VZCZCXYZ0002
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHKH #1002/01 2441338
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 011338Z SEP 09
FM AMEMBASSY KHARTOUM
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4345
RHMFIUU/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHINGTON DC
RHMFIUU/FBI WASHINGTON DC 0085

UNCLAS KHARTOUM 001002 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DOJ FOR NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION 
DEPT FOR M, P, L, AF, DS, S/USSES, CA AND S/CT 
DEPT FOR USAID 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ASEC PTER PGOV SU
SUBJECT:  APPEALS COURT DECISION OF GRANVILLE/ABBAS MURDER TRIAL 
 
¶1. (U) SUMMARY: On July 22, 2009, the Khartoum Court of Appeals 
issued its decision regarding the defendants' appeal of the 
Granville/Abbas murder trial.  The Court affirmed the verdicts of 
the four men convicted of murder by the trial court.  The Court 
overturned the weapons-related convictions of two of the four men 
convicted of murder.  The Court also overturned the weapons-related 
conviction of a fifth man but remanded the case to the trial court 
for consideration of alternative charges.   The Appeals Court noted 
that the Ab"as family has reconsidered their earlier decision to 
request the death penalty and has formally waived their right to 
retribution.  Accordingly, the Appeals Court set aside the death 
penalty and remanded the case to the trial court to solicit the 
position of the Granville family with respect to the death penalty. 
The trial court is scheduled to hold a session on September 15, 
2009, during which it will request that the Granville &amily's 
position be presented to the court.  END SUMMARY 
 
¶2. (U) Following the conviction on June 24, 2009 of the five men 
involved in the January 1, 2008 murders of USAID Officer John 
Granville and FSN driver Abdelrahman Abbas, the defendants appealed 
the trial court decision to the Khartoum Court of Appeals.  In its 
July 22, 2009 decision (Note:  The written decision of the A0peals 
Court was delivered to the Embassy on August 18 and formal 
translation was completed on August 26.  End Note), the Appeals 
Court considered the evidence and arguments provided by the defense 
counsel and confirmed the verdicts of the four men convicted of 
murder, Mohamed Makawi Ibrahim, Abdel Basit Hag El-Hassan Hag 
Mohamed, Muhanad Yousif Mohamed, and Abdel Raouf Abu Zaid Mohamed 
Hamza. 
 
¶3. (U) The appeals court overturned the sentence of the fifth man, 
Morad Abdelrahman Abdullah Al-Sheikh, who had been convicted of a 
weapons-related charge only.  The Appeals Court held that in order 
to be guilty of the particular weapons crime charged, the defendant 
would have had to have been in possession of a firearm at the time 
of the attack.  Because Mr. Al-Sheik was not present at the 
shootings, he could not have been convicted of this weapons charge. 
The Court remanded the case to the trial court so that it could 
consider whether Mr. Al-Sh%ikh should be convicted of crimes related 
to harboring the perpetrators and otherwise providing assistance. 
Although not mentioned in the decision itself, the maximum penalty 
for harboring perpetrators under Sudanese law is five years 
imprisonment.  Mr. Al-Sheik was originally sentenced to two years 
imprisonment, effective beginning January 19, 2008.  Under Sudanese 
law, prisoners receive credit for one-year time served for each 
seven months of good behavior in prison. 
 
¶4. (U) The four men convicted of murder were also convicted by the 
trial court of weapons-related crimes.  The Appeals Court overturned 
the weapons-related verdicts of Mr. Muhanad Mohamed and Mr. Hamza, 
reasoning that these defendants were not in possession of firearms 
at the time of the attack. 
 
¶5. (U) The Appeals Court directed the trial court to consider a more 
severe penalty in the case of Mr. Ibrahim and Mr. Muhanad Mohamed 
with respect to their convictions on document forgery and false 
statement charges. 
 
¶6. (U) The Appeals Court also noted that the Abbas family had 
communicated to the Court its desire not to seek the death penalty 
for the four men convicted of murder.  Some media sources have 
reported that the Abbas family may have accepted compensation from 
the defendants for its decision, a practice that is permitted under 
Sudanese law.  The Appeals Court subsequently set aside the death 
penalty sentence imposed by the trial court and remanded the case to 
the trial court to solicit from the Granville family its intention 
with regard to the imposition of the death penalty.  The Appeals 
Court stated that, prior to sentencing the defendants, the trial 
court should have allowed the Granville family time to appropriately 
present its request for retribution.  The trial court is now 
instructed to receive the appropriately authenticated statement from 
the Granville family. 
 
¶7. (U) Several media sources in both local and international press 
have suggested that the Appeals Court commuted the death penalty of 
the four men convicted of murder without regard to the Granville's 
family sentencing intentions.  The articles do not reflect the fact 
that the Appeals Court has instructed the trial court to solicit 
from the Granville family its' intention with regard to the death 
penalty. 
 
¶8. (U) The next court session has been scheduled for September 15, 
¶2009.  In preparation for that session, USAID/Office of General 
Counsel has been working closely with the Granville family, the U.S. 
Attorney for the Western District of New York and the Granville 
family's Sudanese attorney to have the necessary documents 
authenticated, translated, and delivered to Khartoum for 
presentation to the trial court.  This process is expected to be 
completed prior to September 15. 
 
¶9. (U) Under Sudanese law, the right of retribution belongs to each 
murder victim's family.  Therefore, even if one family waives its 
right to retribution, the court should honor another victim's 
family's request for the death penalty.  A victim's family can 
decide to waive its right to retribution at any point prior to the 
carrying out of the execution.  If both victims' families waive 
their rights to retribution, then the four men convicted of murder 
would be sentenced to imprisonment for up to ten years plus the 
additional penalties of the other crimes for which they were found 
guilty.  Prison sentences may also be pardoned by the President of 
Sudan under Sudanese law.  The President does not have the power to 
pardon defendants who are punished based on a victim's family's 
right to retribution. 
 
¶10. (U) The Appeals Court decision can be appealed to the Supreme 
Court of Sudan for a final decision.  The deadline for making such 
an appeal is 15 days following the trial session currently scheduled 
for September 15. 
 
 
WHITEHEAD