BEIRUT: The campaign to indict Ariel Sharon moved a step closer recently when a Belgian court said that hearing will begin soon to see whether the Israeli prime minister can be tried for war crimes in case brought by survivors of the Sabra and Shatila Palestinian camps massacre in Lebanon.
The decision came days after the Brussels public prosecutor rejected arguments by Israel that Belgium lacked the legal authority to try Sharon.
Amnesty International has lent its backing to the 23 Lebanese and Palestinian plaintiffs who are seeking to indict Sharon for his role in the slaughter of hundreds of Palestinians at the Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camps in 1982.
“We support the investigation into Ariel Sharon’s responsibility with regard to the massacre”, a statement from the Human Rights Watchdog said.
In apparent response to the latest developments, Sharon has appointed a personal lawyer to represent him in Belgium.
Previously, Israel was represented by Michele Hirsch, who was acting on behalf of the state rather than for Sharon.
Chibli Mallat a lawyer for the plaintiffs said Sharon was showing “signs of nervousness”.
“This adds seriousness to the matter and strengthen the argument that he is responsible for a heinous crime”, Mallat said.
The court convened recently to proceed with the hearing but adjourned until November 28, 2001 to allow Sharon’s new legal team, headed by Adrien Masset, time to study the case.
Magistrate Patrick Collignon agreed to open an investigation into Sharon in July, after finding that two complaints filed against the Israeli leader for his role in the killings might warrant prosecution.
But in September Collignon asked an appeal court to decide if he had jurisdiction in the case after Hirsch questioned the Belgian law’s legality.
Among Hirsch’s arguments was that Sharon had immunity as a head of government and that the case had already been considered by the 1983 Kahan Commission. The commission which only investigated the circumstances surrounding the massacre, found Sharon “personally responsible” for Sabra and Shatila killings.
If Collignon decides to press charges, Sharon could be arrested if he enters Belgium or any country that has an extradition treaty with Brussels.
A 1993 Belgian law that gives courts jurisdiction over violations of the Geneva war crimes convention allows claimants to pursue cases against foreigners suspected of war crimes no matter where they occurred.
Amnesty said that it supported the Belgian “universal jurisdiction” law and that it should be extended throughout the European Union.
Sharon has tried to present the case against him as a national rather than a personal question. “By attacking me personally they are looking to attack Israel and the Jewish people. But we will stop it”, Sharon declared.
In a statement signed by Chibli Mallat, Michael Veraeght and Duc Walleyn, the three lawyers representing the massacre survivors described Hirsch’s position as “confusing and ill-founded”.
The lawyers argued that the Kahan Commission “has no judicial powers, and there were no judicial decision taken in Israel, or anywhere else (to prosecute those responsible for the massacre)”. They added that, since Sharon was not judged in court, the legal rule that a suspect cannot be charged twice for the same crime “does not apply”.
The three lawyers also refuted Hirsh’s allegations that the commission did not find any evidence that Sharon was responsible for the massacre. They said that the commission “did not declare Sharon’s innocence.
