Human Rights in Iraq - Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions

The record of correspondence for 2007 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, A/HRC/4/20/Add.1.

Iraq: Killings of Sunnis by Armed Groups Linked to the Ministry of Interior

Violation alleged: Deaths due to attacks or killings by security forces, paramilitary groups, death squads, or private forces cooperating with or tolerated by the State

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Iraq has failed to cooperate with the mandate that he has been given by the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights.

I have been following the reports regarding the barbaric bomb-attack on the al-Askari shrine in Samarra on 22 February 2006 and the following events with great concern and would like to offer my condolences at the terrible loss of life and destruction, particularly of religious sites, your country has witnessed in the course of the last three weeks. As Special Rapporteur on summary executions, I would like to draw the attention of your Government to information I have received concerning a wave of killings of persons belonging to the Sunni community on 22 and 23 February 2006. I am of course aware that the further increase in violence since 22 February has resulted in the killing of numerous Iraqis belonging to the Shiite community as well. The reason I am raising my concerns and seeking information from you with regard to these executions is that the armed groups reportedly responsible for them are alleged to have links to the Ministry of Interior of your Excellency’s Government, and because there are specific reports that the security forces failed to protect the victims. Among the numerous incidents reported, I would like to draw your attention to the attack on the so-called Palestinian compound in Baghdad, the attack on the Basra headquarters of the Iraqi Islamic Party, and the abduction of twelve prisoners from the Al Mina detention centre in Basra with the subsequent execution of eleven of them.

On 22 February 2006 at about 10.30 a.m., militiamen wearing black clothes arrived in several vehicles and attacked the Al Baladiya neighbourhood, where many Palestinians reside (known as the “Palestinian compound”). The militia headed first to the Mohammed Abdul Ra'ouf mosque, firing at civilians and killing an unspecified number of them. Subsequently, the militia went inside the mosque, planted explosives and detonated them, destroying the mosque. Later on, other groups of similarly clad armed men headed to the Al Qods mosque, located at about 1 km from the place of the first incident. They shot at the building, entered the mosque and abducted an employee, Mr. Jamal Mohammed. He was later found dead at the Medico Legal Institute, his face burned. The militias painted messages on the walls of the building: “Now is your turn Wahabis. Praying in the mosque is now forbidden for Wahabis”. The militia went to the Imam's office with the intention of planting explosives, but were prevented from doing so by armed residents of the area, who defended the mosque for about 30 minutes. 15 minutes after the attackers withdrew, the police arrived. It would appear that the police were near the area during the incidents but only intervened once the militias withdrew. Residents identify the attackers as belonging to the Mehdi Army led by Moqtada al-Sadr, but officials of Mr. al-Sadr’s party have denied involvement of their organization.

On 22 February 2006 at 8:30 p.m., a group of masked men (reports vary as to their precise number, some reports speaking of 70 men) came to the Al Mina detention center in Basra. They were dressed in black, wore bullet-proof vests, and were armed with pistols, rifles and rocket propelled grenade launcher (RPGs). The men went to a cell holding Iraqi and foreign Sunni Muslims detained on charges of terrorism. According to some reports, the armed men identified themselves as members of the Iraqi police intelligence and claimed to have authority to remove the prisoners. Ten of the twelve prisoners were killed and their bodies dumped on the streets along the Hay al Hussayn part of the city. Their names, as reported to me, are

Two men are said to have survived and were reportedly returned to the detention centre.

On 23 February 2006 at 1.30 p.m., approximately one hundred persons dressed in black attacked the Basra headquarters of the Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP). Some of the witnesses identified the attackers as members of the Badr Organisation, a militia affiliated with the political party Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, while others described them as belonging to the so-called Mehdi Army. After an exchange of fire, the building was set ablaze, forcing everybody inside to go to the roof of the building. Two IIP members were injured in the attack and were taken to a hospital. Some hours later, men in black clothing abducted the two injured IIP members from the hospital and assassinated them.

Under international human rights law, and in particular under articles 2 and 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the three incidents described above involve the responsibility of your Excellency’s Government at a number of levels.

First and foremost, reports suggest that in some instances the perpetrators of extrajudicial killings belong in fact to the forces of the Ministry of Interior or of the Ministry of Defence. In particular, the Mehdi Army and the Badr Organisation are reported to be active within the police. In this respect, I am also aware of reports according to which perpetrators dressed in police uniforms but in fact unrelated to the police are responsible for killings. The circumstance that some of the executions have been carried out by perpetrators impersonating police officers should not, however, serve as a reason to take the reports alleging executions perpetrated by actual police officers less seriously.

Secondly, reports suggest that even where there is no direct participation of personnel belonging to the forces of the Ministry of Interior or of the Ministry of Defence, there are various forms of collusion between the security forces and the militias suspected of carrying out these attacks, in particular the Mehdi Army and the Badr Organisation. This is of course the case when officials hand over prisoners to militiamen. As to the attacks on the civilian population and Sunni organizations and mosques, they show a degree of organization and reveal that the perpetrators have access to resources and equipment (vehicles, weapons, some form of uniform, bullet-proof vests). Moreover, while it is reported that in some instances the Iraqi police and Army intervened to protect the population, mosques and funeral processions from such attacks, in other cases the security forces clearly failed in their duty to protect the population against the militias, arriving only after the aggression was completed, or withdrawing too early and allowing the assault to resume.

International human rights law requires your Government to take immediate steps to disarm all militias operating in Iraq. Where militias or their individual members have been lawfully integrated into the security forces, your Government must ensure that they are under the effective control of the competent authorities and act under the official, constitutional chain of command. The reported incidents, and all other incidents of similar gravity, must be thoroughly and independently investigated, both with a view to clarifying to what extent the perpetrators belonged to or acted in collusion with the security forces, and in order to bring those responsible to justice. I have received reports that several inquiries have been started into previous cases of executions similar to those described above, but that they have been languishing without producing results whenever there are indications that security forces or militias connected to political parties in power are implicated. Clearly, in order to re-establish trust in the security forces and their readiness to protect all citizens (and other inhabitants) of Iraq, reports of killings involving the security forces must be given priority and be investigated all the more vigorously.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on this case to the Commission or the future Human Rights Council, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

1. Are the facts alleged in the above summary accurate? Please provide detailed information on the investigations carried out to clarify these incidents, in particular the allegations of direct involvement or collusion by the security forces.

2. Please provide the details of all the steps taken to disarm the militias active in Iraq, or – where their members have been lawfully integrated into the security forces – to ensure that they operate within the law and under the lawful chain of command, as well as to hold their members and commanders accountable.

3. Please provide details of all the criminal investigations and prosecutions carried out to bring those responsible for the executions described above to justice.

4. Have the victims of the incidents described above or their families been compensated?

I undertake to ensure that your Government’s response to each of these questions is accurately reflected in the report I will submit to the Commission on Human Rights for its consideration.

In closing this communication I would like to reiterate that the fact that I am raising with your Government the cases described in this letter, and not incidents of equally deadly and condemnable terrorist attacks on security forces or civilians, does certainly not lie in any discrimination between the victims of the attacks. But your Government’s responsibility to protect the right to life of all the persons subject to its jurisdiction is all the more relevant and pressing, both in law and from a political point of view, when there are reports of participation in the killings of personnel belonging to the security forces and to militias connected to political parties in government.

Iraq: Death Sentences of Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti, Barzan al-Tikriti, and Taha Yassin Ramadan

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Iraq has failed to cooperate with the mandate that he has been given by the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights.

