Judgment day looms for Saddam

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Three years after he gave himself up to American soldiers without firing a shot, Saddam Hussein may be condemned to hang on Sunday if an Iraqi court finds him guilty of crimes against humanity.

The final act of Saddam's year-old first trial, the verdict is the high point of a historic, U.S.-sponsored experiment in international justice intended to unite Iraqis in exorcising three decades of rule by the former president, accused of mass killing and torture to keep power over Iraq's disparate peoples.

Yet the country's descent toward civil war since Saddam was overthrown has blighted proceedings. Three defense lawyers were killed, the judge quit over political interference and Iraqis, who a year ago gasped in wonder to see the former strongman in court, have lapsed into distracted indifference to his fate.

Saddam, 69, and seven co-accused have been charged with crimes against humanity for the killing of 148 Shi'ite villagers after an attempt on his life in the town of Dujail in 1982.

If convicted, Saddam faces death by hanging, a prospect Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, with some disregard for judicial independence, has said cannot come soon enough.

But a death sentence -- which Saddam with typical bombast has demanded in court should instead be by military firing squad -- may be many months, even years, away. He is due back in court on Friday in a separate trial for genocide against Kurds in the 1980s and could face up to a dozen other cases.

Since the trial opened in the heavily fortified Baghdad courtroom in October last year, three defense lawyers have been killed in attacks that the defense team, dominated by Saddam's fellow Sunnis, blamed on Shi'ite Muslim gunmen. The first chief judge, a Kurd, resigned in protest over government interference.

"This is a lost opportunity to promote the rule of law," legal observer Richard Dicker from Human Rights Watch said.

Many people in the Shi'ite town of Dujail refused to speak to a Reuters reporter this week out of fear of reprisals and several said they were concerned Sunni insurgents might launch attacks in the area to coincide with the verdict.

Far from being a catharsis for Iraqis scarred by Saddam's rule, many feel the trial has deepened animosities between rival communities 3-1/2 years after the U.S.-led invasion.

Some international legal experts and human rights activists have said the trial would be better held in a third country.

In the village of Awja, Saddam's birthplace in the Sunni heartland of Salahaddin province, many asked for his release.

"If they want peace in Iraq, we demand they stop this farce trial run by Bush and his aides," said Ahmad al-Nasiri, standing next to the village mosque, which was built by Saddam.

Saddam's chief lawyer has warned a death sentence against the former leader, who is being held in a U.S.-run prison, would plunge Iraq into "full scale civil war."

Security in the fortified Green Zone, where the courtroom is located, has been tightened ahead of the verdict, which U.S. and Iraqi officials close to the court say should be announced on Sunday -- though a delay cannot be ruled out.

Saddam has been defiant during televised proceedings. He has staged hunger strikes, dismissed the Iraqi High Tribunal as a U.S.-orchestrated farce, and said the verdict has been rigged.

As President Bush faces mounting criticism over the war, a guilty verdict announced two days ahead of tight U.S. congressional elections on November 7 could reflect positively on him as a vindication of his policy to overthrow Saddam.

U.S. officials deny Washington had any say over the timing of the verdict or the court's decisions, saying the American role was limited to logistics and security.

Throughout the Dujail case, Iraqi court officials have been consulting closely with -- and, sources close to the court say, firmly guided by -- American lawyers from a U.S. Embassy department known as the Regime Crimes Liaison Office.

The unit has been the conduit for $140 million in U.S. funding for the court, and the driving force in the sifting of tons of documents and advising prosecutors.

In a recent briefing, a U.S. official close to the court said the Saddam trial had more historical significance than past trials against former strongmen, including Liberia's Charles Taylor and Yugoslavia's Slobodan Milosevic.

"Saddam is being tried by his own people and in his land," the official said. "That is what this trial is about."

CHRONOLOGY-Life of Saddam Hussein

03 Nov 2006 13:42:41 GMT
Source: Reuters

More Nov 3 (Reuters) - A verdict is expected on Sunday in the trial of Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity in the killings of Shi'ite villagers after a 1982 assassination attempt. If found guilty, Saddam could be sentenced to death.

Here are key dates in the life of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

April 28, 1937 - Born in al-Awja village outside Tikrit, 150 km (90 miles) north of Baghdad.

Oct 1956 - Joins uprising against pro-British royalist rulers and then becomes a militant in the pan-Arab, secular Baath Party.

Oct 1959 - A year after overthrow of monarchy, takes part in attempt to kill Prime Minister Abdel-Karim Kassem. Flees abroad.

Feb 1963 - Returns to Baghdad when the Baath Party seizes power in a military coup, but nine months later Baathists are toppled. Caught and jailed. Elected deputy secretary-general of the party while in prison.

