STL

Bulletin
September 2015
The STL Bulletin provides a monthly overview of the latest developments, news and visits to the Special Tribunal
for Lebanon. It is not a judicial document with legal authority. It is one of a number of public information
documents produced by the Tribunal. You can view them all at http://www.stl-tsl.org/en/news-and-press.

Judicial developments
The Prosecutor v. Ayyash et al. (STL-11-01)1
On 1 and 3 September, Defence Counsel for Mr
Sabra continued the cross-examination of Mr Saadeddine El-Ajouz, who began his testimony on 31 August
2015.2 Mr El-Ajouz is the owner of Power Group, a
company that has been distributing telecommunications products in Lebanon since 1994. During the
cross-examination, the witness was questioned about
telephone and fax contacts that Mr Ahmad Abdel-Aal,
a fellow member of the Islamic Association Project,3
generally known in Lebanon as Al-Ahbash, had with
senior Lebanese and Syrian security officials in late
2004 and early 2005, including calls on 14 February
2005.
1

On 3 September, the Sabra Defence resumed the

cross-examination of Mr El-Ajouz. The witness was
1

This section provides an overview of courtroom hearings in the Ayyash

et al. case only. All the public filings in this case are available on our
website: http://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/stl-11-01/filings

2 For Mr El-Ajouz for last month, see the STL Bulletin for August
2015 available at http://www.stl-tsl.org/en/news-and-press/stlbulletin/4375-stl-bulletin-august-2015.
3 Other names of the organisation in English include the Islamic
Charitable Projects and Association of Islamic Philanthropic Projects.

asked about Lebanese authorities investigations of

his colleagues in addition to the purchase and sales of
certain SIM cards. The witness was shown the record
of a sequence of calls between him and some of his
colleagues in 2004-2005, as well as the record of his
calls with other individuals. The Counsel presented
an alternative theory alleging that Mr El-Ajouz was
involved in the 14 February 2005 attack conspiracy
through the sales of SIM cards, which the Prosecution
alleges were used in the assassination of Mr Hariri. The
witness denied these allegations.
All public transcripts in the Ayyash et al. case are available
on our website in Arabic, English and French.

On 2 September, Mr Jihad Tannir, General Manager

(2005 2013) of Celltec, a mobile telephone distributor in Lebanon, appeared before the Trial Chamber.
The witness testified about the company; its practices; and, in particular, some documents relevant to
the purchase of certain network phones, which the
Prosecution alleges are attributable to Mr Ayyash and
Mr Badreddine and which it claims were used in the

www.stl-tsl.org
Dokter van der Stamstraat 1, 2265 BC Leidschendam, Netherlands PO Box 115, 2260 AC Leidschendam, Netherlands.
For more information please contact the Public Information and Communications Section: stl-pressoffice@un.org Tel : +31 (0) 70 800 3560 / 3828 and +961 4 538 100 (Beirut)
www.twitter.com/stlebanonwww.facebook.com/stlebanonwww.youtube.com/stlebanonwww.flickr.com/stlebanon

conspiracy to assassinate the late former Lebanese

Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Lebanon. He was involved in the wholesale and retail of

mobile phone products including pre-paid SIM cards,
recharge cards, handsets and mobile phone accessories.

Mr Tannir confirmed that Celltec was one of the

eight distributors of Alfa telecommunications products in 2005. He said Celltec was established in 1992
and became an authorised dealer of Alfa products in
November 1995. The company has its head office in
the UNESCO area of Beirut, with different outlet
stores throughout the country.

The Prosecution examined PRH 553 about the location of his shop and the role of an employee who was
the manager of the shop at the time, witness PRH 568.
The Prosecution no longer intends to call witness PRH
568. He was also asked about the wholesale supplier
companies with which he dealt to purchase the SIM
and recharge cards; the wholesale clients; local shops
with which he had regular contacts and to which he
sold SIM cards, particularly in the period between
2004 and 2005. He also spoke about his business; how
often he needed to order supplies for the shop; and the
amount of stock of SIM and recharge cards he held
in store during the referred timeframe. The witness
stated that he did not keep any records of the pre-paid
cards he bought from the distributor companies.

