|
Saddam Wants Trial Moved to The Hague
 |
|
Saddam's
defense asked Annan to use his good offices "to reallocate the present
court outside Iraq, i.e. The Hague, Netherlands".
|
DOHA,
October 28, 2005 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) - A defense
lawyer for ousted Iraq president Saddam Hussein wrote to UN chief Kofi
Annan Friday, October 28, calling for the court trying him on charges
of crimes against humanity to be moved to The Hague and its Iraqi
judges replaced by foreign ones.
"We
submit to you our request for your involvement and your good office in
the present circumstances to call upon the US authority and the
present government of Iraq to review the legal status of the present
court and to reallocate the present court outside Iraq, i.e. The
Hague, Netherlands," said the letter to Annan from defense lawyer
Najib Al-Nawimi.
He
called for the court to be given "independent and impartial
international judges" and also for pressure to be put on the
Iraqi authorities and their US backers to recognize Saddam and his
co-defendants as prisoners of war, according to Agence France-Presse
(AFP).
Nawimi
reiterated that his client refused to recognize the legitimacy of the
Iraqi High Tribunal and again hit out at the obstacles placed in the
way of the defense.
"I
don't acknowledge either the entity that authorizes you nor the
aggression because everything based on falsehood is falsehood,"
Saddam told the chief judge during his trial on October 19.
Chief
judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin, a Kurd, asked repeatedly Saddam to state
his name, profession and tribal name but the ousted dictator refused.
Saddam
is on trial along with seven other defendants for the 1982 murder of
143 Shiites from Dujail village, allegedly as revenge for an attempt
on Saddam's life.
Obstacles
 |
|
Janabi was killed by Iraqi security forces, according to Saddam's lawyers.
|
In
his letter to Annan, Nawimi – former Qatari Minister of Justice --
charged (Iraqi) prosecutors "did not hand over to the defense
team a copy of the accusation list, neither granted us a proper access
to our clients nor to have sufficient time as we had requested (for)
three months".
He
also complained of serious security concerns following the
assassination of Saadun Janabi, an attorney representing one of
Saddam's co-defendants, earlier this month which he blamed on elements
within the Iraqi interior ministry.
"Though
they have denied the present governments involvement, the material
witnesses, we have proved the involvement of the present government in
the assassination, which kept all the defense team feeling that they
will be the second to be assassinated," he wrote.
"We
are in a very dangerous situation where the present Iraqi government
has no control over our security to attend and participate in such a
trial."
Janabi
was murdered the day after Saddam and seven co-defendants went on
trial on charges related to the 1982 execution of 143 Shiites from the
village of Dujail. The case was adjourned until November 28 after all
eight men pleaded not guilty.
The
lawyer's assassination already prompted Saddam's Amman-based defense
team and lead Iraqi counsel Khalil Al-Dulaimi to announce Wednesday
that they were suspending all contacts with the court on security
grounds.
"In
view of the dangerous security conditions in Iraq and their impact on
Iraqi members of the defense team, along with the never-ending threats
against them and their families... a decision has been taken to fully
suspend all contacts with the Iraqi Special (now High) Tribunal,"
their statement said.
Law
experts and human rights groups have doubted the fairness of the
Saddam trial and questioned its legality.
"According
to international law, the trial is null and void. Saddam, as he told
the judge, is the legal elected leader of Iraq. But the court was set
up by an occupying force that enjoys no legality," law expert
Hassan Ahmed Omar told Al-Jazeera, commenting on Saddam's trial and
his refusal to identify himself.
The
Egyptian international law expert further said that Saddam –
regardless of the crimes he has committed – is legally a
"kidnapped person who is standing trial by his own
kidnappers".
Human
rights groups, for their part, have expressed unease about the
possibility of "victor's justice", warning that the trial
must not only be fair, but be seen to be fair, and raising concerns
about the legitimacy of a body set up during US occupation.
|
