U.S. Influence
'Too Much'
By Dahr Jamail
06 September,2005
Inter
Press Service
London, Sep 5
(IPS) - U.S. influence in the process of drafting a constitution
for Iraq is excessive and "highly inappropriate", a United
Nations official says.
"It is a matter
of public record that in the final weeks of the process the newly arrived
U.S. ambassador (Zalmay Khalizad) took an extremely hands-on role,"
Justin Alexander, legal affairs officer for the office of constitutional
support with the United Nations Assistance Mission to Iraq (UNAMI) told
IPS. "Even going so far as to circulate at least one U.S draft."
Alexander, who oversaw
the recent proceedings in Baghdad added: "This involvement was
highly inappropriate for a country with 140,000 soldiers in country."
Zaid al-Ali, a legal
expert who also oversaw the drafting process in Baghdad, made a similar
case at a meeting at the International Association of Contemporary Iraqi
Studies in London.
"There are
three ways in which the occupation intervened in the context of Iraq's
constitution-writing process," he said. "Firstly, the occupation
authorities selected and affected the makeup of the commission that
was charged with drafting Iraq's transitional law, and its permanent
constitution. Second, the occupation determined the limits and parameters
within which the constitution was to be drafted. Third, the occupation
authorities intervened directly in order to safeguard its interests
in the context of the constitutional negotiations."
Al-Ali said it was
significant that one article in the draft constitution on foreign military
bases was dropped from the final version. "One article contained
in a previous draft provided that setting up foreign military bases
in Iraq was to be forbidden, and that the only way in which this could
be deviated from would have been by a two-thirds majority vote in Parliament."
Al-Ali said "this
article was dropped from the final draft of the constitution."
An alliance including
the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars and the large movement of Shia
cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said it rejected the draft and a "political
process which had been led by occupiers and their collaborators."
The group said in
a media statement: "We consider this draft as a next step of this
process which does not represent the peoples' will." The alliance
also expressed "major suspicions about the honesty of the next
referendum, which will take place under occupation and with neither
international nor Arabic and Islamic supervision."
Dr. Marinos Diamantides,
senior lecturer in law at the University of London, said the entire
drafting process could be illegal under international law.
"One could
argue the entire process is against the law," Diamantides told
IPS. "According to the 1907 Convention (the convention for the
pacific settlement of disputes), the occupying power has a duty to maintain
the legal system of the country it occupies. This is the first time
ever that an occupying power has dismantled the internal law system
of the country it occupies."
He also pointed
out that ironically the Sunnis now have power to derail the upcoming
referendum vote by a two-thirds vote in three provinces. That power
was originally intended to give Kurds power to veto the constitution.
When Iraq's Kurdish
and Shia dominated parliament recently approved the draft, Sunnis immediately
began campaigning for a 'no' vote in the upcoming October referendum.
If the draft were to pass the referendum, it would be followed two months
later by election for a government.
At least four provinces
are predominantly Sunni, and Sunni clerics have urged their followers
to reject the draft if it does not meet Sunni demands.
Adding further complexity
to the already muddled situation, former UN humanitarian coordinator
in Iraq during the sanctions Denis Halliday believes that even the United
Nations has no place in occupied Iraq.
"The UN doesn't
have a position in Iraq today," Halliday told IPS. "Once the
invasion took place, the UN became collaborators with the enemy (the
United States)."
Halliday, who had
resigned from his UN post in protest against "genocidal sanctions"
added: "This lesson should have been learned in August, 2003 when
our office in Baghdad was blown up, as we were collaborators. The UN
has simply become a tool of the U.S., and Iraqis can no longer distinguish
between the U.S. and the UN."
Justin Alexander
said Iraq might need a new constitution. "If Iraq creates a progressive
and effective constitution and laws to implement the constitution, then
this could benefit Iraqis. But in the absence of mutual reconciliation
and an end to the occupation this is all futile."