Trial, sentence of Saddam unsound, says rights body

IRAQ: Human Rights Watch (HRW) has concluded the trial of ousted Iraqi president Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity was so basically flawed that the November 5th death sentence is unsound and called upon the appeal court to overturn the verdict.

The 97-page report, Judging Dujail: The First Trial Before the Iraqi High Tribunal, published today, examines the serious procedural and substantive shortcomings of the October 2005-July 2006 proceedings involving the killing of 148 Shias from the market town of Dujail, following a 1982 assassination attempt on Saddam Hussein.

After emphasising the historic responsibility of the specially constituted Iraqi High Tribunal for prosecuting members of the former regime for mass human rights violations, Nehal Bhuta, author of the report, observed: "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."

Having closely monitored the proceedings and interviewed judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers, HRW has drawn up what it says is the "most compre- hensive analysis to date" of the trial. HRW begins by criticising both the US and Iraqi authorities for insisting the trial should be conducted by Iraqis in Iraq.

The report points out Iraq did not have the expertise to conduct such an important trial. Although the US provided Iraqi judges and lawyers with training, this did not meet the demands of the case. It became clear from the outset that the tribunal was not impartial and was, instead, incapable of prosecuting and adjudicating the charges brought against the defendants "in a manner consistent with international law".

Administrative problems undermined the functionality of the court, witnesses were not property protected or psychologically supported, trial documents were inefficiently managed, and defence lawyers found it difficult to function, the report finds.

Although the dossier of evidence was given to the defence ahead of the opening of the trial, 30 per cent of its contents was illegible. No security was provided for private defence counsel, three of whom were kidnapped and killed. Defence counsel did not have an opportunity to present their case equal to that enjoyed by the prosecution.

The basic principle that an accused person should be presumed innocent until proved guilty was not observed. Iraqi government ministers repeatedly prejudged the outcome of the trial by stating they expected Saddam Hussein and his chief lieutenants to be hanged.

Fresh charges were introduced without notifying the defence and documents were presented without notification, the report notes.

The statements of prosecution witnesses were read into the record without making them available for cross-questioning by the defence. Having failed to meet "basic fair trial standards in its first trial", it is "unlikely the court can fairly conduct other trials", stated Mr Bhuta.