You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Iraqi court acquits former top aide to Saddam Hussein
2009-03-03
Iraq's special criminal court Monday acquitted Tariq Aziz, the man who once served as the urbane, cigar-smoking public face of Saddam Hussein's rule, delivering the most significant not-guilty verdict in a series of prosecutions for crimes against humanity that occurred before the U.S. invasion in 2003.

Aziz, who will turn 73 next month, remained in custody, facing charges in two other cases. Only hours after his acquittal, he appeared before another judge to defend himself against charges that he was involved in a massacre of Kurds in 1983.

Even so, the verdict - the first in a case against him - was viewed as a sign of judicial fairness and independence for a controversial tribunal that has been deliberating the most heinous crimes of the Saddam era.

Aziz, who served as foreign minister of Iraq during the invasion of Kuwait in 1990 and as Saddam's deputy prime minister during the U.S. invasion in 2003, was acquitted of culpability in a brutal crackdown against Shiite protesters that followed the assassination of a revered cleric, Grand Ayatollah Mohammed al-Sadr, in 1999.

The court convicted Ali Hassan al-Majid, a former aide known as "Chemical Ali" for ordering poison gas attacks against the Kurds in the 1980s, for his role in those killings, sentencing him to death for a third time.

Two other Saddam aides, Saif al-Din al-Mashhadani and Uglah Abid Siqir al-Kubaysi, both senior Baath party officials who appeared on the infamous deck of playing cards from the U.S. government for Iraq's most wanted officials, were also acquitted in the case.
Posted by:Fred

#2  I didn't pursue it, but the word a few years back was that Aziz was implicated in the marsh Arabs case. That sounded odd from the start, but as I said I never followed up, as there was plenty to do with the other cases then under way.

Nice - I mean depressing - to see the standard distortion still at work. "Controversial" panel to whom? Self-dealing, failed, contemptible Euro & UN-judicial geeks who are paid by the week? Preening puerile purists? And defendants have been acquitted since the outset. Two were sprung in the opening case - Dujayl. The US advisors never thought they belonged in the dock, and the panel agreed in the end.

"Judicial fairness" and "independence" were not heretore evident in the tribunal's deliberations? Really? Evidence, please?

Contested elections, a free press, the first national trials for crimes against humanity in history, all in one of the world's most pathologically dysfunctional regions - made possible by the sacrifice and courageous integrity and skill of many in uniform (US and others), and a tiny handful of intrepid political leaders - yawn.

Nauseating.
Posted by: Verlaine   2009-03-03 02:47  

#1  Tariq Aziz was, almost assuredly, not part of Saddam's "inner circle". Saddam wouldn't have trusted him with much because he wasn't from Saddam's tribe, he is a Christian, and he hung around with foreigners a lot.

Aziz was sort of like Baghdad Bob (in fact, didn't Baghdad Bob work for Aziz?). His job would have been making deals with foreigners and not having much say in domestic goings on. He would have been instrumental in the "oil for food" scandal, though.
Posted by: crosspatch   2009-03-03 00:38  

00:00