israeli Mossad during the Hariri assassination, to conduct assassination operations in foreign countries, particularly in Lebanon, through car bombs with unknown Islamist organizations declaring responsibility for it, is proven.”
To support his argument, Dalal refers to a series of car bomb assassinations dating back to 1981, when Dagan was commander of the “South Lebanon area.” Dalal notes that “Somehow, when Dagan is in the neighborhood, mysterious organizations appear, and exploding objects in their name kill Arabs disliked by Israel.”
To view Marwan Dalal’s amicus brief in full, go to LINK.
To view Marwan Dalal’s Request for Leave brief in full, go to LINK.