I am writing in relation to the trial of Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti and others before the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal in the so-called Dujail case. According to the information received, the most recent developments are that on 19 June 2006 the Chief Trial Prosecutor demanded the death sentence for Saddam Hussein, his half-brother Barzan al-Tikriti and the former Vice-President, Taha Yassin Ramadan. Three days later, the bullet-ridden corpse of one of Saddam Hussein’s defense lawyers, Mr. Khamis Al-Obeidi, who had been abducted from his home on 21 June 2006, was found. It is my understanding that the trial is now adjourned to 10 July, when the defence will deliver its final arguments and the court will retire to consider its verdict.

As your Excellency’s Government is aware, international law – in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Iraq is a State party – does not ban the death penalty but attaches strict and vitally important procedural guarantees to its exercise.

One such limitation is that “in capital punishment cases, the obligation of States parties to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial set out in Article 14 of the (ICCPR) admits of no exception” (Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of the Human Rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10). Your Excellency’s Government is well aware of the serious concerns raised with regard to the compliance of the trial of Saddam Hussein with the requirements of a fair trial – not the least, that the murder of three of his defence lawyers casts some doubt on the full enjoyment of the right to “adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence” and to “defend himself … through legal assistance of his own choosing” (Article 14(3) ICCPR, letters (b) and (d), mirrored in Article 19(4), letters (b) and (d) of the Law on the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal). As the first instance trial is drawing to its conclusion and the Appeals Chamber will have the jurisdiction to hear appeals on the grounds of “error of procedure” (Article 25(1) of the Law on the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal), I do not wish to pursue these concerns at the present stage.

My concern in the present letter is with Article 27(2) of the Law, the first sentence of which reads: “No authority, including the President of the Republic, may grant a pardon or reduce the penalties issued by this Tribunal.” This provision would appear to be irreconcilable with paragraph 4 of Article 6 ICCPR, providing that “[a]nyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the sentence of death may be granted in all cases.”

I am also gravely concerned about the second sentence of Article 27(2), providing that “[p]enalties shall be enforced within thirty days of the sentence or decision reaching finality.” Considering the irremediable nature of capital punishment, this provision would appear to fail to take into account the numerous serious legal issues which, as the experience of other countries retaining the death penalty shows, can and do arise even after a death sentence has become “final”. A period of thirty days does not provide sufficient time for the defence or for the wheels of justice to respond adequately to any subsequent issues that might be raised.

An additional consideration concerns the desirability of ensuring that the defendants are able to stand trial for at least the most serious crimes of which they have been accused. While there may be no formal obligation in international law to refrain from executing someone duly convicted of a most serious crime and sentenced to death before they can be tried on other charges, the interests of promoting accountability and justice would weigh strongly in favour of ensuring that the accused in the present proceedings are brought to court in relation to a reasonable cross section of the gravest charges against them. I note in this regard that your Excellency’s Government has reportedly announced that a second trial against Saddam Hussein and six co-defendants is scheduled to begin on 21 August 2006. In this trial the accused are to be judged, including on charges of genocide, for their alleged role in Operation Anfal, a campaign which is said to have killed an estimated 100,000 Kurdish citizens of Iraq in 1987-88. Proceeding with the rapid carrying out of a death sentence in such circumstances would seem to be incompatible with the interests of the community at large, and of the victims in particular, in securing a careful consideration of the charges in court.

I accept of course that it will not be possible to try all the crimes against humanity and war crimes committed since 17 July 1968 by the regime led by Saddam Hussein, and that there are other transitional justice mechanisms available, such as truth commissions. Nonetheless, I consider that the provision mandating execution within thirty days unnecessarily undermines the efforts of victims of the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein’s regime to promote accountability.

In the light of the above considerations, I urge your Excellency’s Government to use the time provided by the completion of the first instance trial and the (possible) appeals proceedings in the Dujail case to repeal Article 27(2) of the Law on the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal, or amend it as necessary to bring it in compliance with your Government’s obligations under international law. As set forth above, this will require providing for the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence for convicts sentenced to death, as well as for adequate time to effectively exercise this right.

Violation alleged: Death in custody; Deaths due to attacks or killings by security forces, paramilitary groups, death squads, or private forces cooperating with or tolerated by the State

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Iraq has failed to cooperate with the mandate that he has been given by the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights.

Letter of allegation dated 18 August 2006 sent with the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture

We would like to bring to your Government’s attention information we have received concerning 59 men reportedly tortured to death or executed after having been tortured, apparently by security forces of your Excellency’s Government. According to the information received:

As he was leaving a mosque in Al-Huria district, Baghdad, following prayers on an unspecified date in May 2005, Taha Mohammad Sulaiman Al Meshehdani was arrested together with five others by members of the Iraqi Rapid Reaction Force riding in vehicles with the insignia of the National Guards. He was taken to the Ministry of Interior Detention Centre. Having received no news of his whereabouts, 19 days later his family discovered that his body was in the Medico-Legal Institute, found among six others dumped in the Al-Sha’ab district. His body exhibited wounds inflicted as a result of a power drill, his vertebrae and bones in his legs and hands were broken. Death reportedly occurred the day after he was arrested.

On 14 May 2005, Salah Hassan Mosa, Yahya Hassan Mosa, Khalid Al-Azzawi, Salah Ibrahim, Nariman Mahmoud, Khudair Khamees, Naseir Samir, Laith Al-Azawi, Ali Hussein, and Mohammed Hamid Rashid were detained by the Police Special Forces Unit (Al-Borkhan) in the Al-Eskan area of Baghdad. They were found dead in the Al-Gayarra district days later with torture signs on their bodies, including bullet holes and marks indicative of beating.

On 10 July 2005, officers of the Ministry of Interior searched the Seba Abkar district, Baghdad, and arrested men belonging to the Arab Sunni community, including Shiekh Dhiaa Muhmood Al-Jenabi, Abdulsalam Abdul-Aziz, Amer Husain Al-Meshhedani, Ayad Dawood Selman, Selman Dawood Selman, Hadi Zbala, Foua’ad Salem Tawfeek Al-Kaisi, Ala’a Salem Tawfeek Al-Kaisi, Ali Noree Aifan, Mushtaq Misha’an Mutlaq, and Khalid Zaidan Saud Al-Lehaibie. On 13 July 2005, the families of the victims found the bodies in the Medico-Legal Institute. The bodies bore signs of injuries, including wounds caused by power drills, gun shot wounds to the head, acid-induced injuries, and facial mutilation, such as missing eyes.

On 24 August 2005, about 80 persons belonging to the Sunni community were detained in Al-Huria district, Baghdad, by the Police Special Forces Unit (Al-Borkhan Unit). They included Mohamed Ali Hamed Al-Mashhadaniy, Waleed Ali Hamed Al-Mashhadaniy, Mushtaq Abas Alwan Al-Msariy, Emad Qazi Abdullah Al-Kaabiy, Sadam Mohamed Mahood Al-Mashhadaniy, Ali Ahmed Abdul Karrim Al-Mashhadaniy, Hekmet Ahmed Abdul Karrim Al-Mashhadaniy, Mohamed Al- Najar Al-Mashhadaniy, Hassan Ahmed Hussien Al- Mashhadaniy, Ahmed Abed Ahmed Al-Mashhadaniy, Methaq Abass Alwan Al-Mashhadaniy, Adel Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Mahdi Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Fadel Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Zead Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Wessam Adnan Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Hesham Adnan Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Ali Adel Awad Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Umer Adel Awad Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Muwafaq Dawood Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Ahmed Dawood Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Riaad Dawood Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Diaa Dawood Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Mohammed Ibrahem Aubaid Al-Dulaimi, Muhaned Ibrahem Aubaid Al-Dulaimi, Fadel Jasem Mohammed Al-Dulaimi, Feras Talib Dawood Mutlaq Al-Dulaimi, Mukhlif Garib Al-Dulaimi, Shawkat Mukhlif Garib Al-Dulaimi, Falah Mukhlif Garib Al-Dulaimi, Hussain Rashed Jassem Hamadiy Al-Dulaimi, and Mohammed Alawi Abass Al-Ubaidiy. On 28 August 2005, the bodies of 36 of the persons detained on 24 August in Al-Huria were found in Kut province. On 29 August 2005, a relative of other victims identified another 50 bodies in the Medico-Legal Institute, Baghdad, as belonging to persons arrested on 24 August in Al-Huria. The bodies bore signs of injuries, including acid-induced injuries, gun shot wounds to the head, missing teeth, punctures, missing skin, broken hands, and facial mutilation, such as missing eyes. The police have refused to release information as to where they found the bodies which were delivered to the Medico-Legal Institute.

