The advent of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon has been the first serious effort for accountability and ending impunity for political assassinations in Lebanon’s modern history. Nevertheless, the past experiences of United Nations International Independent Investigation Commission and recently the STL have revealed challenges and lacunae in their investigative process. This includes, inter alia, a complex and ambiguous relationship between the UNIIIC’s activities and the STL, the failure of the STL in preventing repeated leaks of confidential documents and witnesses interviews, and weak public outreach over false testimonies before the UNIIIC. This article argues that while the STL’s role remains crucial for ending impunity for the first time in such a torn society, the STL as an international (ad hoc) tribunal is not well equipped to deal with these unpredicted variables in law and policy. The STL Statute is silent on these complex variables and the recent amendments of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence failed to tackle these lacunae as they apply prospectively and not retroactivity. The nascent jurisprudence of the STL has not been able to overcome these shortages and lacunae. To overcome these hurdles and to regain trust in the STL, this article calls upon the STL to take a series of administrative and legislative measures of which the public should be informed and not alienated, as justice is not only about the provision of justice, but also about the perception of providing it. The article concludes by urging the STL to correct the existing errors hand in hand with continuously trying to achieve justice and accountability for all offences and misconducts, including its own.