According to the Prosecution, six SIM cards were

purchased with false identification information on
13 August 2004 from a mobile shop that deals with
Celltec. The witness explained to the court the process
of buying pre-paid and post-paid SIM cards; the
different fields contained in an application form for
the purchase of SIM cards; and which party fills those
in.
Counsel for Mr Badreddine cross-examined Mr Tannir
the same day. The witness was questioned about the
formalities in relation to the purchase of his own
mobile telephone in 2005 or 2006, as well as about his
knowledge of an organisation called Secure Plus.

Furthermore, witness PRH 553 spoke about the

SIM cards sold at his shop; the expiry date of those
cards; as well as the information the customers had to
provide when purchasing the SIM cards. The witness
was also asked about several statements he gave to the
Intelligence Directorate of the Lebanese Army, the
United Nations International Independent Investigation Commission(UNIIIC) and the Internal Security
Forces (ISF) Information Branch between April and
September 2005. In addition, the witness was asked
about his previous imprisonment in Lebanon, because
he had re-used the identity documents of his former
customers, as well as identity documents collected from
his wholesale clients. The witness also spoke about the
eight Alfa Active Identification Forms, which he filled
out when he sold the impugned SIM cards in 2005.
He stated that he was not able to identify to whom the
SIM cards were sold or on which day exactly.

Protected witness PRH 090 appeared before the Trial

Chamber on 2 September. In his statement, which
was previously found admissible under Rule 155 of
the STLs Rules of Procedure and Evidence (RPE), the
witness said a Liban Cell (now MTC Touch) phone
number used in the period October 2004 September
2005, attributed to the attack according to the Prosecution, was falsely purchased in his name. The witness
was asked by the Prosecution to confirm the content
of his statement of September 2013. Counsel for Mr
Badreddine cross-examined the witness later that day
about his former employment at Secure Plus, a security
firm set up to protect the Lebanese Sunni community,
according to counsel.

On the same day, Defence Counsel for Mr Sabra

cross-examined witness PRH 553. The witness was
questioned about the order of events whenever he sold
Alfa SIM cards at his shop, including the forms that
needed to be filled out and submitted to Power Group,
the distributing company. He was then questioned
about two phone calls in December 2004, one between
his colleague at the shop and the Power Group salesperson and another one between his colleague and the
manager of Power Group.

On 3 September, witness PRH 702, who is subject to

protective measures, testified before the Trial Chamber.
He was asked about the witness statement he gave in
October 2013, which he confirmed as authentic. The
witness said a pre-paid SIM card, which the Prosecution alleges was used in the conspiracy of the 14
February 2005 attack, was falsely purchased in his
name. Counsel for Mr Badreddine asked the witness
what information he had about the identification form
that was filled out falsely in his name to purchase an
Alfa SIM card.

On 9 September, Defence Counsel for Mr Sabra

continued the cross-examination of witness PRH 553.
The witness was asked about a single call involving the
Power Group salesperson, and a telephone number
allegedly used by Mr Abdel Karim Abbas, Brigadier

On 8 September, protected witness PRH 553 testified

before the Trial Chamber via video link. The witness
had previously owned a mobile phone shop in Tripoli,

Document provided by the Public Information and Communications Section of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

General in the Syrian Military Intelligence, according

to the Defence.

to 30 forms since Alfa never checked the accuracy and

authenticity of the forms filled out.

The witness was further questioned about the Alfa

Active Identification Forms that Power Group obliged
its clients, including the witnesss mobile phone shop,
to fill out and return when they sell Alfa SIM cards.
The witness was asked in particular about a phone call
he received on 12 January 2005 from the Power Group
salesperson in Tripoli, who asked him to fill in the
forms for the 10 SIM cards the witness sold to a certain
person, whose name was provided to the witness
but was not released publicly. The witness could not
remember whether he had sold those 10 lines to the
person in question. Yet he stated that he used the IDs
of former customers or those submitted to him by his
wholesale customers to fill out the forms.