Ahmad Shaker Mahmoud, aged 37, Omar Khalil Abed, aged 30, and Shaker Mahmoud Ali, aged 66, all of Baghdad, were detained by members of the Al-Mehdi Army following the bombing of two Shiite shrines in Samara on 22 February 2006. On 23 February 2006, their bodies were found dumped in the Kasra-Wattash district, Baghdad, bearing signs of torture. Ahmed Shaker’s left eye was missing, his back appeared to be burned by an iron, and his body bore puncture wounds made by a power drill. Omar Khalil’s neck exhibited power drill injuries; and Shakir Mahmoud had marks indicative of beatings.

Mosa’b Abdul Sattar Abdul Jabbar, aged 25, member of a counseling committee at the Muslim Scholars’ Foundation, Baghdad, was deprived of his freedom by men riding in three cars belonging to the Ministry of Interior on his way to Al-Tasfeerat (the Iraqi Police Center), where he was going to visit one of the detainees. On 30 May 2006, the body of Mosa’b Abdul Sattar was found in the Medico-Legal Institute bearing signs of torture: acid burns on his face and body and power drill holes on his legs. It seems also that his head was squeezed with a metal compressor until his eyes came out of their sockets.

In none of the above cases have investigations led to the arrest of the suspected perpetrators and the initiation of criminal proceedings against them, nor has any of the victims’ families received compensation.

While we do not wish to prejudge the accuracy of these allegations, we would like to draw your Government’s attention to the fundamental principles applicable under international law to these incidents. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) enshrines the right not to be arbitrarily deprived of one’s life. Article 7 ICCPR and Article 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment proscribe torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.

In all cases, except for the death of Ahmad Shaker Mahmoud, Omar Khalil Abed, and Shaker Mahmoud Ali, the reports indicate that the victims were last seen alive when they were deprived of their freedom by members of your Government’s security forces. Under these circumstances, human rights law establishes a rebuttable presumption of State responsibility for the violation of the rights to life and physical and mental integrity.

Also, article 12 of the Convention Against Torture requires the competent authorities to undertake a prompt and impartial investigation wherever there are reasonable grounds to believe that torture has been committed, and its article 7 requires State parties to prosecute suspected perpetrators of torture. The Commission on Human Rights has stressed in Resolution 2005/39 (paragraph 3) “ that all allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment must be promptly and impartially examined by the competent national authority, that those who encourage, order, tolerate or perpetrate acts of torture must be held responsible and severely punished, including the officials in charge of the place of detention where the prohibited act is found to have been committed, and [has taken] note in this respect of the Principles on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Istanbul Principles) as a useful tool in efforts to combat torture”.

Analogous obligations arise for your Government from the death of the men named in the case summaries above. As stated in the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, international law requires your Government to carry out “thorough, prompt and impartial investigation[s] of all suspected cases of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions” (Principle 9). As noted by the Commission on Human Rights in Resolution 2005/34 (paragraph 4), this includes the obligation “to identify and bring to justice those responsible, …, to grant adequate compensation within a reasonable time to the victims or their families and to adopt all necessary measures, including legal and judicial measures, in order to … prevent the recurrence of such executions”. We would like to stress that, because of the above-mentioned presumption of State responsibility for deaths in custody, the obligation to pay compensation to the family members arises and remains even if it was not possible to clarify the circumstances of the death and the identity of the perpetrators.

In drawing your Government’s attention to these principles of international law, we are of course aware of the difficult situation prevailing in Iraq at present and at the time of the alleged incidents, particularly the ongoing armed conflict in some parts of the country, the nearly daily barbaric attacks by terrorists and the activities of sectarian militias kidnapping and killing civilians on a daily basis. In this respect, we would like to recall the following considerations by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions in his letter to your Excellency’s Government of 14 March 2006, a letter that has regrettably remained unanswered:

“First and foremost, reports suggest that in some instances the perpetrators of extrajudicial killings belong in fact to the forces of the Ministry of Interior or of the Ministry of Defence. In particular, the Mehdi Army and the Badr Organisation are reported to be active within the police. In this respect, I am also aware of reports according to which perpetrators dressed in police uniforms but in fact unrelated to the police are responsible for killings. The circumstance that some of the executions have been carried out by perpetrators impersonating police officers should not, however, serve as a reason to take the reports alleging executions perpetrated by actual police officers less seriously.

It is our responsibility under the mandates provided to us by the Commission on Human Rights, reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly and extended by the Human Rights Council, to seek to clarify all cases brought to our attention. Since we are expected to report on these cases to the Human Rights Council, we would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

2. Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any investigation, medical examinations, and judicial or other inquiries which may have been carried out in relation to these cases. If no inquiries have taken place or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why.

3. In the event that the alleged perpetrators are identified, please provide the full details of any prosecutions which have been undertaken. Have penal, disciplinary or administrative sanctions been imposed on the alleged perpetrators?

4. Please provide the details of all the steps taken to disarm the militias active in Iraq, or – where their members have been lawfully integrated into the security forces – to ensure that they operate within the law and under the lawful chain of command, as well as to hold their members and commanders accountable.

5. Have the families of the victims in the incidents described above compensated? Please provide details.

In closing this communication, we would like to stress that we are aware that the victims in all the incidents described above would appear to belong to the Sunni community. The fact that we are raising with your Government the cases described in this letter, and not incidents of equally deadly and condemnable terrorist attacks on security forces or Shiite civilians, does certainly not lie in any discrimination between the victims of the attacks. But your Government’s responsibility to protect the right to life of all the persons subject to its jurisdiction is all the more relevant and pressing, both in law and from a political point of view, when there are reports of participation in the killings of personnel belonging to the security forces and to militias connected to political parties in government.

Iraq: Death Sentences of Six Men in Relation to the Kidnapping of Romanian Journalists

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Iraq has failed to cooperate with the mandate that he has been given by the General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights.

In this connection, we would like to draw the attention of your Government to information we have received regarding Mohammad Munaf Mohammad al-Amin, who holds dual American and Iraqi citizenship, Yusuf Munaf Mohammad al-Amin, Salam Hikmat Mohammad Farhan al-Qassir, ‘Abd al-Jabbar ‘Abbas Jasim al-Salman, ‘Omar Jasim Mohammad ‘Ali al-Salman, and Ibrahim Yassin Kadhim Hussain al-Jibouri.

