From The New York Times, an opinion article by Michael A. Newton, a lieutenant colonel in the Army's Judge Advocate General's Corps and a teacher of international law at the United States Military Academy.
.... Last month I spent a week in London working with the group of judges and prosecutors who form the core of the special tribunal [the Iraqi Special Tribunal to try Saddam Hussein, et al.]. They are a distinguished group of patriots who know more than any outsider how critical the rule of law will be for the future of their country. Yes, just like other inexperienced judges on previous tribunals elsewhere in the developing world, they have much to learn about conducting complex trials in accordance with the most modern nuances of international law. But they are dedicated to doing so. As one Iraqi told me, "My job is to judge, not to murder."
Unfortunately, their pleas for assistance are going unanswered. For example, some of the most experienced practitioners from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia had initially agreed to participate in the London sessions. At the last minute, however, the United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, lamely insisted that these experts were all too busy in The Hague to help the Iraqis, and he ordered them to stay home.
Similarly, Amnesty International has issued a press release insisting that the "trial of Saddam Hussein must draw on international expertise," but has failed to provide any such help. Human Rights Watch took testimony from Iraqi victims who thought they were helping develop cases against Iraqis suspected of crimes. But according to American officials, the organization, without consulting the witnesses, refused to provide all the statements or to give all the victims' identities to the special tribunal. Human Rights Watch has even taken issue with the statute's ban on former Baath Party members sitting in judgment of the accused. Would the group have wanted Nazis passing judgment at Nuremberg? |