BAGHDAD, Iraq ,-- October 3, 2006 - The court
trying Saddam Hussein said Tuesday it was postponing
the verdict to give the judges more time to review
evidence, amid widespread worries over the
decision's impact at a time of sharp Shiite-Sunni
divisions in Iraq.
The court had been expected to announce its verdict
Oct. 16, when it reconvenes for the first time since
July 27, when nine months of testimony were
completed.
Court spokesman Raid Juhi told The Associated Press
that the Oct. 16 session will be held, but "will not
be for the verdict. It's for the judges' review of
the evidence."
Juhi said he could not say when the verdict would be
issued, but the review raised the possibility the
judges could ask to recall some witnesses or seek
new testimony on some evidence.
A court official, speaking on condition of anonymity
because he was not allowed to release the
information, said the verdict could be put off until
late October or early November.
Saddam and his co-defendants face possible execution
by hanging if found guilty on charges against
humanity over a crackdown on Shiites in the town of
Dujail launched in 1982.
But any verdict raises the possibility of a violent
reaction amid the deepening sectarian tensions that
have torn Iraq. Thousands have been killed in
Shiite-Sunni violence this year.
That fear is in sharp contrast to the United States'
original hopes for the trial - that it would serve
as a way to heal Iraq's divisions by bringing out
the truth about Saddam's regime and helping
reconciliation between Sunnis and Shiites. |
Chief Judge Raouf Abdel Rahman, headed the panel for
Saddam's trial in the killing of Shi'as in Dujail.
Former dictator Saddam Hussein
Photo : AFP |
|
But there has been little healing during the stormy
trial. A death sentence could anger Sunnis and fuel
the three-year-old insurgency, while anything short
of execution would infuriate Shiites.
Many Sunnis remain convinced the tribunal is merely
a show trial put on by the now dominant Shiites,
backed by the Americans, to take vengeance against
the former Iraqi leader.
Minority Sunnis were dominant under Saddam but lost
power to Shiites, who comprise some 60 percent of
Iraq's population, after the U.S.-led invasion in
2003.
Meanwhile, Shiites and the minority Kurd community -
both persecuted under Saddam - have been eager to
see Saddam taken to the gallows.
A guilty verdict for Saddam is widely expected - but
the court official suggested that there were
differences over how heavy a sentence to impose.
The court official said that if Saddam is convicted
and sentenced to death, the violence may increase.
If Saddam receives a lighter sentence, it would
anger Shiite political parties and the people, he
said.
The longer review of the evidence is intended to
ensure that the final verdict - which will be
accompanied by a report explaining the reasoning in
detail - "is complete, that no one can put holes in
it," he said.
Juhi did not link the delay to worries over tensions
in Iraq. He said the judges have been reviewing the
evidence and testimony from the trial to determine
"whether it is complete or is lacking."
If they decide it is lacking, they could call back
witnesses or review other evidence. Juhi would not
say whether he believed this would likely happen.
"It is up to the judges to issue a decision on
this," Juhi said.
Saddam and his co-defendants have the opportunity
for appeal of any verdict.
The Dujail trial, which began Oct. 19, 2005, is the
first for Saddam.
A second trial of the former Iraqi leader and six
other co-defendants began Aug. 21 on genocide
charges for their alleged roles in a bloody
1987-1988 crackdown against Kurdish rebels. It was
adjourned last week until Oct. 9 after a stormy
session during which the chief judge expelled all of
the defendants.
Earlier in the week, Chief Judge Mohammed Oreibi
al-Khalifa had replaced the previous chief judge in
the genocide trial, who was accused of being too
soft on the former president.
Saddam's attorneys responded by boycotting the
proceedings, and al-Khalifa put the trial on hold in
order to give Saddam and the other defendants time
to convince their lawyers to end the boycott or to
confer with new ones.
The Dujail trial was equally stormy, with frequent
outbursts by Saddam and his top co-defendant, former
intelligence chief Barzan Ibrahim.
The trial heard extensive testimony from Shiite
survivors of the crackdown, recounting torture while
in prison and the deaths of loved ones. The
crackdown was sparked by a 1982 assassination
attempt on Saddam by Shiite rebels.
Hundreds of Dujail residents were arrested, some
tortured to death, and 148 Shiites were sentenced to
death for involvement in the attempt to kill Saddam.
The prosecution argued that they were executed after
a fake trial and that the crackdown aimed to punish
the entire town.
The main evidence against Saddam were a series of
documents signed by him - the order for the 148 to
be put on trial, the approval of their death
sentences and an approval of rewards for several
intelligence officers involved in the crackdown.
The defense argued that the crackdown was justified
in response to the assassination attempt - a feeling
shared by many Sunnis. They also argue that the
documents don't add up a crime against humanity
since Saddam was performing his constitutional role
in ordering suspects put on trial, then signing off
on the verdict against him.
AP
Top |
® 