According to the information received, the six men named were sentenced to death by the Central Criminal Court of Iraq (CCCI) on 12 October 2006 for their alleged involvement in the kidnapping of three Romanian journalists in Iraq. The trial, which considered the case of all six defendants at the same hearing, is reported to have lasted about one hour. All six defendants face execution if the Court of Cassation upholds the CCCI’s verdict. The men were reportedly tortured and threatened in pre-trial detention.

Mohammad Munaf Mohammad al-Amin is currently being held by the US armed forces at Camp Cropper near Baghdad airport. He has been in US custody since his capture in May 2005, under an agreement which allows pre-trial detainees awaiting criminal prosecution in Iraqi courts to be held in detention centres run by the Multi-National Force-Iraq (MNF-I). He was reportedly held for months in US custody as a security internee before appearing before the CCCI. He is alleged to have subsequently made statements at Iraqi preliminary hearings admitting to having participated in the kidnapping of the journalists, but retracted his confession at trial. He claims that the confession was made after he received threats of violence and sexual assault against him and his family.

Mohammad Munaf Mohammad al-Amin is due to be transferred imminently to Iraqi custody. He has an application pending before a US district court for a temporary restraining order to prevent his transfer to Iraqi custody, on the grounds that his right to a fair trial may have been violated. However, the US government has argued that the US courts do not have jurisdiction in the case.

Muhammad Munaf Mohammad al-Amin was born in Iraq, and emigrated to the USA in 1990. In 2001 he moved to Romania with his Romanian wife and three children. He accompanied the three kidnapped Romanian journalists to Iraq, acting as a guide and interpreter. The journalists were held for two months before being released unharmed during a military rescue operation in May 2005. Muhammad Munaf Mohammad al-Amin was arrested during the rescue operation, and was accused of posing as a kidnap victim and of involvement in the kidnapping plot. He denies these charges.

The other five defendants are in Iraqi custody. Three of them have reportedly been tortured by being beaten with cables and the use of electric shocks in various parts of their bodies. However, their complaints were not considered by the court, and no investigation into the alleged torture is believed to have been initiated.

While we are fully aware of the most serious nature of the crimes these men have been found guilty of, we respectfully remind your Excellency that “in capital punishment cases, the obligation of States parties to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial set out in Article 14 of the (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) admits of no exception” (Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of the Human Rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10). Relevant to the cases at issue, these guarantees include the right not to be compelled to confess guilt and the right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of one’s defence.

We also recall that Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/39 urges States to ensure that any statement, which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made. This principle is an essential aspect of the right to physical and mental integrity set forth, inter alia, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Furthermore, we would like to draw your Government’s attention to Resolution 2005/39 of the Commission on Human Rights reminded Governments that corporal punishment can amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or even to torture. We would also like to draw your attention to the report of the Special Rapporteur on torture to the 60th session of the General Assembly, in which he, with reference to the jurisprudence of UN treaty bodies, concluded that any form of corporal punishment is contrary to the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. He also noted that States cannot invoke provisions of domestic law to justify violations of their human rights obligations under international law, including the prohibition of corporal punishment and called upon States to abolish all forms of judicial and administrative corporal punishment without delay (para.28 A/60/316). Both the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture have called for the abolition of judicial corporal punishment. In paragraph 5 of General Comment No. 20 (1992), the Human Rights Committee stated that the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment must extend to corporal punishment, including excessive chastisement ordered as punishment for a crime of as an educative or disciplinary measure.

We urge your Excellency’s Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee that the rights under international law of the six men above are respected. This can only mean suspension of the capital punishment until the allegations of torture have been thoroughly investigated and all doubts in this respect dispelled. Moreover, international law requires that the accountability of any person guilty of subjecting these men to torture is ensured.

In view of the urgency of the matter, we would appreciate a response on the initial steps taken by your Excellency’s Government.

Moreover, it is our responsibility under the mandates provided to us by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to our attention. Since we are expected to report on these cases to the Human Rights Council, we would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

2. Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any investigation, medical examinations, and judicial or other inquiries carried out in relation to the allegations that Mohammad Munaf Mohammad al-Amin, Yusuf Munaf Mohammad al-Amin, Salam Hikmat Mohammad Farhan al-Qassir, ‘Abd al-Jabbar ‘Abbas Jasim al-Salman, ‘Omar Jasim Mohammad ‘Ali al-Salman, and Ibrahim Yassin Kadhim Hussain al-Jibouri were subjected to torture while in pre-trial detention. If no inquiries have taken place, or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why.

3. Please provide the full details of any prosecutions which have been undertaken with regard to the alleged torture of the above-mentioned individuals. Have penal, disciplinary or administrative sanctions been imposed on the perpetrators?

Correspondence from 2006

The record of correspondence for 2006 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2006/53/Add.1.

Iraq: Death Sentences of Four Men

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: 4 males

Character of reply: No response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Iraq has failed to cooperate with the mandate he has been given by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.� The SR has since received credible information that Ahmad al-Jaf, �Uday Dawud al-Dulaimi, and Jasim �Abbas have been executed.� However, he reiterates his urgent appeal with respect to Tahsin �Ali Mattar.

Urgent appeal sent on 31 May 2005

Mr. Ahmad al-Jaf, aged 30, Mr. �Uday Dawud al-Dulaimi, aged 25, Mr. Jasim �Abbas, aged 44 and Mr. Tahsin �Ali Mattar who were reportedly sentenced to death in two separate trials in Iraq. If their sentences are ultimately carried out, they may be the first people to be executed by the new Government.

According to the information received, on 22 May 2005, Ahmad al-Jaf, �Uday Dawud al-Dulaimi and Jasim �Abbas were sentenced to death by a criminal court in al-Kut, about 170 kilometres southeast of Baghdad, following a trial alleged to have lasted only a few hours. The three accused are alleged members of the armed group Ansar al-Sunna. I understand that they were found guilty of kidnapping, killing of policemen and rape of women, although no information on the details of the charges has been made available to me. The Court reportedly announced that the sentences would be carried out �within 10 days� of the pronouncement of the verdict. It is not currently known if the case would be referred to a Court of Appeal.

It is further reported that, on 25 May 2005, a criminal court in Babil, south of Baghdad, sentenced Tahsin �Ali Mattar to death after finding him guilty of �terrorist activities�. He and another defendant, who received a 15-year prison term, have reportedly been given 10 days to appeal of the decision. No further information in relation to this case has been brought to my attention.

Without in any way wishing to prejudge the accuracy of this information, I would respectfully request Your Excellency�s Government to provide me with the details of the trials of the above-mentioned individuals, with a view to establishing whether the proceedings complied with international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment.

It is my understanding that, on 8 August 2004, the interim government reinstated the death penalty in Iraq for certain crimes such as murder, drug trafficking and kidnapping. The reimposition of capital punishment was justified as a measure to deal with the deteriorating security situation.� More specifically, I understand that Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari has recently announced that that the death penalty would be implemented as a way to control ongoing violence and insurgency.� I do not wish to under-estimate the challenges posed by this insurgency and I am aware that armed groups opposed to the presence of foreign troops and to the Iraqi Government have carried out very serious crimes including kidnapping and killing of civilian hostages, as well as indiscriminate suicide and bomb attacks that have left hundreds of civilians dead. I understand that Ansar al-Sunna has allegedly claimed responsibility for many of these abuses.

I would nevertheless stress that, while I recognise the responsibility of Governments to protect their citizens against the excesses of non-State actors or other authorities as well as the crucial need to bring the perpetrators of such abuses to justice, efforts in that sense must be undertaken within a framework clearly governed by international human rights law.