July 1968 - Saddam helps plot the coup that puts the Baath Party back in power, deposing President Abdul-Rahman Aref.

March 1975 - As vice-president of the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC), signs border agreement with the Shah of Iran, who ends support for an Iraqi Kurdish revolt, causing its collapse.

July 16, 1979 - Takes power after President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr steps aside as chairman of the RCC.

Sept 22, 1980 - Following border skirmishes, Saddam launches war on Iran that lasts eight years.

March 16, 1988 - Iraqi forces launch chemical attack on Iraqi Kurdish town of Halabja, killing about 5,000 people.

Aug 20, 1988 - A ceasefire is officially implemented in the Iran-Iraq war. The campaign against Kurds continues.

Aug 2, 1990 - Launches invasion of Kuwait, prompting U.N. Security Council to impose sanctions on Iraq.

Jan 17, 1991 - U.S.-led forces start Gulf War with air attacks on Iraq and occupied Kuwait. Hostilities end on Feb 28 with eviction of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

Oct 15, 1995 - Saddam wins a presidential referendum and is elected unopposed with more than 99 percent of the vote.

Oct 15, 2002 - Official results show Saddam wins 100 percent of votes in a referendum for a new term in office.

Dec 7, 2002 - Saddam apologises for invasion of Kuwait but blames the emirate's leadership. Kuwait rejects the apology.

Feb 2003 - In first interview in more than a decade, Saddam denies Baghdad has any banned weapons or links to al Qaeda.

March 20 - U.S. launches war against Iraq.

April 9 - U.S. forces sweep into the heart of Baghdad as Saddam Hussein's 24-year rule crumbles.

July 22 - U.S. military confirms Saddam's two sons, Uday and Qusay, were killed in gun battle in Mosul.

Dec 14 - U.S. officials announce capture of Saddam.

Oct 19, 2005 - Trial opens with Saddam charged with crimes against humanity for the killing of 148 Shi'ite men in Dujail after a 1982 assassination attempt. He pleads not guilty.

Aug. 21, 2006 - Saddam refuses to enter a plea as the trial starts on charges of war crimes in the "Anfal" campaign that killed tens of thousands of Kurdish villagers in 1988.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/PAR344196.htm

FACTBOX-What happens next after Saddam verdict

03 Nov 2006 13:53:20 GMT
Source: Reuters

Nov 3 (Reuters) - A verdict is expected on Sunday in the trial of Saddam Hussein and his seven co-defendants charged with ordering the killing and torture of hundreds of Shi'ite villagers after a 1982 assassination attempt in Dujail.

Following are some questions and answers about the legal procedure and what happens after a verdict is announced.

THE COURT

Saddam and his co-defendants are being tried before what was originally called the Iraqi Special Tribunal, established in December 2003 by U.S.-led occupation authorities. It became known as the Iraqi High Tribunal in October 2005 and consists of two trial chambers with five judges in each.

THE CHARGES

Saddam has been charged with crimes against humanity for the arrest, torture, killings and deportation of 399 men, women and children. A total of 148 were killed. The charge sheet includes wilful killing, deportation or forcible transfer of population, imprisonment, torture, enforced disappearance of persons and other inhumane acts.

Prosecutors have demanded the death penalty against Saddam, his half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti, former vice president Taha Yassin Ramadan and former Revolutionary Court head Awad Hamed Al-Bander. They also asked for a reduced punishment for three local Baath party officials and that a fourth be freed.

THE VERDICT

A five-panel judge will issue a majority verdict. Proof must be shown only to the "satisfaction" of the judges, falling short of the "beyond reasonable doubt" benchmark of the Anglo-Saxon legal system.

If found guilty, Saddam faces the maximum penalty of death, which is carried out by hanging. Saddam has said he deserves to meet this fate by firing squad because he is a military officer. Judges could also hand down a sentence of life in prison.

THE APPEAL

Defendants can appeal the verdict to a nine-member appeals chamber. If the verdict is death or life in prison, an appeal is automatic even if defence counsel does not submit one. Any sentence must be carried out within 30 days of all appeals being exhausted. There is no statute of limitation as to how long the appellate court can take on ruling.

The presidential council, made up of Iraq's president and two vice presidents, has to ratify any death sentence before it is carried out. The current president is an ethnic Kurd and the two vice presidents are a Shi'ite and a Sunni Arab.

Iraq's law states that the corpse of the executed person is handed over to relatives if they so request. Otherwise the prison authorities will carry out the burial at government expense, but there will be no funeral ceremony.

