ICTJ in the News

November 6, 2006

Serious doubts raised over fairness of trial

The Herald (Glasgow)

By Calum MacDonald

The trial that sentenced Saddam Hussein to hang was itself in the dock last night with some rights groups and legal experts claiming it was flawed and might fail to persuade Iraqis that justice had been done.

Most of the responses to the verdicts and sentences handed down to Saddam and six of his co-accused were predictable, ranging from celebration in the US to condemnation from the former dictator's defence team.

However, more objective observers raised serious questions over the fairness and legitimacy of the process.

Three defence lawyers were murdered and the original judge quit citing political interference - all of which exposed the trial to accusations that it fell short of the standards demanded of a fair and impartial process.

"The court was not impartial. There were not adequate steps taken to protect the security of defence lawyers and witnesses," said Malcolm Smart, head of the Middle East and North Africa programme for Amnesty International.

"Every individual has a right to a fair trial, even people accused of crimes of the magnitude that Saddam Hussein was accused of, and this has not been a fair trial."
The New York-based International Centre for Transitional Justice, which monitored the Dujail trial closely with staff in Baghdad, said appeal judges should consider ordering a retrial to fix its flaws.

"It's not a sham trial by any means, but there were lots of errors and mistakes along the way, as they were learning," said Hanny Megally, the ICTJ's expert on justice in the Middle East.

Louise Arbour, the UN high commissioner for human rights, who opposes the death penalty in all cases, said Iraq should guarantee fair appeals and should not carry out executions.

The International Federation for Human Rights denounced the use of the death sentence, warning it "will generate more violence and deepen the cycle of killing for revenge in Iraq", while the Council of Europe called it "futile and wrong" to execute Saddam.

Mark Stephens, an international lawyer, raised concerns about the outcome being devalued because of possible political interference and worries of a kangaroo court.
Talking about the change of judges during the case, Mr Stephens said: "Anywhere else, if the judge couldn't continue, you would start the trial anew." Mr Stephens, of law firm Finers, Stephens, Innocent, added: "This process is going to be open to criticism when it should have been and could have been above and beyond reproach."

Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "There are concerns about whether Saddam Hussein was ever going to receive a fair trial in Iraq given the sectarian tensions that are rife."