The Defence Counsel for Mr Badreddine resumed his

cross-examination by showing the witness a sample of
forms filled out with information of the clients who
bought SIM cards and questioned the authenticity
of the information included in the form. The witness
admitted that he used wrong information to fill out
the forms.
During re-examination, the witness reiterated that he
had no information about the person or persons who
actually bought the eight SIM cards that were later
used in the assassination of Mr Hariri according to the
Prosecution. He added that if he had information at
the time, he would have told the Lebanese authorities
back in 2005 instead of being imprisoned.

During his testimony, the witness was also questioned

about an earlier statement he gave to the UNIIIC on
the network coverage of both mobile companies in
Lebanon, Alfa and MTC Touch. The witness reiterated
his earlier statement that the Alfa coverage is better in
North Lebanon.

Finally and at the request of the Trial Chamber, the

Prosecution provided a brief summary of their case in
relation to the sale of the Red telephone network allegedly implicated in the 14 February 2005 conspiracy.
On 14 September, Mr Spartak Mkrtchyan testified
before the Trial Chamber. The witness is a staff member
at the STL, working for the Prosecution as a Computer
Information Systems Officer and Database Administrator. Mr Mkrtchyan spoke specifically on the format
in which the raw call data and SMS content were originally provided to the Prosecution by three telecommunication companies in Lebanon, Alfa, MTC Touch
and Ogero; the database that he created and populated
with the raw data; and the stored procedures he wrote
to search the database, which enabled the creation of
some of the call sequence tables (CSTs).

Defence Counsel for Mr Sabra also questioned the

various statements the witness gave to the Lebanese
Investigative Magistrate, Elias Eid, the UNIIIC, the
ISFs Information Branch and the Lebanese Army
intelligence Directorate regarding the identity of the
unnamed person referred to above; in addition to
the witnesss incarceration in the Lebanese Roumieh
prison; and whether or not he had any communication with some individuals during his imprisonment.
Defence Counsel suggested to PRH553 that he had
in fact sold the impugned SIM cards to the unnamed
person on 30 December 2005. PRH 553 agreed that
he had sold 10 SIM cards to that particular dealer but
could only confirm it was during the holiday period
toward the end of December 2004 and the New Years
Eve.

According to the witness, the data was received as raw

files from the three telecommunication companies in
Lebanon, Alfa, MTC Touch and Ogero. The data were
then moved to the structured query language (SQL)
database, which maintains specific fields for data such
as telephone numbers and other call information. He
also explained that the OTP has two databases, the
OTP SQL database and the Golden Copy SQL database. The witness explained that the first was created at
the time of the UNIIIC, and the second for STL use.

On 10 September, Witness PRH 553 was cross-examined by the Defence Counsel for Mr Badreddine
on the Alfa Active Identification Forms filled out by
the witnesss mobile shop. The Counsel focused on the
date when the form was filled out and asked the witness
whether, as a matter of practice, the witnesss shop
ever relied on authentic IDs in filling out the form, or
whether the forms were routinely filled out afterwards
with ID information of people who had previously
made purchases at the store.

The witness also spoke about random sample tests

conducted when he and his team were working on
developing the database and he was asked about the
possibility of detecting errors in the SQL database. The
witness said the various tests implemented show that
the database and the stored procedures he designed
yield the expected results.

The witness stated that some forms were filled out

correctly whereas others were not. He added that it
would have been possible to use one ID to fill out up

Document provided by the Public Information and Communications Section of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

On 15 September, the Defence Counsel for Mr

Ayyash, Mr Badreddine and Mr Oneissi cross-examined Mr Mkrtchyan. The questioning focused on the
database he developed with his team; and whether he
comprehensively reviewed the work carried out by his
predecessor developer of the database.

displayed through the EPE. Those include i) maps; ii)

locations; iii) cell sites (the locations and orientations
of mobile phone cell masts and sites); iv) telephone call
information retrieved from CSTs; and v) attribution of
phones to individuals. Then he demonstrated how a
combination of some or all of those items can be visualized through the EPE. He also explained how records
are kept in this system and how quality assurance is
performed using the EPE. Throughout Mr Faheys
testimony, the OTP relied on call lists as way of examples to demonstrate how the EPE software exhibits
the proposed evidence. While the OTP said the information shown in the courtroom was for now only
for illustrative purposes, the Defence objected to the
inclusion of some of the data at this point.

