Stéphane HESSEL

Background

Mr. Stéphane Hessel, an ambassador and a member of the higher authority on audio-visual communication in France,¹ testified as an expert witness in Case 001 concerning concepts of “forgiveness”² and international criminal justice.³ He served as a member of the “French resistance”, and was arrested by the Gestapo and deported to “concentration camps”.⁴ He participated in drafting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948⁵ and witnessed “activities” of the Nuremberg Trials.⁶

The Trial Chamber relied on Hessel’s testimony regarding ‘reconciliation’ in determining Kaing Guek Eav’s (alias Duch) cooperation with the court as a mitigation factor since the cooperation also contributes to the “national reconciliation”.⁷

The concepts of ‘forgiveness’, and ‘international criminal justice’ including reconciliation

Hessel testified that ‘forgiveness’ can only apply to those who have been victims of the “horrific acts”.⁸ After handing down the judgement, it is their rights to whether reject ‘forgiveness’, but the judgement is for them to consider that it would enable them to cope with their pain and resume friendly contact with “compatriots” just like how the Nuremberg Trials made it possible for the “victors” and “vanquished” of World War II.⁹ It does not mean victims would forgive the accused when the accused pleads guilty.¹⁰ However, it may arouse the consideration depending on the ‘past situations’ and “possible future” of the accused, and other judges’ reasoning.¹¹

Hessel considered that international criminal justice should play a “constructive role” in bringing public awareness, upholding non-impunity and having ‘comparable effect’ with other countries that have truth and reconciliation.¹² In his view, there can be existence of ‘impunity’ when there is removal of other accused through judgments or judicial decisions.¹³ When there is impunity, reconciliation is not considered;¹⁴ reconciliation does not mean forgiveness, but contributes to building peace for a nation,¹⁵ and can be effective when the truth exists.¹⁶ The reconciliation processes starts with the truth.¹⁷

Hessel gave the example of Albert Speer who was tried by Nuremberg Trials, who he claims benefited at sentencing having assured the judges that he understood the importance of holding accountable those responsible for the conditions and events at the camps.¹⁸ Hassel did however, qualify this by noting that sentence mitigation should not apply to those who only admit guilt but have not shown that they tried to oppose “instructions” on committing deadly crimes.¹⁹

Videos

Testimony
Date	Written record of proceedings	Transcript number
15/September/2009	E1/75	E1/75.1

Relevant documents
Document title Khmer	Document title English	Document title French	Document D number	Document E3 number
None