The capture of Charles Taylor should be welcomed, but there are several aspects to the former Liberian leader’s trial that are worrying, notes Tajudeen Abdul Raheem. Chief among these are the way in which the trial allows Liberia, and those complicit in Taylor’s rule, to externalize justice for his crimes.

I have been following the arrest and swift dispersal to the UN Special Court in Sierra-Leone, of the former President of Liberia, Charles Taylor, with mixed feelings. In spite of the tawdry politics surrounding the saga I share the relief of many from Liberia, Sierra-Leone and people of the West African sub region that this gangster of a president was finally caught.

As warlords and rebel opportunism go and their grotesque notoriety and infamy across Africa, Taylor was in a separate class of his own, probably only comparable to the late Jonas Savimbi. He was dubiously even 'luckier' than Savimbi because a nation fatigued by his mendacious war 'rewarded' him with the presidency of the country.

Savimbi 'only' got himself a negotiated vice presidency, after he had lost the popular polls (which he rejected) but pressures were brought to bear on the Angolan government to accommodate his megalomania. This included the ridiculous provision that named him in a special gazette with a compendium of rights and privileges as the 'official leader' of the opposition. All this capitulation to his vanity did not stop him from further conspiring to prolong the war until he finally fell on his sword.

Charles Taylor rode to power on the broken limbs and severed heads of his compatriots. Even as president, Taylor continued his brigandage through murders, smuggling of diamonds, laundering timber, gun running and human trafficking. He basically operated a criminal state infrastructure. But we must be clear that he is not alone, even though he may have been excessive.

The way Charles Taylor was caught just shows again how cowardly these dictators are once they are stripped of their terror infrastructure. It echoes how that other sad sadist, Saddam, was caught in a hole like a frightened rat. Taylor, who had sent so many innocent people to their untimely deaths, was caught trying to run across a border like the common smuggler he was. There was no exchange of fire, no resistance and no act of courage on his part. Even the bags of money that he was carrying and willing to trade for his escape could not help him.

However despite my sharing the relief of many I am not as enthusiastic that the cause of peace in the region will automatically be served by his trial and even conviction. For instance, who is talking about Saddam's trial now? Does it really matter if he is hanged, commits suicide or just rots away in prison?

One needs to be more circumspect and cautious about a one-dimensional definition of justice, which has been tried several times without much success. How long did it take the Hague court to get Milosevik to trial and at the end what happened? Now that he has died without a verdict will his death resolve anything in Serbia?

Since it was established, defendants and their lawyers have bogged down the Sierra-Leone Special Court in procedural matters and deliberate delay tactics, hence not many of those indicted have been convicted. This includes the former militia leader turned defence minister, Hinga Norman. Charles Taylor's comrade in arms, Foday Sankoh, died in prison while awaiting trial. Did his death mean accountability for all the charges against him?

There are other aspects of Taylor's indictment that have always concerned me. He was indicted not for all the atrocities he committed against the people of Liberia but for his foreign misadventures in neighboring countries and especially Sierra-Leone. This has allowed the Liberian political class to externalize the resolution of their own political problems and outsource the search for justice and accountability. Internally he was more or less given impunity. If he had not been indicted for Sierra Leone he would have got away with his atrocities in Liberia. This is typical of most internal settlements in Africa that often reward perpetrators of violence in the name of 'national reconciliation'.

Taylor was not the only beneficiary of national impunity. All other politicians who collaborated with him and the various armed rebel groups for two decades also escaped an accounting for their actions. This is justice by second hand. Since millions of our people already depend on second hand clothes, second hand vehicles, second hand everything, justice coming via second sources is not altogether surprising!

Second hand justice may be better than no justice at all. By this precedent of outsourcing justice many presidents in Africa should not be sitting complacently in their mansions. They may be relatively 'safe' now but justice may catch up with them once they are out of office. For instance, it is now possible that after his third or fourth term, President Museveni could be indicted for the activities of his army or rebel groups he supported, in the DRC. President Omar Al Bashir may never be prosecuted for genocide in Darfur but can be indicted for LRA atrocities in Uganda. Internationally we should be looking at possibilities of Bush and Blair being indicted for their illegal war in Iraq or various French or Belgian leaders being indicted for genocide in Rwanda. Taylor's saga demonstrates that while 'The Strong Man' may intimidate his national compatriots into submissive peace it is possible for him to be tried for regional crimes against humanity.

It is not only Charles Taylor's supporters who will be monitoring this trial keenly. There is a need to widen the trial to include those companies and individuals (arms dealers, diamond dealers etc etc) who aided, abetted and facilitated him and his cohorts for all these years. This will certainly open up a huge Pandora’s Box. Senior elements in the new political establishment, including the president herself, cannot wash themselves clean of previous associations and culpability in Taylor's bloody match to Monrovia from 1989. That is why it is convenient for them to have him tried for his foreign intervention instead of welcoming the opportunity to try him at home.

If Taylor goes for broke and comes clean on his bloody career we might yet get to know those who facilitated his escape from a US prison, after which he went on to build a rebel army which was initially popular. Libya and Burkina-Faso are regularly mentioned as countries that helped him to power, but so did Jerry Rawlings in Ghana and the Late Houphoet-Boigny of Ivory Coast. Who are Charles Taylor's bankers? Where are his billions kept? Where would the blood trail stop?

There are millions crying out for justice but there are powerful interests too that may not want Taylor to face full justice. It is rather too early to be congratulating ourselves that Taylor is behind bars. In spite of all the contradictions and uncertainties, his arrest and impending trial at a symbolic level should warn our leaders that indeed 'no condition is permanent'. Strong men of today may become the weakling cowards of tomorrow. Taylor, Saddam and Milosevik must have once thought of themselves as untouchables, just like some of our presidents who are riding roughshod over the basic rights of their peoples. After Charles Taylor, some of them may be next.

* Dr Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is General-Secretary of the Pan African Movement, Kampala (Uganda) and Co-Director of Justice Africa

* Please send comments to