Saddam
Trial Fundamentally
Flawed: HRW
By Human Rights Watch
21 November, 2006
Human
Rights Watch
(New York, November
20, 2006) The trial of Saddam Hussein and seven other defendants
before the Iraqi High Tribunal for crimes against humanity was marred
by so many procedural and substantive flaws that the verdict is unsound,
Human Rights Watch said in a 97-page report
released today. The shortcomings of the trial, for the killings of more
than 100 people from the Iraqi town of Dujail, also call into question
subsequent proceedings at the tribunal.
The proceedings in the Dujail
trial were fundamentally unfair. The tribunal squandered an important
opportunity to deliver credible justice to the people of Iraq. And its
imposition of the death penalty after an unfair trial is indefensible.
The proceedings in the Dujail trial were fundamentally unfair, said
Nehal Bhuta of the International Justice program at Human Rights Watch
and author of the report. The tribunal squandered an important opportunity
to deliver credible justice to the people of Iraq. And its imposition
of the death penalty after an unfair trial is indefensible.
The report, entitled ?Judging Dujail: The First Trial Before the Iraqi
High Tribunal, is based on 10 months of observation and dozens of interviews
with judges, prosecutors and defense lawyers, and is the most comprehensive
analysis to date of the trial. Human Rights Watch, which has demanded
the prosecution of Saddam Hussein and his lieutenants for more than
a decade, was one of only two international organizations that had a
regular observer presence in the courtroom.
The Iraqi High Tribunal was undermined from the outset by Iraqi government
actions that threatened the independence and perceived impartiality
of the court. Members of parliament and even ministers regularly denounced
the tribunal as weak, leading to the resignation of the first presiding
trial judge.
Judging Dujail reports previously undocumented and serious procedural
flaws in the trial, including:
regular failure to disclose key evidence, including exculpatory evidence,
to the defense in advance;
violations of the defendants? basic fair trial right to confront witnesses
against them;
lapses of judicial demeanor
that undermined the apparent impartiality of the presiding judge; and
important gaps in evidence that undermine the persuasiveness of the
prosecution case, and put in doubt whether all the elements of the crimes
charged were established.
The report also shows that the tribunal as an institution has struggled
to competently perform basic administrative functions that are essential
to a fair and effective trial. It failed to develop effective programs
to address the needs of witnesses and victims or to ensure the security
of defense lawyers, and ignored the important task of explaining the
trial process to the Iraqi population.
The Dujail trial commenced before the Iraqi High Tribunal in Baghdad
on October 19, 2005, and ended on July 27, 2006, with a verdict announced
on November 5, 2006. Saddam Hussein and two other defendants were sentenced
to death by hanging, and four defendants received prison terms ranging
from 15 years to life. One defendant was acquitted at the prosecution?s
request. The verdict and sentences are currently being appealed to the
Appeals Chamber.
The trial concerned the aftermath of an assassination attempt against
then-President Saddam Hussein in Dujail in July 1982. Government officials
were accused of orchestrating an attack on the town's inhabitants in
revenge for the assassination attempt, resulting in the detention, torture
and forced displacement of hundreds, and the deaths of more than 100
boys and men after a summary trial.
The tribunal failed to meet basic fair trial standards in its first
trial. Unless the Iraqi government allows experienced international
judges and lawyers to participate directly, its unlikely the court can
fairly conduct other trials, said Bhuta.
The tribunal's statute requires that death sentences be implemented
30 days after the final appeal, and that no commutation is possible.
If the death sentence against Saddam Hussein is upheld on appeal, there
is a chance that he will be executed before the conclusion of his ongoing
trial for genocide against the Kurds.
Human Rights Watch opposes the death penalty as inherently inhumane
punishment and says that executing Hussein while other trials are ongoing
will also deprive many thousands of victims of their day in court.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights