Taiwan ex-leader on fraud charges

30 June 2011 Last updated at 14:38 GMT Lee Teng-hui has denied the charges of embezzlement Former Taiwanese President Lee Teng-hui has been charged with embezzling $7.79m (?4.8m) of state funds.

Mr Lee is accused of taking the money from a secret diplomatic fund during his 1988-2000 presidency.

Prosecutors say the 88-year-old took money from the National Security Bureau fund to set up a private think tank, of which he became honorary president.

Mr Lee, who was the island's first directly elected leader, has denied taking the money from the bureau.

He is the second former Taiwanese president to be charged with fraud. His successor, Chen Shui-bian, is serving a 17-year sentence for bribery.

'Political ploy'

In a 23-page indictment, the prosecutors allege that Mr Lee and his right-hand man Liu Tai-ying stole public funds and laundered the money through a property fund.

They say that in 1994 Taiwan wanted to donate $10.5m to an unidentified country, as part of the island's policy of so-called cheque-book diplomacy.

The Foreign Ministry did not have enough money, so a loan was provided by the National Security Bureau.

Mr Lee and Mr Liu are accused of siphoning off almost $8m dollars when the loan was repaid.

The BBC's Chris Hogg in Shanghai says Mr Lee is a leading figure in the Taiwanese opposition, and is in favour of the island declaring formal independence from China.

Although Beijing and Taipei have had separate governments since the civil war ended in 1949, the Chinese government still regards Taiwan as a breakaway province.

The party Mr Lee helped form, the Taiwan Solidarity Union, said the indictment was a political ploy by the current President Ma Ying-jeou, who has fostered warmer ties with Beijing.

"This is incredible. President Ma is using this political tactic when his election campaign is at the lowest point," said the union's Huang Kun-hui.

But chief prosecutor Chen Hong-ta insisted there was evidence to prove Mr Lee's guilt.

"Without the president's approval and instruction, no-one could have used this fund, so the defendant's plea is just an excuse," he said.

View the original article here

Wilders cleared of hate charges

23 June 2011 Last updated at 10:34 GMT Geert Wilders said freedom of expression had been at stake Dutch far-right politician Geert Wilders, who described Islam as "fascist", has been acquitted of inciting hatred against Muslims.

Amsterdam judge Marcel van Oosten accepted the Freedom Party leader's statements were directed at Islam and not at Muslim believers.

They were, the judge ruled, "acceptable within the context of public debate".

It is believed the plaintiffs may attempt to make their case before a European court or the UN.

Their lawyer, Ties Prakken, was quoted by Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf as saying they were "deeply disappointed" and believed the right of minorities to be protected against hate speech had been violated.

'Free to speak'

Mr Wilders has compared the Koran to Hitler's Mein Kampf.

Judge van Oosten said that although the bench found remarks by Mr Wilders "gross and denigrating", they had not given rise to hatred.

The verdict was greeted with applause from Mr Wilders' supporters in the public gallery.

Continue reading the main story Lauren Comiteau BBC News, Amsterdam

Supporters of Geert Wilders erupted into applause in the public gallery of the court as presiding judge Marcel van Oosten acquitted the populist politician of all charges of hate speech and discrimination against Muslims.

Judges found that while some of his comments, especially his words about a "tsunami" of immigrants, had been "crude and denigrating", they were legal and a legitimate part of the country's ongoing debate over multi-culturalism.

Mr Wilders called the verdict a victory for free speech and many analysts agree that the scope of debate in this country's culture wars may have just been widened.

Mr Wilders is an enormously popular politician here and the support of his Freedom Party is crucial to the current centre-right government, which is adopting many of his anti-immigrant positions.

With the acquittal, it appears the radical views of Mr Wilders are now more mainstream in a country that for decades was viewed as one of the most liberal and tolerant in the world.

Outside the courtroom, the 47-year-old politician said he was "incredibly happy" with the verdict.

"It's not only an acquittal for me, but a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands," he said.

"Now the good news is that it's also legal to be critical about Islam, to speak publicly in a critical way about Islam and this is something that we need because the Islamisation of our societies is a major problem and a threat to our freedom and I'm allowed to say so."

Members of minority groups who initiated the case had told the trial that Mr Wilders' comments had led to a rise in discrimination and violence against Muslims.

Plaintiffs had been seeking a symbolic one-euro fine. Before the court verdict, they had said they would consider taking their case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Mr Wilders was charged with inciting hatred and discrimination in January 2009, based on anti-Islamic statements he had made in speeches, written articles and in his controversial film Fitna.

