Convictions in the Anfal Trial

Convictions in the Anfal Trial

The verdict has been delivered in the Anfal trial — and not surprisingly, “Chemical Ali” and his highest-ranking co-defendants have been convicted and sentenced to death:

Ali Hassan al-Majid, Saddam’s cousin and the former head of the Baath Party’s Northern Bureau Command, earned his nickname for his alleged use of chemical weapons against the ethnic minority during efforts to crush a rebellion in the north.

The judge, Mohammed Oreibi al-Khalifa, said al-Majid was convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes for ordering army and security services to use chemical weapons in a large-scale offensive that killed or maimed thousands.

Former defense minister Sultan Hashim Ahmad al-Tai also was sent to the gallows after the judge ruled that he had ordered a large-scale attack against civilians and used chemical weapons and deportation against the Kurds.

[snip]

The former deputy director of operations for the Iraqi Armed Forces, Hussein Rashid Mohammed, also was sentenced to death after he was convicted of drawing up military plans and other allegations against the Kurds.

Two other defendants — both military intelligence officers under Saddam — were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, while charges were dismissed at the prosecution’s request against the former governor of Mosul.

Although the Anfal trial has received far less attention than the Dujail trial, it was no less unfair:

The Anfal trial was marred by procedural flaws including political interference such as removal of the presiding judge on September 19, 2006 by the Iraqi Prime Minister and Cabinet after the judge made remarks perceived as favorable to the defense. Human Rights Watch has also raised concerns about vague charges which made it difficult for the defendants to prepare their case and the inability of the defense to call witnesses who feared for their security. Proceedings in the Anfal trial closed on May 10, 2007 and a verdict will be issued soon. The prosecutor has called for the death penalty to be imposed on five of the six defendants.

“The court undercut the accused’s right to present a vigorous defense by allowing the prosecution to rely on vague charges and refusing requests to accommodate defense witnesses,” said Dicker. “This includes refusing to hear testimony from defense witnesses abroad via videolink.”

More on the Anfal judgment when it becomes available.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Topics
General
Notify of
Troy
Troy

He will only receive true justice at The Hague — the great Protector of the little guy everywhere.

Kevin Heller
Kevin Heller

Well said. I agree completely. The ICC guarantees due process — and should actually provide it — unlike the IHT, which is only interested in show trials.

Matthew Gross
Matthew Gross

I think Troy is being sarcastic.

As usual, the news out of the ICC makes me hold my head and sigh. Apparently, the most effective defense if accused of war crimes is hope hostile witnesses simply die in the multi-year interim.

The NewStream Dream
The NewStream Dream

I have to question if the ICC guarantees due process, given the lack of data. I think one can easily point to problems with the ICTY and ICTR. A judge getting replaced for public comments and vague charges pale in comparison to some of the tomfoolery at the ICTY/R