Trials in Iraq are a joke, and it's the USA's fault.

[theweaselking]

On the trial of Pulitzer-prize winning AP photographer Bilal Hussein:

He's being held in Iraq. His prosecution is a 5-man team from the US military. They've pressured the judge to completely exclude the defense attorney from trial proceedings, and refuse to allow him access to the defendant at all. The judge is allowing them to present secret witnesses via camera from secret locations, explicitly to prevent cross-examination. And, of course, on day #1 of the trial, before evidence or argument, the judge announced that he would recommend a conviction and refer the matter to the criminal court. This concerned the US sources, because they had been trying to get the judge to say that AFTER the evidence.

Harpers' does point out this:

Still this sort of conduct is the exception. Most of the Americans providing support to the court and its judges perform their functions in a capable and professional way, and most of the judges went out of their way to recount their experiences showing professionalism and kindness. The exceptions seem to come when there is heavy pressure out of Washington for a particular result. Like in the case of Bilal Hussein.

Comments

[lafinjack.livejournal.com]

Still this sort of conduct is the exception.

If we're the good guys, there should never, ever, ever be any fucking exceptions. Otherwise we're just pissing on the Constitution.

[sanityimpaired.livejournal.com]

If there's one thing I can say I like about the invasion of Iraq, it's that it makes these kinds of things much more visible and apparent to the population. The kind of under the table politics that defined US - middle eastern relations for several decades is now much more visible.

With any luck, the population will take notice and do something about it.