OTHER CASES

Saddam is also facing charges in a separate trial for genocide against ethnic Kurds. Even if the ousted leader receives a death sentence, proceedings for the Anfal (Spoils of War) military campaign will continue. Only after the death of a defendant are the charges of other cases dropped.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IBO322681.htm

Unclear if US Republicans will profit from Saddam trial verdict

by Jerome Bernard
Thu Nov 2, 10:09 AM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A verdict in the first criminal case against Saddam Hussein is expected two days before a key US midterm vote that has become a referendum on the Iraq war -- but any benefit for President George W. Bush's Republican Party was unclear.

The verdict is to be presented on Sunday, just ahead of Tuesday's vote in which Bush's Republicans appeared poised to lose control of Congress.

Attorneys for the former Iraqi president and some US leftists suspect the Bush administration arranged for the verdict to be presented just ahead of the vote. Yet US policy observers are skeptical about the impact it would have on the election.

"I would be very reluctant to even speculate on that," said Carroll Doherty, a researcher at the Pew Research Center. "The only thing I would say is to this point: Iraq is the main issue in the campaign. It has energized Democratic voters," she said.

Stephen Hess at the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank, said he thought the impact would "be relatively modest."

Most US voters already "have a pretty strong idea about how they feel about Iraq and how it affects their vote," he said, although it is "always possible" that the Saddam verdict could sway undecided voters.

"It would certainly be headline news and it would be used by the Republicans and by the president to remind people why the United States were in Iraq in the first place," Hess said.

"And possibly it would used by some people who are left-wing bloggers to say, 'Hey, isn't (it) some sort of a conspiracy?'" he said, referring to the timing of the verdict.

Polls show that Republicans will likely lose control of the House of Representatives, and may lose control of the US Senate, largely due to concern about the war in Iraq.

Thirty-three of the Senate's 100 seats are open for contest, along with all 435 seats in the House of Representatives. Voters will also elect governors in 36 US states.

Bush's popularity rose sharply when Saddam was captured in December 2003. The president's poll numbers have since plunged, currently hovering just below 40 percent.

"The Bush administration cares more about the November elections than the lives of US troops, the Iraqi people and the rule of law," said Ramsey Clark, one of the lead attorneys on Saddam's defense team.

Clark, US attorney general from 1967 to 1969, noted "the high probability that death sentences (in the Saddam case) will cause greater violence and irreconcilable division in Iraq."

Saddam and several co-conspirators, including former vice president Taha Ramadan, face execution by the Iraqi High Tribunal handling their case over the killing of 148 Shiite villagers from the Iraqi village of Dujail in 1982.

Another of Saddam's lawyers, Bushra Khalil, warned Wednesday that a guilty verdict on Sunday could plunge Iraq and the region into violence.

"Any death sentence will be explosive for Iraq and the region. Any death sentence will be hell for the US Army" in Iraq, said Khalil, speaking in Beirut.

Khalil said the Sunday date for the verdict proved the trial was being used by the Bush administration as "propaganda."

Saddam himself addressed the High Tribunal's presiding judge, asking that the verdict not be announced on November 5 because it would reinforce Bush's Republican Party in the elections.

"The propaganda machine will seek to show that Bush has achieved his strategic goal" in Iraq, Saddam said.

On the Internet, in US leftist discussion forums and among some bloggers, there is a strong suspicion that the date was chosen on purpose to benefit the Republicans.

"Given the Bush administration's history of timing national security-related actions to the political calendar, has the date for the verdict's release been set to provide maximum political benefit for the administration and congressional Republicans?" asked a blogger on the DemocraticUnderground.com discussion site.

Tom Engelhardt, writing in the leftist The Nation magazine, notes that the verdict comes "curiously enough, just two days before the midterm elections. It's the sort of the thing that -- you would think -- any reporter with knowledge of the US election cycle ... would at least note in an article. But no, you can search high and low without finding a reference to this in the mainstream media."

US Ambassador in Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad rejects the charges, insisting that the date was set by Iraqi judges and that Washington had no role in the decision.

Saddam and his co-defendants are currently facing charges in a second trial concerning the death of thousands of Kurds in the 1988 Anfal campaign, in which government forces razed thousands of villages in northern Iraq. They face the death penalty if convicted.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061102/pl_afp/iraqtrialsaddamus_061102150938

Fear over what Saddam verdict may bring

Friday, November 03, 2006

AP - By Robert H Reid

AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — The trial of Saddam Hussein was intended to heal a fractured Iraq: exposing the crimes of his regime in a court of law, so Iraqis could come to terms with their past and move forward — united as a people.

Instead, the nine-month trial, roiled by a civil war and Saddam's own political outbursts, has brought little healing for Iraqis who remain deeply divided over his legacy.

The verdict, expected Sunday, could just make those tensions worse.