Although the death penalty is not prohibited under international law, I would like to remind your Excellency�s Government that it must be regarded as an extreme exception to the fundamental right to life, and must as such be interpreted in the most restrictive manner. Therefore, it is crucial that all restrictions and fair trial standards pertaining to capital punishment contained in international human rights law are fully respected in proceedings relating to capital offences.� This includes the right to an adequate defence and the right to appeal the death sentence.

In this connection, I would like to refer Your Excellency�s Government to the fundamental principles set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Articles 3 and 6 of these instruments, respectively, provide that every individual has the right to life and security of the person, that this right shall be protected by law and that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life. I shall underline that the right to life as provided for in article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is non-derogable (See Article 4(2) of the Covenant). Besides, Articles 6(2), 14 and 15 of the ICCPR provide that the death penalty may only be imposed for the most serious crimes, in accordance with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime, and pursuant to a final judgement rendered by a competent court.

Iraq: Inquiry Regarding the Death Penalty

Violation alleged: Non-respect of international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment

Subject(s) of appeal: General

Character of reply: Cooperative but incomplete response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur reiterates that the Commission on Human Rights has requested him to monitor the implementation of all standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment and that his communication of 29 August 2005 was designed to further that end by requesting particular factual and legal information from the Government of Iraq.� The SR regrets that the Government�s response deals solely with the question of whether the death penalty should be abolished, a question that was not raised by the SR, since it does not fall within his mandate.

Urgent appeal sent on 29 August 2005

Urgent appeal sent concerning recent reports according to which 48 individuals sentenced to death since the reinstatement of capital punishment in Iraq on 8 August 2004 have had their appeals against their death sentences rejected. They are therefore reportedly at risk of imminent execution. The sentences are reported to have been referred to the Presidential Council, made up of President Jalal Talababi and his two deputies, �Adil �Abdul Mahdi and Shaikh Ghazi al-Yawar, for ratification. I have neither been informed of the names of these 48 persons or of the charges on which they were convicted, nor have I been informed of any details of their trials.

I understand that, since the new Iraqi government was formed in early May 2005 under Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Ja�afari, at least 50 people have been sentenced to death. No executions are known to have been carried out.

Your Excellency will recall that, on 31 May 2005, I sent a communication regarding the situation of M. Ahmad al-Jaf, aged 30 M. Jasim �Abbas, aged 44 and M. �Uday Dawud al-Dulaimi, aged 25 and M. Tahsin �Ali Mattar who had been sentenced to death in two separate trials in Iraq. I have recently been informed that M. Ahmad al-Jaf, M. Jasim �Abbas, and M. �Uday Dawud al-Dulaimi, could now be at risk of imminent execution, following a reported declaration by Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Ja�afari that: "The President has signed three death sentences, and the next few days will see the first executions in al-Kut." M. Tahsin �Ali Mattar reportedly appealed against his death sentence but the result of his appeal is not known.

As I had indicated in my previous correspondence, it is my understanding that, on 8 August 2004, the interim government reinstated the death penalty in Iraq for certain crimes such as murder, drug trafficking and kidnapping. The reintroduction of capital punishment was justified as a measure to deal with the deteriorating security situation. More specifically, I understand that Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari had announced that the death penalty would be implemented as a way to control ongoing violenc and insurgency. I do not wish to under-estimate the challenges posed by this insurgency and I am aware that armed groups opposed to the presence of foreign troops and to the Iraqi Government have carried out very serious crimes, including kidnappings and killings of civilian hostages, as well as indiscriminate suicide and bomb attacks that have left hundreds of police officers and civilians dead.

I would nevertheless stress once more that, while I recognize the responsibility of Governments to protect their citizens against the excesses of non-State actors or other authorities as well as the crucial need to bring the perpetrators of such crimes to justice, efforts in that sense must be undertaken within a framework clearly governed by international human rights law.

Although the death penalty is not prohibited under international law, I would like to remind your Excellency�s Government that it must be regarded as an extreme exception to the fundamental right to life, and must as such be interpreted in the most restrictive manner. The Commission on Human Rights has consistently requested me and my predecessors as Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions to monitor the implementation of all standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment.

At present, I would like to highlight the following standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment:

1) the �sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes� (Article 6(2) ICCPR), it being understood that their scope should not go beyond intentional crimes with lethal or other extremely grave consequences (Paragraph 1 of the Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984);

2) �in capital punishment cases, the obligation of States parties to observe rigorously all the guarantees for a fair trial set out in Article 14 of the [ICCPR] admits of no exception� (Little v. Jamaica, communication no. 283/1988, Views of the Human Rights Committee of 19 November 1991, para. 10);

3) �anyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence.� (Article 6(4) ICCPR).

Without in any way pre-judging the accuracy of the information I have received, I would respectfully request Your Excellency�s Government to provide me with details of the trials of the above-mentioned offenders, with a view to establishing whether the proceedings complied with international standards relating to the imposition of capital punishment. In this regard, please provide the full names of the 48 above-mentioned individuals whose appeals have allegedly been rejected, details of the charges of which they were convicted and dates of their initial trials and their subsequent appeals.

In order to carry out the mandate entrusted to me by the Commission on Human Rights, and to be able to effectively monitor the implementation of the relevant standards, I would be grateful if you would provide me with the following information:

(a) For which offences does the law currently provide for the imposition of the death penalty?

(b) Which courts can impose the death sentence? What appeals and extraordinary remedies are available to a person sentenced to death?

(c) Please provide a complete list of the persons currently in detention under a death sentence, with the dates of their sentence, the offences of which they were found guilty, and the remedies used by them as well as those still available to them.�

(d) Please also provide a list of the currently pending criminal cases in which the prosecution has sought the death sentence.

Response of the Government of Iraq dated 10 November 2005

Position of the Government of Iraq on the reinstatement of the death penalty

The Government of Iraq should like to point out that the death penalty was originally introduced under the Iraqi Penal Code No. 111 of 1969, as amended, as a punishment for certain serious crimes.� The penalty was temporarily suspended pursuant to Order No. 7 of 10 June 2003, issued by the Transitional Coalition Authority, and was subsequently reinstated by Council of Ministers Order No. 3 of 8 August 2004.� The aforementioned penalty is confined to crimes against the internal security of the State, crimes that constitute a threat to the public, the use of bacteriological substances, criminal attacks upon the safety of transport and communications, premeditated murder with aggravating circumstances, drug-trafficking offences under the Drugs Act, and the kidnapping offences enumerated in the Penal Code.

To revoke the death penalty in our country at the present time would to be to undermine our policy on crime, since we are facing some of the worst and reprehensible crimes of organized and non-organized terrorism, as well as organized crime, offences designed to destabilize institutions or democratic processes, and acts of violence motivated by racial, sectarian, ethnic or religious factors and committed in an unstable security situation.� It is therefore necessary to retain the death penalty, albeit in modified form.� This penalty is imposed only for the most serious crimes, including those already enumerated.� The judiciary, through the courts and public prosecution service, makes sure that the death penalty is only applied in respect of the offences for which it is prescribed and of culprits who are proven to constitute a serious threat to society, who cannot be reformed or reintegrated into society, and who are highly likely to commit the same offence again.� There must be powerful evidence to show, beyond any shadow of doubt, that the accused person is guilty and cannot possibly be innocent; otherwise, the court must make use of extenuating factors to avoid imposing this penalty.� The Head of State can use the power vested in him by the Constitution to grant a special pardon to stop this penalty from being enforced in circumstances that do not conflict with the interests of society.

