Decision to Assign Counsel to Charles Ghankay Taylor (SCSL-03-
Jurisdiction: Sierra Leone (international criminal tribunal jurisdiction)
Court: Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone (RSCSL), Court Management (Freetown)
Decision Maker: Defence Legal Officer, RSCSL (Claire Carlton-Hanciles)
Date of Decision: 25 April 2014 (received by Court Management, The Hague, 28 April 2014)
Case Number: SCSL 1 of 2003 (Taylor)
Decision Reference: SCSL-03-01-ES
Legal Area(s): International Criminal Procedure, Right to Counsel, Post conviction representation, Sentence enforcement
Tags: assignment of counsel; defence legal officer; Rule 45; directive on assignment of counsel; residual special court; post conviction; sentence enforcement; power of attorney
Catchwords (Headnote Summary)
International criminal procedure, residual tribunal, assignment of counsel, post conviction representation, sentence enforcement, right to counsel, eligibility of counsel under Rule 45, directive on assignment of counsel, interests of justice, counsel at no cost to tribunal.
Procedural Posture
This was an administrative, post conviction decision of the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone assigning counsel to a convicted person. The decision was issued by the Defence Legal Officer pursuant to the tribunal’s constitutive instruments and its Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
Facts of the Case
Charles Ghankay Taylor had completed both trial and appeal proceedings before the Special Court for Sierra Leone and was serving his sentence in the United Kingdom.
Mr Taylor wished to be represented in matters relating to his transfer to serve his sentence (and related filings) and sought to appoint Mr John Jones QC.
Mr Taylor executed a power of attorney appointing Mr John Jones QC and requesting him to act for Mr Taylor before the Residual Special Court and in filings connected to sentence enforcement.
The Defence Legal Officer considered the applicable legal framework and concluded that Mr John Jones QC met the requirements for assignment of counsel under Rule 45, and had indicated willingness to represent Mr Taylor at no cost to the RSCSL.
Issues for Determination
Power to assign counsel: Whether, under the Statute of the RSCSL, the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and the Directive on Assignment of Counsel, the Defence Legal Officer could assign counsel to represent a convicted person in the interests of justice.
Eligibility of proposed counsel: Whether Mr John Jones QC met the requirements for assignment of counsel under Rule 45.
Interests of justice and resources: Whether it was appropriate to direct the assignment where counsel would represent the convicted person at no cost to the RSCSL.
Positions (as reflected in the decision)
Because this instrument is framed as a set of formal recitals followed by a directive, it does not record adversarial submissions from opposing parties. The decision reflects:
Mr Taylor’s desire to appoint Mr John Jones QC, evidenced by a power of attorney.
Mr John Jones QC’s indicated willingness to represent Mr Taylor at no cost to the RSCSL.
Authorities Cited in the Decision
The decision expressly relied on:
Statute of the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone, Article 23.
Rules of Procedure and Evidence (RSCSL), as amended 4 December 2013, including Rule 45.
Directive on the Assignment of Counsel of the Special Court, adopted by the Registrar on 1 October 2003, including Article 13.
Decision / Order
The Defence Legal Officer directed the assignment of Mr John Jones QC as counsel to Mr Charles Ghankay Taylor, effective 25 April 2014.
Legal Reasoning
The decision proceeds by identifying and applying the governing framework for assignment of counsel:
Source of authority: The Defence Legal Officer grounded the power to assign counsel in the Statute of the RSCSL (Article 23), the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (including Rule 45), and the Directive on the Assignment of Counsel (including Article 13).
Context and necessity: The decision recorded that Mr Taylor, then in the United Kingdom for sentence enforcement following completion of trial and appeal, wished to be represented in matters connected to sentence enforcement and filings before the RSCSL.
Eligibility under Rule 45: The Defence Legal Officer recorded a finding that Mr John Jones QC met the requirements for assignment of counsel under Rule 45.
Interests of justice and cost: A further consideration was that Mr John Jones QC was willing to represent Mr Taylor at no cost to the RSCSL, supporting the appropriateness of the assignment.
Given these findings and considerations, the Defence Legal Officer issued the direction assigning counsel.
Key Quotations from the Decision
“HEREBY DIRECTS the assignment of Mr. John Jones QC as Counsel”.
“Mr. John Jones QC meets the requirements for assignment of Counsel … in Rule 45”.
“willingness to represent Mr. Taylor at no cost”.
Ratio Decidendi
Where a convicted person before the RSCSL seeks representation on post conviction matters (including sentence enforcement), and the proposed counsel meets the eligibility requirements under Rule 45 and is willing to act, the Defence Legal Officer may, in the interests of justice and pursuant to the tribunal’s governing instruments, direct the assignment of that counsel.
Obiter Dicta
No substantive obiter observations were recorded. The instrument is confined to recitals of authority and factual considerations, followed by a directive.
Final Orders / Reliefs Granted
Assignment of counsel to Mr Taylor: Granted.
Effective date: 25 April 2014.
No conditions recorded (for example, security or reporting conditions), and no costs order recorded.
Commentary / Practice Note
1. Post conviction representation in a residual mechanism
Residual mechanisms are often tasked with limited, ongoing functions after the closure of a tribunal, including sentence enforcement and related issues. This decision illustrates that the RSCSL maintained a structured system for ensuring representation where justice required it.
2. Private appointment, formal assignment, and tribunal regulation
The decision reflects a hybrid arrangement: Mr Taylor sought to appoint a named lawyer via power of attorney, while the RSCSL applied its own procedural framework (Rule 45 and the Directive) to formally assign counsel. This preserves tribunal oversight and ensures that counsel meet minimum qualifications and ethical requirements.
3. The role of cost in access to representation
The explicit recital that counsel would act at no cost to the RSCSL indicates that resource considerations may be relevant to how residual mechanisms facilitate representation, without displacing the primary test, namely, interests of justice.
Case Laws and Other Laws Referred to in the Attachment
A. Case law
None cited .
B. Statutes, rules, directives, and other legal instruments
Statute of the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone, Article 23.
Rules of Procedure and Evidence (RSCSL), as amended 4 December 2013, including Rule 45.
Directive on the Assignment of Counsel of the Special Court, adopted by the Registrar on 1 October 2003, including Article 13.
Sample Legal Questions (for study)
Multiple Choice Questions
The decision to assign counsel to Mr Taylor was issued by:
A. Trial Chamber of the SCSL
B. Appeals Chamber of the SCSL
C. Defence Legal Officer of the RSCSL
D. Registrar of the SCSL
The eligibility requirement for assignment of counsel was assessed under:
A. Rule 45 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
B. Rule 12 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
C. Rule 99 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence
D. Article 1 of the Statute only
The assignment was connected to which procedural context?
A. Pre trial confirmation of charges
B. Trial on the merits
C. Appeal against conviction
D. Post conviction matters, including sentence enforcement
Which factor supported the appropriateness of the assignment?
A. Counsel would be paid from the RSCSL legal aid budget
B. Counsel indicated willingness to act at no cost to the RSCSL
C. The Prosecutor requested assignment
D. The Defence sought to delay enforcement
The assignment was effective as of:
A. 1 October 2003
B. 4 December 2013
C. 25 April 2014
D. 28 April 2014
Answers
C
A
D
B
C
Essay Questions
Discuss the function of residual mechanisms in international criminal justice and explain how counsel assignment frameworks (Rule based eligibility and directives) safeguard fairness post conviction.
Analyse the relationship between a convicted person’s private choice of counsel (via power of attorney) and the tribunal’s formal assignment system, using this decision as an example.