On the same day, Professor Peter Sommer testified

before the Trial Chamber. The witness is an expert on
computer and information systems as well as storage
and data security, and digital evidence. In his testimony, Professor Sommer spoke about his experience
and qualifications, as well as a report he submitted to
the STLs OTP in July 2012; and the methodology,
information and material he used in his report. He
reviewed the work done by Mr Mkrtchyan, including
related documentation. He also ran various tests on
the importing of data into the SQL database and
the stored procedure developed by Mr Mkrtchyan.
Professor Sommer concluded that the work done by
Mr Mkrtchyan and his team was sound.

On 17 September, The Prosecution resumed the

examination of Mr Fahey. The witness spoke mainly
on the quality insurance aspect of the EPE system and
how it accurately represents the proposed evidence
that is stored in the Prosecutions databases. He also
explained various quality assurance checks and tests
that are carried out on a regular basis.

Defence Counsel for Mr Sabra, Mr Badreddine, Mr

Ayyash and Mr Oneissi cross-examined Professor
Sommer. He was questioned about the OTPs request
to produce the report and with whom he met from
the Prosecution. He also spoke about the report and
the possibility to identify corruption errors from the
uploading process to the database; and the accuracy
of the underlying data he was provided by the OTP,
which they received from Alfa and MTC telecommunication companies. Furthermore, the witness was
questioned about the various manuals he received
prior to the preparation of his report and the impact
they had on his work.

Defence Counsel for Mr Ayyash, Mr Oneissi and Mr

Badreddine cross-examined Mr Fahey. The questions
focused on his testimony on the EPE system, how the
system was developed; his contribution to it; and the
tests that were run on the system. He was also questioned about the meetings he attended with the various
organs at the STL on the EPE system, the sources used
to collect the telecommunications data, and whether
he knows if the data he worked on was previously
reviewed on a regular basis.
On 29 September, protected witness PRH 087 gave
his testimony before the Trial Chamber. The witness
was shown statements he made in the past and was
asked about them. One was made in January 2015
and incorporates an earlier statement made in 2006
taken by UNIIIC. The second statement was given
in March 2010. The witness on occasions went to the
same mosque that Abu Adass4 frequented in 2004 and,
thus, had the opportunity to see him. The witness also
said that Abu Adass lived in the same area that he lived
in for a while. PRH 087 was asked about Abu Adasss
behavior during the prayers at the mosque and the type
of clothes Abu Adass wore to prayers. PRH087 stated
that the last time he saw Abu Adass was on a Friday in
the mosque. Abu Adass was talking to a young man
sitting beside him. The witness was asked to describe
the man to whom Abu Adass was talking to.

On 16 September, Mr Andrew Fahey appeared before

the Trial Chamber. Mr Fahey is an STL OTP analyst.
He has been involved in developing the electronic
presentation of evidence (EPE) system since 2011,
before assuming the role of a project manager during
the software development phase as of November 2012.
Mr Fahey testified about three main topics. The first
was related to the EPE system, the second regarding
the cell site data that he used in his analysis and the
third was in relation to the various locations that have
been plotted into the presentation system.
The witness spoke about the EPE as a system modified
for the STL to store, retrieve, display, and save information based on specific needs. He added that the
nature of the information entered into the software
is primarily geographic mapping data extracted from
call data records (CDRs). The Prosecution witness
spoke in detail about the five types of evidence that are

4 Ahmad Abu Adass is the presumed author of the videotaped false

claim of responsibility.

Document provided by the Public Information and Communications Section of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

The Defence Counsel for Mr Oneissi cross-examined

PRH 087. The witness was questioned about statement
made before the Lebanese Investigative Judge Elias
Eid in April 2005 and another on 24th of November,
2006, made before UNIIIC. He also spoke about the
physical appearance of Abu Adass, his religious beliefs,
the dialect used between Abu Adass and the person
with him in the mosque, as well as about Abu Adasss
family members and friends. The witness was shown a
photo board and was asked whether he could identify
the young man he had seen sitting with Abu Adass. He
was unable to identify anyone.

related specifically to the attribution of the one phone,

which the Prosecution links to one of the Accused, Mr
Oneissi. According to the Prosecution, Mr Oneissi was
a client of the witness and they had several professional
appointments, the last appointment being in August
2004. The witness was asked about his business locations and the records he kept, the phone numbers of
one of the business locations as well as his business
relationship and contact with Mr Oneissi.
The Defence Counsel for Mr Oneissi cross-examined
witness PRH 067. The witness was questioned about
his contact with Mr Oneissi, a statement he gave to the
STL Prosecution in September 2015 and the accent of
the Accused when he speaks.