We can conclude by saying that the death penalty is the only penalty which guards against the commission of serious crimes in the current circumstances, and that the basic factor behind its adoption is public deterrence, i.e. warning members of society of the consequences of committing capital offences.� This penalty has a huge psychological impact on persons who are hesitant about committing serious crimes.� Thus, the death penalty is one of the most important ways of preventing crime, a function which depends on the circumstances of each society and the types of crimes committed.

In conclusion, the Government of the Republic of Iraq should like to commend the United Nations and non-governmental organizations, including Amnesty International, for providing a full range of material and moral support to guarantee the sovereignty of Iraq and to bring security, stability and prosperity to its people, pending the restriction and abolition of the death penalty.

Iraq: Container Killing of Nine Men

Violation alleged: Deaths in custody

Subject(s) of appeal: 9 males

Character of reply: Cooperative but incomplete response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur appreciates the response provided by the Government of Iraq and looks forward to receiving the results of the investigation.

Allegation letter sent on 14 September 2005

Allegation letter sent concerning the death of nine men in Baghdad on 10 July 2005. The names of the men, as reported to me, are Wa�ail Abbas Salim, Umer Anaid Ahmed, Dhiaa� Muhammed Ahmed, Riadh Muhammed Ahmed, Mushtaq Turky Salih, Sabah Zekm Ali, Hussain Ali Talib, Taha Hessen Medlol, and Nafia� Salem Abbas. According to the information received:

On 10 July 2005 Iraqi police forces arrested twelve men at a hospital in Baghdad's Shuala district. According to statements by the authorities they were members of an armed group who had engaged in an exchange of fire with US or Iraqi forces. According to other sources eleven of the men were part of a group of bricklayers working in the al-'Amariya district. One of them sustained gunshot injuries during a firefight between armed fighters and police. His colleagues took him to a hospital in the Shuala district of Baghdad where he was pronounced dead. A police commando then arrived at the hospital and proceeded to arrest the remaining eleven men, along with one other man who was there accompanying his pregnant wife. The suspects were taken to the police headquarters in the Jihad neighbourhood in western Baghdad. There they were beaten and otherwise tortured by the police officers and then locked into a police van or container for 14 hours. Due to the extreme temperatures and the lack of fresh air, nine of the twelve men died in the container. Medical staff at Yarmouk hospital in Baghdad, where the bodies of those who died were taken to on 11 July 2005, have confirmed that some of the men bore signs of torture, including electric shocks.

In this connection, I would like to recall the principle whereby all States have �the obligation � to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions�, as recently reiterated by the 61st Commission on Human Rights in Resolution 2005/34 on �Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions� (OP 4). The Commission added that this obligation includes the obligation �to identify and bring to justice those responsible, �, to grant adequate compensation within a reasonable time to the victims or their families and to adopt all necessary measures, including legal and judicial measures, in order to� prevent the recurrence of such executions�.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention. Since I am expected to report on this case to the Commission, I would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

1.�� Are the facts alleged in the above summary accurate?

2.�� Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any police investigation, medical examination (autopsy), and judicial or other inquiries carried out in relation to the death of Wa�ail Abbas Salim, Umer Anaid Ahmed, Dhiaa� Muhammed Ahmed, Riadh Muhammed Ahmed, Mushtaq Turky Salih, Sabah Zekm Ali, Hussain Ali Talib, Taha Hessen Medlol, and Nafia� Salem Abbas. If no inquiries have taken place, or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why.

3.�� Please provide the full details of any disciplinary action and prosecution undertaken with regard to the persons responsible of the death of Wa�ail Abbas Salim, Umer Anaid Ahmed, Dhiaa� Muhammed Ahmed, Riadh Muhammed Ahmed, Mushtaq Turky Salih, Sabah Zekm Ali, Hussain Ali Talib, Taha Hessen Medlol, and Nafia� Salem Abbas.

4.�� Please indicate whether compensation has been provided to the families of the victims.

Response of the Government of Iraq dated 16 December 2005

The Government informed the Special Rapporteur that the Iraqi concerned authority has convened an investigation committee concerning the information mentioned in the letter and would informed the Special Rapporteur of the Investigation results as soon as received.�

Iraq: Death of Journalist Waleed Khaled

Violation alleged: Violations of the right to life during armed conflicts contrary to international humanitarian law

Subject(s) of appeal: 1 male (journalist)

Character of reply: No response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Iraq has failed to cooperate with the mandate he has been given by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

Allegation letter sent on 16 September 2005 with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression

In this connection, we should like to bring to your Government�s attention � as well as to the attention of the Government of the United States, which we are addressing in this matter as well � information we have received concerning the fatal shooting of Waleed Khaled, a 24-year old TV soundman working for Reuters, based in Samawa.

According to information received, on 28 August 2005 a Reuters TV crew consisting of Waleed Khaled and the cameraman Haider Khadem went to the site of a terrorist attack that had resulted in the death of two Iraqi policemen in the Hay-al-Adil district of West Baghdad. Upon arrival at the scene, a United States military sniper standing on the roof of a shopping centre opened fire on him, hitting him fatally once in the head and four times in the chest. Mr. Khadem was slightly wounded and immediately arrested by U.S. forces. A U.S. military statement said that �U.S. Task Force Baghdad units�� responded to a terrorist attack on an Iraqi Police convoy. (�) One civilian was killed and another was wounded by small-arms fire during the attack.�

Without in any way implying any determination on the facts and circumstances of this case, we would like to refer Your Excellency's Government to the fundamental principles applicable to such an incident under international law. Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life. As the Human Rights Committee has clarified, �arbitrarily� means in a manner �disproportionate to the requirements of law enforcement in the circumstances of the case� (Views of the Committee in the case Su�rez de Guerrero v. Colombia, Communication no. 45/1979, � 13.3). In order to assess whether the use of lethal force was proportionate to the requirements of law enforcement, there must be a �thorough, prompt and impartial investigation� (Principle 9 of the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions). This principle was recently reiterated by the 61st Commission on Human Rights in Resolution 2005/34 on �Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions� (OP 4), stating that all States have �the obligation � to conduct exhaustive and impartial investigations into all suspected cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions�.

In Resolution 2005/38 the Commission on Human Rights restated this principle with specific regard to acts of violence against journalists, calling on States to investigate such acts and to bring those responsible to justice, and adding explicitly that the principle applied also in situations of armed conflict. Respect of the outlined norms of international law is crucial not only in order to protect the right to life of journalists, but also to ensure respect for the right to freedom of opinion and expression, as set forth in article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and reiterated in article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.�

It is our responsibility under the mandates provided to us by the Commission on Human Rights and reinforced by the appropriate resolutions of the General Assembly, to seek to clarify all cases brought to our attention. Since we are expected to report on these cases to the Commission, we would be grateful for your cooperation and your observations on the following matters:

1.�� Are the facts alleged in the above summary of the case accurate?

2.�� Please provide the details, and where available the results, of any investigation, medical examinations, and judicial or other inquiries that may have been carried out in relation to the shooting of Waleed Khaled, both by your Excellency�s Government and by the United States authorities, insofar as you are aware of such inquiries. Have penal, disciplinary or administrative sanctions been imposed in connection with this incident? If your Government has not undertaken any inquiries in this matter or if they have been inconclusive, please explain why.

3.�� Is your Excellency�s Government aware of the rules of engagement or policies of the United States military forces operating in Iraq. Have such rules of engagement or policies been agreed on with your Government? What safeguards do they contain to protect the right to life and physical integrity, as well as the right to freedom of expression and information, of journalists covering terrorist attacks in Iraq, in order to prevent incidents such as the one resulting in the death of Waleed Khaled.

