Human rights groups concerned over Saddam trial

By Luke Baker

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Three days before Saddam Hussein goes
on trial for crimes against humanity, human rights groups have
raised profound concerns about the independence of the court
trying him and whether it meets international standards.

Among other issues, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty
International have expressed unease about limits on the ability
of the accused to mount a defense, the burden of proof,
political sway over the court and use of the death penalty.

Questions also surround the fact the Iraqi government has
passed new laws governing the court, but has not yet brought
them into force. Those new statutes could take effect in the
next few days, or after the trial begins, raising further
doubts about the clarity of procedures.

Saddam and seven others are due to appear in court on
October 19 on charges of premeditated murder in the deaths of
more than 140 Shi’ite men from the village of Dujail, north of
Baghdad, following a failed attempt on the then-president’s
life in 1982.

In an 18-page report on Sunday, New York-based Human Rights
Watch questioned trial preparations, including the amount of
time the defense had been given to study evidence and its
access to witnesses, and said proceedings might not be free or
fair.

“We have grave concerns that the court will not provide the
fair trial guarantees required by international law,” said
Richard Dicker, director of the group’s international justice
program.

“The proceedings must be fair and be seen to be fair, and
that means ensuring that the accused can vigorously defend
themselves.”

Amnesty International, in a report released earlier this
year, laid out similar concerns, and questioned if defendants
were being granted their full rights under international law.

“The statute of the Iraqi Special Tribunal currently in
place is not consistent with international law,” Amnesty said.

“Trials and further investigations should not proceed until
the concerns outlined … have been adequately addressed.”

Amnesty and Human Rights Watch are due to have observers in
the courtroom on October 19, although it is not clear if passes
provided by U.S. authorities for access to the fortified Green
Zone compound, where the court is, will be granted on time.

LIMITED ACCESS

When the trial gets under way, Saddam’s chief lawyer,
Khalil al-Dulaimi, is expected to challenge the legitimacy of
the court, which under current statutes was set up in December
2003 by U.S.-backed authorities during the U.S. military
occupation.

Over recent months Dulaimi has complained about a lack of
access to his client, inability to question witnesses already
interviewed by the investigating judge who built the case, and
restrictions on support from foreign lawyers.

He has also said that the 45 days allowed to prepare for
the trial after the investigator presented his evidence is
insufficient, particularly in a trial alleging crimes against
humanity, a complaint supported by Human Rights Watch.

The Special Tribunal says 45 days is enough under Iraqi
law.

Many observers, including sources close to the tribunal,
expect the trial to be adjourned after one or two days of
hearings so that the five-judge panel trying the case can study
any defense motions for a delay.

Though grim, Dujail is one of the lesser crimes of which
Saddam is expected ultimately to be charged, but prosecutors
are starting with it because it is relatively clear-cut, strong
evidence exists and a conviction therefore appears more likely.

Since it also involves the deaths of Shi’ites linked to the
Dawa Party, which was banned under Saddam but which is now in
the — Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari is from Dawa — some see
a political motive in bringing the Dujail case first.

In the coming weeks, other cases against Saddam and his
associates are expected to be presented for trial, including
his role in ordering the Anfal campaigns against the Kurds in
northern Iraq in the 1980s, which included the gassing to death
of as many as 5,000 people in the town of Halabja.

If Saddam and his seven co-defendants are found guilty in
the Dujail case, they could be put to death.

Under the tribunal’s new statutes, which have yet to take
effect, convicted defendants must have their sentences carried
out within 30 days of their last appeal failing.

In theory that means Saddam could be executed before facing
trial for other crimes.

Human Rights Watch called such a provision “draconian,” and
called for a re-examination of the capital punishment
provision, which international criminal courts reject as
inhumane.

“The mandatory application of the death penalty, without
any opportunity for clemency, directly violates Iraq’s human
rights obligations,” it said.

“Areas of serious concern need to be addressed by the
Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal if it aims to satisfy the
promise of delivering justice rather than vengeance.”