This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The article needs to be updated. For example, the section on Charles Taylor says that the defense is scheduled to start in June 2009. It is almost January 2011, so that section is almost 1 1/2 years outdated. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
This has now been updated to reflect the resting of the Defense on 12 November 2010 and the fact that the Trial Chamber is now considering the final verdict. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Sentence that was typed about Koroma's alleged death did not state the claim was confirmed, but that people believed it was true. This sentence has merit and should be included, because they could eventually either find his body or drop him as a fugitive if they find enough to be convinced he was murdered. The prosecution have been trying Charles Taylor for this alleged murder too.JoetheMoe25 (talk) 14:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Taylor was extradited to the Special Court following a request to this effect by the Liberian Government. He was immediately turned over to the Special Court for trial.
This sentence makes little sense. Our article on Taylor suggests he was sent to Liberia on their request (but not actually extradited since there was no extradition agreement and what exacty they did isn't explained but I presume he had no intrinsic right to be in Nigeria so they could simply decide they no longer were going to allow him to stay anymore and deport him), handed over to the UN and then flown to the special court by the UN which makes more sense but it isn't sourced either so I'm reluctant to copy it here. Nil Einne (talk) 10:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Feel free to change it. THe article was quite subpar until today .
This removes content from IP editors as per the edit summary. Academic and RS reactions are notable (which was TWICE removed by the IP because he doesnt seem to like the outcome per IDONTLIKEIT) on the basis that "There is no consensus that the Western World has unduely persued "justice" through the Taylor case. Hence, I have removed the comment n=making this claim - attributed to Christine Cheng (Dr Howard SCOTT" however this was cited AS the op-ed not fact and not sure what "howard SCOTT" means? + the flag for the judges is based on the SCSL page that lists Teresa as being from northern island. The edit summary "NI not sovereign UK is sovereign and UN member" clearly explains the editor dint bother to read the source + words were added by the IP that were not in the quote, again showing he dint bother to read the source to add his own words.(Lihaas (talk) 23:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC)).