On 30 September, PRH 067 testified before the Trial

Chamber via video link. The evidence of PRH 067

In the Contempt Case against AL JADEED [CO.] S.A.L. / NEW T.V. S.A.L (N.T.V.)
and Ms Karma Mohamed Tahsin Al Khayat (STL-14-05)5
On 18 September, Contempt Judge Nicola Lettieri
issued a Judgment in the contempt case against Al
Jadeed [CO.] S.A.L./NEW T.V. S.A.L. (N.T.V.) and
Ms Karma Mohamed Tahsin Al Khayat.6

confidence in the Tribunals ability to protect the

confidentiality of information about, or provided by,
witnesses or potential witnesses.

The Judge found Ms Al Khayat guilty and Al Jadeed

S.A.L. not guilty with respect to the charges under
count 2. Under Count 2, Al Jadeed S.A.L. and Ms
Khayat were charged pursuant to Rule 60bis (A) (iii)
with knowingly and wilfully interfering with the
administration of justice by failing to remove from Al
Jadeed TVs website and YouTube channel information
on purported confidential witnesses in the Ayyash et
al. case, thereby violating an order issued by the STLs
Pre-Trial Judge in the Ayyash et al. case on 10 August
2012.
On 28 September, the Contempt Judge issued his
sentencing judgment in the case against Ms Al Khayat.
During the hearing Judge Lettieri heard the parties
submissions on the sentence with respect to Ms
Khayats conviction under count 2. Each party had 30
minutes for its submissions and then the Judge heard
each partys response to the opposing partys submissions. Judge Lettieri sentenced Ms Khayat to a fine of
ten thousand Euros, to be paid in full by 30 October
2015. The Judge stated that written reasons for his
decision were to follow in due course.

Judge Lettieri found both Accused not guilty with

respect to the charges under count 1 of the order in lieu
of indictment. Under Count 1, Al Jadeed S.A.L. and
Ms Khayat were charged pursuant to Rule 60bis (A) of
the Tribunals Rules of Procedure and Evidence with
knowingly and wilfully interfering with the administration of justice by broadcasting and/or publishing
information on purported confidential witnesses in
the Ayyash et al. case, thereby undermining public
5 This part provides an overview of the public courtroom hearings
in the case STL-14-05 only. Filings in this case are available on our
website: http://www.stl-tsl.org/en/the-cases/contempt-cases/stl-14-05/
filingsstl-14-05.
6

You can read a summary of the Contempt Judges judgment at http://

www.stl-tsl.org/en/news-and-press/press-releases/4364-18-09-2015summary-of-the-judgment-in-stl-14-05. Kindly note that the full
Judgment is the only authoritative version.

Document provided by the Public Information and Communications Section of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

Visits and News

Students from the University of Washington

In the month of September, the STL received four

group visits. The STL hosted a delegation of 15 Spanish
magistrates. In addition, students from Qatar University College of Law, the University of Washington, and
the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) visited the
Tribunal. The visitors had briefings with several organs
about the work of the STL.

You can book a visit for a group of at least 10 people by

filling in the online booking form no later than one month
prior to the proposed date of visit.

www.stl-tsl.org
Dokter van der Stamstraat 1, 2265 BC Leidschendam, Netherlands PO Box 115, 2260 AC Leidschendam, Netherlands.
For more information please contact the Public Information and Communications Section: stl-pressoffice@un.org Tel : +31 (0) 70 800 3560 / 3828 and +961 4 538 100 (Beirut)
www.twitter.com/stlebanonwww.facebook.com/stlebanonwww.youtube.com/stlebanonwww.flickr.com/stlebanon