4.�� Please indicate whether compensation has been provided to the victim or the family of the victim.�

Iraq: Killing of Lawyers Sadoum al-Janabi and Adel Muhammad al-Zubaidi

Violation alleged: Impunity; Deaths due to attacks or killings by security forces

Subject(s) of appeal: 2 males (lawyers)

Character of reply: No response

Observations of the Special Rapporteur

The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Iraq has failed to cooperate with the mandate he has been given by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

Allegation letter sent on 15 November 2005

Allegation letter sent concerning the killing of Sadoum al-Janabi and Adel Muhammad al-Zubaidi.� According to the information received, at least ten armed men abducted Sadoum al-Janabi from his office in Baghdad at around 10 p.m. on Thursday, 20 October 2005, and his body was found shortly thereafter with two bullet wounds to the head.� Eyewitnesses were quoted as saying that the men who abducted Al-Janabi identified themselves as officials of the Interior Ministry.� I am also aware that, in an October 26 interview with Al-Jazeera, your Government�s Interior Minister, Bayan Jabr al-Zubaydi, stated that an investigation has been opened.

With respect to Adel Muhammad al-Zubaidi, the information I have received is that he was killed in a drive-by shooting on 8 November 2005.� I have received multiple accounts.� One is that the Interior Ministry reports that either three or four men in an Opel sedan pulled up alongside Al-Zubaidi�s car and opened fire with automatic weapons.� According to another account, Thamer al-Khuzaie, who was riding with al-Zubaidi, had noticed that the car carrying the gunmen was followed by a police car.

The apparent pattern in these killings is especially troubling. Al-Janabi and Al-Zubaidi were both lawyers representing persons being tried by the Iraqi Special Tribunal (IST).� Al-Janabi was the attorney for Awad Hamed al-Bander, and Al-Zubaidi was the attorney for Taha Yassin Ramadan.� Both lawyers represented their clients in court on the first day of their trial, October 19, and both were killed shortly thereafter.

�

As you are aware, under human rights law, States have a legal duty to ensure as well as respect the right to life in all circumstances.� (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Arts. 2, 4, 6).� States are legally responsible for extrajudicial executions that are committed by Government agents or that are committed by persons or groups operating with official knowledge or acquiescence.� In addition, States are legally obligated to take all appropriate measures to deter, prevent and punish private persons and armed groups who commit extrajudicial executions.� These obligations require States to investigate � with a view to prosecution � alleged violations of the right to life promptly, thoroughly and effectively through independent and impartial bodies.� (CHR resolution 2004/37, paras. 4�6; Human Rights Committee, General Comment 31; E/CN.4/2005/7, paras. 65�76).� The obligation to investigate extrajudicial executions is not a pro forma requirement.� Depending on the manner in which it is conducted, an investigation either will play a critical role in ensuring the right to life in the face of violence or, instead, will contribute to impunity.�

In light of the allegations received, I would like to call the attention of your Excellency�s Government to two aspects in particular of the duty to investigate.�

Human rights law requires investigations to be conducted by independent and impartial bodies.� (CHR resolution 2004/37, para. 5; Human Rights Committee, General Comment 31, para. 15).� In this connection, I would like to draw the attention of Your Excellency�s Government to the standards provided by the United Nations Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.� Principle 11 notes that normal investigative procedures may be inadequate when there are complaints regarding their impartiality and provides that in such circumstances, �Governments shall pursue investigations through an independent commission of inquiry or similar procedure�.� Regardless whether an investigation is conducted through established investigative procedures or through an independent commission of inquiry, interference by individuals who are potentially implicated must be prevented, the investigation�s report must be made public, and the Government must bring to justice those found responsible.� (Principles 15�18).� It is important to emphasize that measures taken to ensure an investigation�s independence and impartiality do not reflect any pre-judgment of the allegations received in a particular case.� Independence and impartiality are required in all cases out of respect for the rule of law.

Human rights law also requires States to conduct investigations in a prompt and effective manner.� (CHR resolution 2004/37, para. 6; Human Rights Committee, General Comment 31, para. 15).� The timing and pattern of the killings of Al-Janabi and Al-Zubaidi suggest that the murders were in response to their work as defense attorneys before the Iraqi Special Tribunal.� Without a prompt investigation leading to the apprehension of those responsible for their deaths, there is reason to fear that other attorneys may be killed in the future.� In these circumstances, a prompt and effective investigation is necessary not only to vindicate the rights of Al-Janabi and Al-Zubaidi but also to protect the lives of the other defense attorneys before the Iraqi Special Tribunal.� Moreover, continuing impunity threatens to contravene the State�s obligation to ensure that Al-Bander and the other defendants receive a fair trial.� (ICCPR, Arts. 14).� The possibility is especially grave when the defendant faces the possibility of the death penalty.

I am, of course, aware of the parlous security situation in Baghdad and of the difficulty of undertaking investigations into every killing that occurs in such a setting.� Nevertheless, I consider these cases to be particularly significant in terms of the broader efforts to institute the rule of law in Iraq and believe that a failure to undertake a convincing investigation will have major negative implications for these efforts.

It is my responsibility under the mandate provided to me by the Commission on Human Rights to seek to clarify all cases brought to my attention.� Without in any way wishing to pre-judge the accuracy of the information received, I would be grateful for a reply to the following questions:

1. Are the facts alleged in the above summary accurate?

2. Please provide the details and, where available, the results of any investigation, medical examination (autopsy), and judicial or other inquiries carried out in relation to these cases.

3. Please provide details on how the impartiality and independence of these investigations is being ensured.

4. Given the allegations that officials of the Interior Ministry were involved in the killing, the seriousness of this crime, and its possible ramifications for a fair trial for the defendants before the Iraqi Special Tribunal, is international assistance in conducting the investigation required?

5. What steps have been taken to ensure the protection of other attorneys representing clients before the Iraqi Special Tribunal?

Correspondence from 2005

The record of correspondence for 2005 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2005/7/Add.1.

Type, date and summary of communication: Urgent appeal, 21 July 2004: The Special Rapporteur drew the attention of the Government regarding the forthcoming trial of Saddam Hussein by a special Iraqi court (established by the Interim Government of Iraq on 10 December 2003). While the Special Rapporteur welcomed the establishment of this judicial body as a first milestone in the fight against impunity in Iraq, he had received information that the Government may reinstate, for specific cases, the death penalty (first suspended by the former US central Command Chief in April 2003 and upheld by the Coalition Provisional Authority in June 2003). Although the death penalty is not prohibited under international law, it must be regarded as an extreme exception to the fundamental right to life and must as such be interpreted in the most restrictive manner possible. Therefore, the Special Rapporteur urged the Government not to impose the death penalty unless it can be assured that the Iraqi legal system has obtained the minimum standards of judicial integrity and due process.

Correspondence from 2004

The record of correspondence for 2004 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2004/7/Add.1.

On 20 October 2003, the Special Rapporteur sent a communication to the relevant authorities in connection with the following individual cases.

Sa�adi Suleiman Ibrahim al-�Ubaydi was reportedly shot dead on 14 May 2003. On that morning, two United States armed vehicles allegedly crashed through the stone perimeter wall surrounding his home, located behind the courthouse in Ramadi, and reportedly drove right up to the door of the house. According to reports, unarmed and in his nightclothes, he rushed to the exterior door in the kitchen. Several soldiers allegedly forced their way in and beat him with their rifle butts. He reportedly ran out of the house but was shot and allegedly died immediately.

Ja�far Musa Hashem was reportedly killed by United States soldiers in Baghdad on 18 June 2003 during a demonstration held outside the entrance of the Republican Palace. United States forces reportedly shot and killed at least two demonstrators. It was reported that there was no use of firearms by Iraqis during the demonstration but that the demonstrators were throwing stones.

