Thursday, 13 May 2010 - Two Defence witnesses remain before Lubanga´s lawyers ask to stop the trial

The eighteenth Defense witness completed his testimony on Tuesday and concluded an intriguing story of stolen identities. Mr. Adel Adubango, the current headmaster of the school in Mahagi that the two former UPC child soldiers, Tonyfwa Urochi (Defence Witness 32) and Jean Paul Bejijo Chonga (Defence Witness 33), attended, received a telephone call that revealed some clues.

According to Lubanga´s lawyers, the "so-called" child soldiers who testified as victims last January (Witness 225 and Witness 229) used false names: the identities of Tonyfwa and Jean Paul were stolen by an individual, presumably the former head teacher of the pupils and the first participating victim to give evidence, "Mr. P" (Witness 270).

Mr. Adubango was the key in uncovering "Mr. P"´s alleged plot. On 4^th November 2009, the headmaster of the Beiju Institute received an unexpected visitor. It was Dieudonné Mbuna, the Defence investigator. He wanted to consult some school reports and make some photocopies of the originals. "On the 5^th he came back with the originals and he asked me to authenticate the copies," says Mr. Adubango. "[The] next day I received a telephone call. It was ´Mr. P.´ He said: ´I have just heard you have collaborated with somebody.´ He asked me who that person was and what he asked for. Then he asked me whether the documents contained the names of Tonyfwa Urochi and Jean Paul Bejijo Chonga."

Mr. Adubango, disconcerted, checked the documents he had given to the Defence investigator. "One week after, ´Mr. P´ called me again to know if I had found those names," says Adubango. "I said 'yes.' He laughed and then said: ´This is a quite serious situation.´ I obviously wondered about this. I didn´t know what the problem was.

Following the conclusion of Mr. Adubango´s testimony, there are two Defence witnesses left before Lubanga´s lawyers ask the Chamber to stop the case on the basis of abuse of process.

The next Defence witnesses to testify are Witness 297 and Witness 29.

Witness 29 brings 20 kilograms of documents to the Hague - original school reports that the Defence has never seen before. It is evidence collected by the witness himself and that must be in his custody since Witness 29 must return to DRC with the originals. The Defence therefore must quickly scan all the documents and review the pieces with Witness 29 before he testifies. The Chamber believes that the meeting between the Defence and the witness will be of an investigative nature and therefore does not imply any violation of the "witness proofing" ban. This process, prohibited by the ICC judges, consists of the reading through of the witness statement to prepare the witness for questions he might be asked.

To gain time to work on Witness 29´s evidence, the Defence will first call Witness 297, a child soldier and former Prosecution witness. The youngster could not testify in court because of health problems and he is now called by Lubanga´s lawyers. "His testimony, entirely or in part, fits the submissions of the Defence," says Mr. Biju-Duval. Witness 297, although he was scheduled to testify against Thomas Lubanga, had given a statement contrary to the Prosecution's position on the use of intermediaries.

As a result, the Prosecution also shows its interest in questioning Witness 297 and adds that the witness still "provides incriminating information given that he maintains that he was a UPC child soldier." Considering part of Witness 297´s evidence is opposed to the Prosecution's case, the Prosecutor is allowed to ask the witness non-neutral questions.

Witness 297 will be the second Prosecution witness to be subjected to leading questions by the participants. Last March, a "hostile witness," Prosecution Witness 15, took the stand for the second time after testifying that he had lied to ICC investigators. When he gave evidence in court for the first time in June 2009, Witness 15 further implicated an OTP intermediary who he claimed was involved in the fabrication of lies.

Witness 297 will first be examined by the Prosecution as the Chamber ruled that "the fairest approach is for him to remain as he would have been if he had been called by the Prosecution, namely someone who is questioned by the Office of the Prosecutor first."

Witness 297 will begin his testimony on Monday 17.