His trial began in January 2010, after judges of the court in Amsterdam ruled that the case should be heard - despite a decision by the public prosecutors' office not to pursue it.

Even during the trial, the prosecutors had called for Mr Wilders to be acquitted, saying that while his remarks were offensive they should be part of legitimate political debate.

Although not part of the coalition government, the support of Mr Wilders's Freedom Party (PVV) keeps it in power.

View the original article here

US drops Bin Laden terror charges

17 June 2011 Last updated at 20:11 GMT The bombs at US embassies in Kenya, shown above, and Tanzania, exploded just moments apart US prosecutors have asked a judge to drop terrorism charges against Osama Bin Laden, arguing his killing by US forces last month voids the case.

Bin Laden was indicted in federal court in 1998 in connection with the bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people in August 1998.

In court filings, officials said DNA and facial-recognition technology enabled the US to identify his body.

The al-Qaeda chief was killed in May in a US raid on his home in Pakistan.

Genetic match

In a court filing in New York City, federal prosecutors revealed new details about the process used to identify Bin Laden's body after he was shot dead in a night-time raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

According to the filings, following a firefight the US Navy Seal special forces team collected DNA samples from the body presumed to be Bin Laden's and transported them to a US military base in Afghanistan.

Prosecutors also cited videos seized from Bin Laden's compound as proof of his identity

There, military and CIA technicians matched the sample with DNA collected from "multiple members" of Bin Laden's family.

George Toscas, a counter-terrorism and counter-espionage official in the US justice department, wrote in a filing that the possibility of a mistaken identification stemming from the DNA tests was "approximately one in 11.8 quadrillion".

The US used facial recognition technology comparing facial bone structure, age spots, hair-growth patterns, and the size, shape and relative position of the eyes, ears and nose to known photographs of the al-Qaeda chief, Mr Toscas wrote.

One of Bin Laden's wives, who was present on the third floor of the compound when he was killed, also confirmed his identity.

And finally, Bin Laden's purported successor as al-Qaeda leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, acknowledged he was dead in a recent video address to supporters, prosecutors said.

View the original article here

Mladic shuns 'monstrous' charges

3 June 2011 Last updated at 10:48 GMT Gen Mladic responds to the charges in The Hague

Ex-Bosnian Serb army head Ratko Mladic has made his first appearance at The Hague war crimes tribunal, saying he will not enter a plea to the "monstrous" and "obnoxious" charges.

He is charged with atrocities during the 1992-95 Bosnian war, including the massacre of nearly 8,000 Muslim men and boys in Srebrenica in 1995.

Gen Mladic, who said he was "gravely ill", told the court he had been "defending my people and my country".

He was arrested last week in Serbia.

The tribunal indictment charges him with genocide, persecution, extermination, murder, deportation, inhumane acts, terror, deportation and hostage-taking.

Prosecutors say this was his part in a plot to achieve the "elimination or permanent removal" of Muslims from large parts of Bosnia in pursuit of a Greater Serbia.

As well as Srebrenica, Europe's worst atrocity since World War II, Gen Mladic is also charged over the 44-month siege of the capital Sarajevo from May 1992 in which 10,000 people died.

His lawyer and his family say he is too ill to stand trial but doctors have so far declared him fit to be in court.

'Be patient'

In his first hearing before the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Gen Mladic, 69, was asked if he could understand the proceedings and he confirmed that he could.

Continue reading the main story Chris Morris BBC News, The Hague

There he was - older, balding but instantly recognisable. He saluted as he walked slowly into court wearing a light khaki cap and a grey jacket.

"I am General Ratko Mladic," he said. "I am a gravely ill man and I need time to organise my defence".

He showed only flashes of emotion but occasionally spoke with contempt. He described the charges against him as "obnoxious and monstrous" and entered no plea.

But the chief judge's summary of the indictment was a thesaurus of brutality. In the judge's own words: "Genocide, persecution, murder, extermination, deportation, forcible transfer, torture, rape and plunder."

He gave his name and date of birth, although the date was different from the court records.

Court-appointed Serbian lawyer Aleksandar Aleksic represented Gen Mladic at the hearing. Gen Mladic may choose a permanent counsel for the trial later, or opt to conduct his own defence.

Judge Alphons Orie said the purpose of the hearing was to list the charges against Gen Mladic and ask him for a plea.

Gen Mladic's rights were read out in court, but he said: "I am a gravely ill man and need more time to understand what was read out, so please be patient."

