A Collaboration with the University of Pittsburgh

Ex-Iraqi VP Taha Ramadan should be freed or retried

Giovanni Di Stefano [Studio Legale Internazionale, Rome]: "In the first proper legal ruling of the Iraqi High Tribunal the Court has decided to adjourn the case of my client Taha Ramadan not only based upon the submissions filed but because as a matter of law no defence lawyer had 'legally' been notified of the hearing. Under normal circumstances and as we have seen in the Saddam Hussein, Barzan Al Tikriti and Awwad Al Bandar cases the IHT takes no notice whatsoever of their own Rules of Procedure. But the public outcry advanced by those such as myself at political, judicial and legal levels have created a wind of change that - although it comes too late for Saddam, Barzan and Awwad - may just save others.

The question of notification is a fundamentally important factor in the legal process in any jurisdiction. Cases succeed based upon the failure to 'notify' judgements, decisions, sentences, defendants, lawyers. One of the submissions that I had made to the IHT in the case of Barzan Al Tikriti and Awaad Al Bandar was that they had NEVER been legally notified of the Appeal Chamber decision dated 26 December 2006 rejecting their appeal. Thus in my submission since they had never been notified, Para. 266 of the Law on Criminal Proceedings 1971 could not 'kick in' and as such the 30 day period stipulated for any appeal only started when legal notification had occurred. The Iraqi Government hung my clients the day after I lodged the said submissions and the application to President Talabani for commutation of sentence. The deaths of Saddam Hussein, Barzan Al Tikriti, and Judge Awwad Al Bandar may thus not have been wholly in vain.

The IHT has ruled that since the defence lawyers were not 'notified' legally of any hearing then the proceedings could and should not commence. They have also received my submissions and will no doubt have to try and find a way of answering what is clear, precise and plain law. In the meantime, Taha Ramadan lives on and if there is to be any hearing on 12th February 2007 I will be present, but at that time my submission will be quite simple - the time period for any further re-hearings has expired and any Court would not be properly constituted thus making any decisions ultra vires. The dilemma will then be whether Taha Ramadan should be freed or retried."

Giovanni Di Stefano is a lawyer with Studio Legale Internazionale in Rome, Italy, and represents Taha Ramadan. He previously represented Barzan Al Tikriti, Awwad Al Bandar, and Saddam Hussein.

Opinions expressed in JURIST Commentary are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, donors or the University of Pittsburgh.

About Professional Commentary

Professional Commentary is JURIST's platform for newsmakers, activists and legal experts to comment on national and international legal developments.

Hotline welcomes submissions, inquiries and comments at professionalcommentary@jurist.org.

© Copyright JURIST Legal News and Research Services, Inc., 2013.