Mohammad al-Kubaisi, a 12-year-old boy, was allegedly shot by United States forces in the Hay al-Jihad area of Baghdad on 26 June 2003. He was reportedly in charge of carrying the bedding up to the roof where his family slept during the summer. From 9:30 p.m. dozens of United States troops were carrying out search operations in the houses and, at around 10.30 p.m., Mohammad reportedly stopped on the stairs up to the roof to watch the soldiers. One soldier saw him from the house opposite and opened fire at him. According to information received, about 20 United States soldiers entered the house after the shooting in order to search it. They allegedly kicked Mohammad�s mother aside as she held her son who was bleeding and did not offer medical treatment. Some neighbours reportedly tried to drive Mohammad to the hospital but they were stopped by soldiers who ordered them to go home since the curfew had started. Meanwhile, Mohammad al-Kubaisi bled to death.

Merdan Muhammad �Ali, aged 74, was injured and his wife killed on 1 July 2003 when Unied States troops allegedly opened fire on his car in Jama� Kirkuk. At around 9 p.m. on that day, he was leaving his home in his car with his wife sitting in the passenger seat when he reportedly saw four United States military vehicles blocking the top of the road. When he was at a distance of about 50 m from the vehicles, he reportedly heard gunshots coming from behind his car. He allegedly stopped the car, heard shouting, and decided to take a left turn to get away from the apparent danger when soldiers reportedly opened fire on the car. According to information received, he was not aware of any warning shots having been fired. His right knee was allegedly fractured by a bullet while his wife was shot dead, hit by several bullets. Reports indicate that Merdan was visited by a United States military representative while in hospital and that the official allegedly apologized but made no reference to the possibility of an investigation.

Radi Nu�ma was reportedly arrested by the United Kingdom Royal Military Police on 8 May 2003 and died in custody that same day. On 10 May 2003, United Kingdom soldiers reportedly delivered a written note to the family�s house stating that Mr. Nu�ma had suffered a heart attack while he was being questioned. He was taken to the military hospital, and the family should contact the hospital for further information. Allegedly unaware that he was dead, the family was told by the hospital that no person of that name was admitted, but they subsequently discovered his body in the morgue. The Royal Military Police reportedly delivered an unidentified corpse to the hospital on the evening of 8 May 2003, telling staff that the cause of death was a heart attack but failing to provide other information, such as the name of the deceased. It was later reported that the Royal Military Police Special Investigations Branch visited the hospital. According to information received, the Royal Military Police launched an investigation into this case as the family of the deceased claim that Mr. Nu�ma died from ill-treatment and torture while in custody.

Ala� Jassem, a 22-year-old man, was reportedly killed when soldiers fired on detainees who were allegedly rioting on 13 June 2003 at Abu Ghraib Prison. According to reports, demonstrators were throwing bricks and poles at the soldiers. Ala� Jassem was allegedly in a tent when he was shot. Seven other detainees were reportedly wounded.

On 31 October 2002, the Government of Iraq sent a communication to the Special Rapporteur enclosing Iraqi Revolution Command Council resolution No. 225 dated 20 October 2002 concerning the general, comprehensive and final amnesty for Iraqi prisoners (civilian and military) inside and outside Iraq.

Correspondence from 2003

The record of correspondence for 2003 is excerpted from the official United Nations report, E/CN.4/2003/Add.1.

On 7 May 2002, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Representaive of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iraq, sent an urgent appeal to the Government of Iraq relating to Safia Taleb Al Souhail, publisher of the Al Manar Al Arabi newspaper and Advocacy Director for the Arab and Islamic World at the International Alliance for Justice. In Jordan, Ms. Al Souhail reportedly received threats carried by a special messenger, warning her that she would suffer the same fate as her father, Sheikh Taleb Al Souhail, former leader of the Bani Tamim tribe, who was assassinated by Iraqi diplomats in Beirut in 1994. Ms. Souhail's family in Beirut and Amman have reportedly also received death threats by telephone, threats which are believed to be from Iraqi Government Intelligence "Al Moukhabart". It is alleged that the threats were in retaliation to Ms.Al Souhail's denunciation of the human rights violations committed by the Iraqi Government, as well as her request to the Lebanese authorities to reopen her father's file, since the Iraqi perpetrators who admitted to the crime received diplomatic immunity. It is reported that following Ms. Al Souhail's contribution to a series of articles on her father's assassination published on 12 April 2002 in Azzaman, a London-based Arabic newspaper, a letter, allegedly from the Beni Tamim tribe, was published in Azzaman on 24 April and the Al Nahrain web site on 26 April stating that if anything happened to the leaders of the Beni Tamim tribe, and in particular the Al Souhail family, it would be the responsibility of the author of the articles. It cited the assassination of Ms. Al Souhail as one of the things that could happen. According to information received, this letter is believed to have been sent by the Iraqi intelligence to intimidate opponents of the Iraqi regime.

On 25 July 2002, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on torture, sent an urgent appeal to the Government of Iraq regarding Hamza Qassim Sabbat, also known as Abu Haitham, aged 46, and Ibrahim �Abd al-Jasim Mohammad, also known as Abu Ayub, aged 43. Both men are said to have appeared on Iraqi national television on 24 July 2002 and confessed their involvement in "terrorist acts" inside Iraq for the benefit of a foreign country. It is feared that their confessions may have been extracted under duress and that televised statements may have an impact upon the fairness of their trial. The two men are also said to be at risk of being sentenced to death and executed. During their confessions, Mr. Sabbat and Mr. Mohammad reportedly admitted that they were members of groups that had been trained in Iran and sent to Iraq to kill Iraqi officials, members of the security forces and the military, as well as to carry out bomb attacks in the capital, Bagdad. The two also reportedly confessed their involvement in missile attacks targeting government buildings in Bagdad in 2000 and 2001, as well as in a "plan to destabilize the country" in the aftermath of the attacks on New York and Washington on 11 September 2001. Fears have been expressed that the above-mentioned persons may be at risk of torture or other cruel and inhuman treatment.

On 6 June 2002, the Government of Iraq replied to an urgent appeal sent on 8 May 2002 by the Special Rapporteur jointly with Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iraq regarding Sofia Taleb Al-Souhail. The Government reported that it has thoroughly investigated the case and confirms that the allegations mentioned in the urgent appeal are unfounded. The Government explained that it was of the impression that the complainant tried to take advantage of human rights mechanisms for political motives. The Government of Iraq expressed the hope that the Special Rapporteurs do not let anyone use their mandates for political motives.

Correspondence from 1983-2002

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has been corresponding with Governments regarding alleged violations since the mandate was established over two decades ago. While the Project on Extrajudicial Executions is making efforts to provide easily browsed versions of as many years as possible, much of the earlier correspondence is available only in the PDF versions of reports from 1983 to the present.

Iraq: Visits & Communications

Correspondence from 2007

Iraq: Killings of Sunnis by Armed Groups Linked to the Ministry of Interior

Correspondence from 2006

Iraq: Death Sentences of Four Men

Iraq: Inquiry Regarding the Death Penalty

Position of the Government of Iraq on the reinstatement of the death penalty

Iraq: Container Killing of Nine Men

Iraq: Death of Journalist Waleed Khaled

Iraq: Killing of Lawyers Sadoum al-Janabi and Adel Muhammad al-Zubaidi

Correspondence from 2005

Correspondence from 2004

Correspondence from 2003

Correspondence from 1983-2002