The judge then asked if Gen Mladic had read and understood the indictment against him.

Gen Mladic said he needed at least two months to read the three binders of documents that had been brought to him.

However, Mr Aleksic said he believed his client had understood the indictment.

Gen Mladic then told the judge: "I do not want a single letter or sentence of that indictment to be read out to me."

However, the judge proceeded to read out an annotated version of the charges.

At some points, Gen Mladic shook his head.

John Simpson said the man in the dock was a ''shrunken'' and ''milder'' character

When asked to enter a plea, he said the charges were "monstrous" and he needed more than a month to respond.

If Gen Mladic does not enter a plea within 30 days, the judges will enter pleas of not guilty on his behalf.

After a brief recess, the hearing moved into private session so Gen Mladic could express concerns about his health.

Then as the hearing ended, Gen Mladic said: "I defended my people, my country... now I am defending myself. I just have to say that I want to live to see that I am a free man."

He added: "I don't want to be helped to walk as if I were some blind cripple. If I want help, I'll ask for it."

BBC world affairs editor John Simpson, in the courtroom, said Gen Mladic had looked over at him and given a mocking salute.

At one point, one of the Srebrenica widows had caught Gen Mladic's eye and made a throat-cutting gesture, to which he smiled, adds our correspondent.

A new hearing was set for 4 July.

'Still searching'

Relatives of some of the victims of the war gathered outside the courtroom awaiting Gen Mladic's arrival.

Continue reading the main story Counts 1/2: Genocide of Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats in Bosnia-Hercegovina and SrebrenicaCount 3: PersecutionsCounts 4/5/6: Extermination and murderCounts 7/8: Deportation and inhumane actsCounts 9/10: Terror and unlawful attacksCount 11: Taking of UN hostagesMunira Subasic, whose son and husband died in Srebrenica, told Reuters: "In 1995 I begged him to let my son go. He listened to me and promised to let him go. I trusted him at that moment.

"Sixteen years later, I am still searching for my son's bones."

Gen Mladic had earlier been examined by doctors in the medical facility of the detention unit at The Hague after arriving on Tuesday night.

On Thursday, Mr Aleksic said of his client: "He has not had proper healthcare for years and his condition is not good."

Also on Thursday, Mr Saljic said Gen Mladic had been treated for cancer two years ago at a Belgrade hospital.

Mr Saljic has previously been quoted as saying by Serbian media that his client had suffered three strokes and two heart attacks, was too ill to be sent to The Hague and would not live to the end of a trial.

One lawyer representing victims, Axel Hageldoorn, told Associated Press there was concern that "he is too sick to follow the trial to its end and there will be no verdict".

Former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic died of a heart attack at The Hague in 2006, four years into his own genocide trial.

The former Yugoslavia was a Socialist state created after German occupation in World War II and a bitter civil war. A federation of six republics, it brought together Serbs, Croats, Bosnian Muslims, Albanians, Slovenes and others under a comparatively relaxed communist regime. Tensions between these groups were successfully suppressed under the leadership of President Tito. After Tito's death in 1980, tensions re-emerged. Calls for more autonomy within Yugoslavia by nationalist groups led in 1991 to declarations of independence in Croatia and Slovenia. The Serb-dominated Yugoslav army lashed out, first in Slovenia and then in Croatia. Thousands were killed in the latter conflict which was paused in 1992 under a UN-monitored ceasefire. Bosnia, with a complex mix of Serbs, Muslims and Croats, was next to try for independence. Bosnia's Serbs, backed by Serbs elsewhere in Yugoslavia, resisted. Under leader Radovan Karadzic, they threatened bloodshed if Bosnia's Muslims and Croats - who outnumbered Serbs - broke away. Despite European blessing for the move in a 1992 referendum, war came fast. Yugoslav army units, withdrawn from Croatia and renamed the Bosnian Serb Army, carved out a huge swathe of Serb-dominated territory. Over a million Bosnian Muslims and Croats were driven from their homes in ethnic cleansing. Serbs suffered too. The capital Sarajevo was besieged and shelled. UN peacekeepers, brought in to quell the fighting, were seen as ineffective. International peace efforts to stop the war failed, the UN was humiliated and over 100,000 died. The war ended in 1995 after NATO bombed the Bosnian Serbs and Muslim and Croat armies made gains on the ground. A US-brokered peace divided Bosnia into two self-governing entities, a Bosnian Serb republic and a Muslim-Croat federation lightly bound by a central government. In August 1995 the Croatian army stormed areas in Croatia under Serb control prompting thousands to flee. Soon Croatia and Bosnia were fully independent. Slovenia and Macedonia had already gone. Montenegro left later. In 1999 Kosovo's ethnic Albanians fought Serbs in another brutal war to gain independence. Serbia ended the conflict beaten, battered and alone.BACK {current} of {total} NEXT

View the original article here

IMF head denied bail on sex charges

16 May 2011 Last updated at 18:12 GMT Mr Strauss-Kahn denies the allegations against him

A court in New York has remanded IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn in custody on charges of sexual assault.

