VZCZCXRO5066
OO RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHLZ
DE RUEHFT #1817/01 1620733
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 100733Z JUN 08
FM AMCONSUL FRANKFURT
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 6853
INFO RUCNFRG/FRG COLLECTIVE IMMEDIATE
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
RUEHSA/AMEMBASSY PRETORIA IMMEDIATE 1593
RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD IMMEDIATE 4308
RUEHTRO/AMEMBASSY TRIPOLI IMMEDIATE
RUEHKL/AMEMBASSY KUALA LUMPUR IMMEDIATE 0235

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 FRANKFURT 001817 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR T, EUR, ISN, SCA, AF, EAP 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PARM MNUC PREL KNNP ETTC KJUS KCRM PREL GM
SUBJECT: TRIAL OF A.Q. KHAN LINKED DEFENDANT GOTTHARD LERCH RESUMES 
 
REF: A. 07 BERLIN 2239 
     ¶B. 06 BERLIN 2194 
     ¶C. 06 BERLIN 1170 
 
FRANKFURT 00001817  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
Sensitive but unclassified; not for internet distribution. 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  On June 5, the 4th Senate of the Higher Regional 
Court (a federal court) in Stuttgart re-opened the trial of Gotthard 
Lerch, a German engineer allegedly linked to the A.Q. Khan nuclear 
proliferation network.  Lerch is accused of aiding the Libyan 
government in its efforts to acquire nuclear weapons technology. 
The trial was suspended in July 2006 by a Mannheim district 
(state-level) court because of extradition issues and unresolved 
requests for judicial assistance from Switzerland, Malaysia, 
Liechtenstein, and South Africa.  On the opening day of the trial in 
Stuttgart, the defense demanded to have the case moved back to 
Mannheim, calling the acceptance of the case by the Stuttgart Higher 
Regional Court "illegal" and the court's authority "objectively 
arbitrary."  The trial is expected to last through January 2009. 
Some media outlets speculate that the case could be dismissed due to 
lingering problems with evidence and other legal complications.  END 
SUMMARY. 
 
New Trial - Old Strategy 
------------------------ 
¶2. (SBU) On the opening day of the trial, defense attorneys 
Gottfried Reims and Christof Pueschel filed a motion arguing that 
the decision to move the trial to Stuttgart was "illegal" and 
claiming that the Higher Regional Court was not the competent 
authority.  [NOTE:  In 2006, the Federal Prosecutor's office in 
Karlsruhe formally petitioned to have the case reassigned from the 
Mannheim district court to the Stuttgart court as the result of 
changes in German procedural rules that give regional (federal) 
courts jurisdiction over violations of the Foreign Trade and 
Payments Act (FTPA) and War Weapons Control Act (WWCA).  END NOTE.] 
Before Wolfgang Siegmund of the Federal Prosecutor's Office could 
read the indictment, the defense requested that the case be moved 
back to the Mannheim court.  Lerch's attorneys also made clear that 
their client will not testify in the trial.  In a second motion, 
both attorneys requested to have the complete trial taped, something 
the prosecution opposes.  The judge will rule on the motions at the 
next session on June 12. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Lerch's attorneys appear to be pursuing the same strategy 
they employed in 2006, when the case against Lerch was still under 
the jurisdiction of the Mannheim court.  Lerch was released 
following fourteen months of pretrial detention when the Mannheim 
court suspended the trial in July 2006.  The court cited missing 
files and concerns over Germany's extradition law.  At that time, 
his lawyers argued that the Mannheim court did not have the legal 
competence to conduct the trial and insisted it be moved to a 
specialized court in Konstanz.  This time, prosecutors argued that 
the procedural changes that allow the Federal Prosecutor's Office to 
take on cases of special importance -- including violations of the 
FTPA and WWCA -- were adopted specifically for the Lerch case, a 
charge which the prosecution staunchly denies.  The judge will rule 
on both motions this week.  Given that the procedural changes were 
institutionalized in the so-called "Second Judicial Modernization 
Law," the defense argument appears to have a weak legal basis for 
challenging the Stuttgart court's authority. 
 
Lerch: A Danger to Germany's National Security? 
--------------------------------------------- -- 
 
¶4. (SBU) Lerch stands accused of violating both the FTPA and the 
WWCA.  The sixty-five year old engineer currently lives in 
Switzerland, but appeared in court on the first day of the trial. 
The prosecution argues that he endangered the external security of 
the Federal Republic of Germany, jeopardized international peace, 
and damaged Germany's international reputation.  Lerch is accused of 
hiring a friend in South Africa to produce a system of tubing for a 
Libyan enrichment facility designed to produce weapons-grade 
uranium.  Lerch is alleged to have worked with Pakistani nuclear 
scientist Abdul Quader Kahn.  Prosecutors claim he received 55 
million German marks for his work. 
 
¶5. (SBU) Three experts on nuclear technology were present at the 
opening and will testify in the trial.  One of the three, Horst 
Puettner, originally examined material found and confiscated by U.S. 
forces on a German cargo ship (BBC China) bound for Libya in 2003. 
The detention of the ship in 2003 was followed a short time later by 
the Libyan government's announcement that it would abandon its 
 
FRANKFURT 00001817  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
nuclear program.  In a written statement, Puettner concluded that 
the materials found on the ship were intended for the production of 
nuclear weapons. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Several media sources have speculated that the case will be 
dismissed due to a lack of evidence.  Newspapers have reported 
rumors that the Swiss government destroyed key files in the case at 
the request of the U.S. government.  According to the papers, the 
CIA worked with Lerch and his associates to gain information on 
Libya's nuclear program and, in return, helped Lerch and his 
associates evade prosecution. 
 
¶7. (SBU) COMMENT:  The opening of the trial revealed that Lerch's 
attorneys plan to use similar tactics as in earlier phases of the 
trial, once again employing legal nuances to question the courts 
authority.  Both the defense and the prosecution expect the trial to 
last at least eighteen months.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶8. (U) This cable was coordinated with Embassy Berlin. 
 
POWELL