Swift Hints by Prosecution to Open Door for Potential Surprises during Trials

The Hague - Naharnet Feature

It will be difficult on Hizbullah and its supporters to go on with the theory that Israel violated the telephone networks in Lebanon in an attempt to alter the data and point the accusation in the murder of ex-Prime Minister Rafik Hariri away from the party's members and its prominent leaders after the extensive demonstration by Prosecution counsel Graeme Cameron during the opening session of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon trials in The Hague.

The issue isn't linked to one cellular phone or a particular number of them but with the networks of tens of phone, which the prosecution proved were moving according to a specific mechanism in specified geographical areas and specific protocols to ensure the secrecy of the movement.

Although the team of the prosecution rejects to talk to the media and reveal the remaining information, observers close to the investigation and the indictment pointed out that Hizbullah is seeking to admit that the party's ranks were breached en-mass, which allowed Israel to detect the secret numbers used by tens of its prominent and security members and modified the data afterward to prove the theory of spatial correlation, which was proved by the prosecution.

The observers wonder if Hizbullah's theory concerning the Israeli breach of the Lebanese telecom networks was true then what would those who are defending the party justify the political association between the data of tailing Hariri and his notable stances that his enemies, in Lebanon and their allies in the region, didn't favor. Did Israel alter the reality of the political course that Lebanon passed through in 2004 and 2005?

The observers continue that the prosecution identified the owners of the phone numbers through various methods including submitting their numbers in bank transactions, administration records, vehicles registration papers and even through phone calls with “girlfriends” and old companions.

Despite the extensive explanation during the opening session regarding the phone calls, observers noticed that the prosecution focused on several other indications that it will endorse throughout the trials, most significant:

1- The type of explosives used in assassinating Hariri and his companions.

After reports said that C4 was used in the bombing, the prosecution stressed that the matter used was explosive material RDX. Which poses a question whether this kind of material would point the accusation finger towards a specific side based on the fact that it has ties with those who are manufacturing this type of explosives or own it?

2- A number of suspect that haven't been revealed yet, which the prosecution is calling them by numbers, used more than one cellular phone that were used plotting the crime, which indicates that “leadership” sides owned a phone that managed each of the networks and direct them. The matter requires the usage of one cellphone for each network by a “leader” to contact its group without making the five networks overlap.

3- The counterfeit report that claimed responsibility for the crime would allow opening new testimonies in the investigation file linked to phone calls received by several media outlets from a prominent security official to demand the broadcasting of the video recording that showed “Abu Adas” claiming responsibility for the assassination.

4- Linking between trailing of Hariri and his stances and specific decisions taken by him indicates that there was a political decision to assassinate him, prompting the groups that tracked him to implement the decision.

The implicit reference by the prosecution could open wide doors in the upcoming stages that aim at identifying the side that issued the assassination order that will lead, if they were successful, to transferring the responsibility to the “president,” who in turn is responsible for the actions of his followers.