The judge said Mr Strauss-Kahn, 62, is a flight risk. He was arrested on Saturday after boarding a plane, and accused of trying to rape a hotel maid.

Mr Strauss-Kahn, who had been seen as a front-runner in France's presidential election in 2012, denies the charges.

His lawyer expressed disappointment at bail being denied, but said his client would be exonerated.

"This battle has just begun," defence lawyer Benjamin Brafman told the court.

Prosecutors told the court it was not the first time Mr Strauss-Kahn had been involved in such an incident and argued he had been arrested attempting to flee the country.

Defence lawyer Benjamin Brafman contested this, saying the defendant had not tried to flee the scene and was actually rushing for a lunch appointment.

Continue reading the main story

When I hear your client was at JFK airport about to board a flight, that raises some concerns”

End Quote Judge Melissa Jackson He added that Mr Strauss-Kahn later called the hotel to say he was at the airport and had left a mobile phone in his room.

'Concerns'

However Judge Melissa Jackson denied the defence's offer to post $1m (?617,000) bail and agree to stay with his daughter in New York until the next hearing on Friday.

"When I hear your client was at JFK airport about to board a flight, that raises some concerns," Ms Jackson said.

The charges relate to an alleged assault at the Times Square Sofitel hotel in New York.

According to the New York Police Department, a 32-year-old maid told officers that when she entered his suite on Saturday afternoon, Mr Strauss-Kahn emerged from the bathroom naked, chased her and sexually assaulted her.

The woman was able to break free and alert the authorities, a NYPD spokesman added.

Later on Saturday Mr Strauss-Kahn was detained on board an Air France flight at New York's John F Kennedy airport minutes before take-off.

The IMF chief underwent medical examinations on Sunday. Police were looking for scratches or any other evidence of his alleged assault.

He was later charged with a "criminal sexual act, unlawful imprisonment and attempted rape". Police say the maid formally identified him in a line-up.

'Thunderbolt'

Until he was arrested, Mr Strauss-Kahn was considered a favourite to become the Socialist candidate for the French presidency next year.

Continue reading the main story Michelle Fleury BBC News, New York

On a rain-soaked Monday morning, the pavements outside the courthouse were blocked by reporters and cameras all waiting to catch a glimpse of this particularly high-profile defendant.

Dominique Strauss-Kahn was brought from a holding cell to the courtroom looking pensive in a black overcoat. Cameramen and photographers jostled to try to capture an image of the IMF head and French presidential hopeful.

But instead it was his New York lawyer who spoke to the waiting media after the judge said Mr Strauss-Kahn must remain in jail. Benjamin Brafman is well-known in legal circles in the US. His past clients have included other famous figures such as Michael Jackson and Sean P Diddy.

When Mr Brafman emerged he told reporters that the battle had only just begun.

Opinion polls gave him a good chance of defeating President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Socialist party president Martine Aubry described his arrest as a "thunderbolt" but called for Mr Strauss-Kahn to be presumed innocent.

Mr Strauss-Kahn's wife, French TV personality Anne Sinclair, has also protested his innocence.

Meanwhile, another allegation against Mr Strauss-Kahn has emerged. A French writer says she may file a complaint for an alleged sexual assault in 2002.

Tristane Banon, 31, says Mr Strauss-Kahn tried to rape her when she went to interview him for a book she was writing.

"We're planning to make a complaint," Ms Banon's lawyer told AFP news agency. Mr Strauss-Kahn's lawyers have so far not responded to the allegation.

The European Union says the scandal should not affect bail-outs for eurozone countries.

The IMF has played a central role in organising rescue packages for the troubled economies of Portugal and Greece, and Mr Strauss-Kahn had been due to attend an EU finance ministers' meeting in Brussels to discuss the bail-outs.

The BBC's Chris Morris in Brussels says he has gained the trust of countries in Europe which are giving financial assistance, and those which are receiving it.

View the original article here