From the UN and beyond, the message after the conviction of Charles Taylor has been the same: The days of impunity of tyrants around the world are now numbered. Taylor was found guilty on 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for helping Sierra Leone rebels in their bloody rampage during the nation's 11-year civil war that ended with more than 50,000 dead. The former Liberian president has thus become the first head of state since World War II to be convicted by an international war crimes court, and the first African leader to stand trial for war crimes. Perhaps just as important as the superlatives, the verdict is a watershed moment which signals that being in the highest position of power is no longer a guarantee of immunity. Murderous heads of state are now accountable for what they do and no person, no matter how powerful, is above the law. However, prosecuting Taylor proved how hard it is to bring leaders with blood on their hands to justice. Taylor was not found guilty of either ordering or planning the atrocities in Sierra Leone, and his more flagrant crimes, committed in his home country Liberia, were ignored entirely by the special court. The length of the Taylor trial – seven years – was also unjustifiable, delaying justice for his victims, dulling the impact of the case and increasing its financial costs. War crimes trials of leaders in general have a mediocre record at best. Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic was tried by an international tribunal but died before a judgment was issued. Almost the same thing happened to Muammar Gaddafi. He was indicted with crimes against humanity but was killed by Libyan rebel fighters before he could face a court of law. The International Criminal Court has charges of crimes against humanity pending against Laurent Gbagbo, the former Ivory Coast president. Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad's prospects of being indicted appear remote. Syria does not recognize the ICC, meaning prosecutors there cannot intervene unless the Security Council asks them to. Russia and China would likely veto any such move. In one success story, the UN's Yugoslav war crimes tribunal is close to wrapping up its case against former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic. Taylor's sentencing may not be the ideal fairy tale ending. He may appeal the verdict, and there is no death penalty in international criminal law. And champions of international justice will highlight that despite the unquestionable importance of prosecuting a tyrannical head of state, it may not genuinely help victims of mass crimes. The verdicts are of no particular help to those who suffered except for the psychological satisfaction of closure, However, Taylor's trial was conducted in a fair and thorough international procedure and the verdict is a mortal blow for him and a victory for his victims, and it could perhaps act as a deterrent and prevent the rise of another tyrant. Above all, it is affirmation that with leadership comes not just power and authority but also responsibility and accountability. __