Indeed, many of Saddam's fellow Sunni Arabs — but some Shiites and Kurds too — are predicting a firestorm if the Iraqi High Tribunal, as widely expected, convicts and then sentences the ex-president to death.

"Violence and killings will increase and Saddam will turn into a national hero among Sunnis," said Ibrahim Khalid, 52, a Sunni from Baghdad's Azamiyah district, where many people still support the ousted 69-year-old president.

Many Shiites, on the other hand, will be enraged if he escapes the gallows. Last month, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, said he expects "this criminal tyrant will be executed" and his followers who are "gambling on returning to power" will lose heart and abandon the insurgency.

"Hanging is too good for him," said Saad Mindil al-Garaawi, 39, a Shiite lawyer in Diwaniyah whose father and brother were executed for opposition to Saddam in 1988. "We demand they hang him as soon as possible."

In a broader sense, the fear and frustration over Sunday's verdict is a microcosm of what many Iraqis feel about their country's worsening cycle of violence since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

Saddam and seven co-defendants — including a half brother — have been on trial since Oct. 19, 2005, for their alleged roles in the deaths of about 150 Shiites in the town of Dujail after an assassination attempt against the president in 1982.

A second trial against Saddam — for alleged genocide against the Kurds — began in August and more charges are expected to follow. It is unclear whether those cases would move forward if Saddam is condemned to hang.

Five judges will render the Dujail verdict based on a simple majority decision. There is no jury. If Saddam is convicted, his case would be reviewed by a nine-judge panel.

The review has no time limit but a death sentence, if upheld, must be carried out within 30 days.

Instead of healing old wounds, the two trials have widened the gulf between Iraq's ethnic and religious groups at a time when sectarian reprisal killings are spinning out of control.

Many Iraqis appear weary of the drawn-out proceedings. Even though Iraqi and American authorities had promised long before Saddam's capture in December 2003 to put him on trial, public opinion tends to believe the proceedings are intended to distract attention from failures to restore order and build a functioning government.

"In the beginning we were all enthusiastic to watch the trial," said Mohammed Jassim, a Shiite who fled Iraq for Egypt and follows the proceedings on Arabic satellite TV stations. "Now it has become really unbearable to watch. ... They are airing it to hide all the murder, plunder and sectarian strife going on in the country."

Some Sunnis also suspect the trial is an act of vengeance by Saddam's U.S., Shiite and Kurdish enemies and that a death sentence is inevitable — as will be the backlash.

"I think that the execution of Saddam will have grave consequences," said Osama Abdul-Rahman, 22, a Sunni college student in Baghdad. "By issuing the verdict, the Americans want to frighten Arab leaders who would face the same fate if they stood up against America."

Many Shiites, however, believe Saddam should have been hanged soon after he was captured in a hole near Tikrit.

"The trial of the tyrant really pleased us," said Shiite laborer Mohammed Swadi al-Zamili, 41, whose brother was executed in 1994. "What we want is for him to be hanged by Iraqi hands, and we will not accept anything less."

Such polarization is not the reaction American officials were hoping for as they worked with Iraqis for two years after the invasion to prepare for a trial — including gathering evidence and training Iraqis.

The incident in Dujail, 40 miles north of Baghdad, was selected for the first trial because it was considered the easiest to prosecute, even though the number of people killed pales compared with the crackdown on the Kurds or the suppression of a Shiite uprising of 1991.

But the trial was chaotic from the start.

One defense lawyer was kidnapped and murdered the day after the opening session. Two more were assassinated before the five-judge panel adjourned July 27 to consider its verdict.

And Saddam turned the proceedings into a political forum — lambasting the judges as lackeys of the Americans and appealing to Iraqis to defy the U.S. occupation.

The first judge resigned only three months into the trial after Shiite politicians complained that he was too lenient with Saddam — a move Human Rights Watch branded as "nothing less than an attack on judicial independence." Then the replacement judge was criticized by Saddam's supporters as too strict.

Iraqi officials telecast the proceedings as a sign of transparency. That strategy may have backfired because many Iraqis appear turned off by the courtroom turmoil, which raised doubts about fairness.

"This is a plot by the Shiite government," said Mazen Mahmoud, a Kurd who fled Baghdad for the Kurdish-ruled area in the north. "The whole trial is rigged."

Whatever opportunity the trial presented to heal the nation's wounds was drowned out in the wave of Sunni-Shiite killings, which began soon after Saddam's fall but surged after the bombing of a Shiite shrine in February.

Both communities feel under siege from insurgents, militias and death squads. That may have bolstered Saddam's image among his fellow Sunnis, willing to trade the chaos of democratic Iraq for the security of authoritarian rule.

http://www.kurdmedia.com/articles.asp?id=13523

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.