"Chemical Ali" to hang in "a matter of days."

The Iraqi Presidential Council said Friday they removed the blockade on the execution of Ali Hassan al-Majid, better known as “Chemical Ali.”  It was delayed in June 2007 over obstacles in the legal procedure for handing down death sentences.  The council is made up of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, and his two vice presidents. Majid was found guilty of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity for the Anfal campaign targeting ethnic Kurds.  Though Iraq has not asked the United States to assume custody of Majid, which would mean his execution was imminent, it is expected that the sentence will be carried out within 30 days.

In June, 1988, the Iraqi military – directed by Majid – killed up to 180,000 Kurdish civilians and guerillas as part of a crackdown against uprisings in Iraqi Kurdistan.  Majid admitted to ordering troops to execute Kurds who would not participate with imposed displacements, however, he denied the use of chemical weapons during the campaign.  Majid also faced death for his role in the suppression of a Shi'ite rebellion – which was allegedly backed by the United States – following the defeat of Iraq in the 1991 Gulf War.

An adviser to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said the execution will be carried out in “a matter of days.”

I’ve been critical of this tribunal in the past.  The Iraqi High Tribunal examining the case came into power while Iraq existed under the mandate of the Coalition Provisional Authority, the transitional government of Iraq ran by the United States as the occupying power. Some critics, including this author, say the Iraqi tribunal should proceed in coordination with the international courts, which it does not.  The Iraqi code of law did not recognize crimes against humanity and other war crimes until the CPA allowed it to do so.  On that front, the Fourth Geneva Convention curtails the legal limits an occupying power must exercise when defining the laws in its subject country.  The CPA defining, or at the very least participating in, the definitions of war crimes and subsequent penalties smacks of victor's justice.

Another issue here is the ability to proceed in a war crimes tribunal in a fair matter so soon after the overthrow of the previous regime.  As mentioned, a member of the Council determining his fate is himself a Kurd, making impartiality dubious indeed.  Others view the imposition of the death penalty as a violation of international law because the tribunal does not use a jury system, instead proceeding with a review panel of judges.

Various members of U.N. judicial councils also view the trials as unfair, and thereby the death penalty here, unjust.

See “Iraq” category for more on this, or search for “Anfal.”