INA–Baghdad

The head of the Iraqi High Criminal Court, Judge Saad al-Lami, affirmed on Sunday that the court is continuing its work, pursuant to a constitutional provision, until all cases before it have been resolved. He also noted that approximately 3,300 arrest warrants remain unexecuted for individuals accused of committing crimes against humanity during the previous regime.

"Establishment and Powers"

In an interview with the Iraqi News Agency (INA), al-Lami stated, “The Iraqi High Criminal Court was established in 2005 under Law No. (10) of 2005. It is an extension of the court established by the Governing Council in 2003 under the name of the Iraqi Criminal Court for Crimes Against Humanity, whose work was limited solely to the investigative phase.”

He added that “following the election of the National Assembly in 2005, the court was established under national legislation as the Iraqi High Criminal Court, thereby replacing the court established under Law No. (1) of 2003.”

He explained that “the court consists of an investigative panel comprising three judges and three public prosecutors, a trial panel comprising five judges and three public prosecutors, in addition to a cassation panel consisting of nine judges.”

He pointed out that “the court remained administratively affiliated with the Council of Ministers until the issuance of Law No. (35) of 2011, which severed its affiliation with the Council and placed it under the Supreme Judicial Council. Since 2012, it has formed part of the Supreme Judicial Council’s structure,” noting that “this was in accordance with the principle of the separation of powers, thereby reinforcing the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.”

Al-Lami affirmed that “since its establishment, the court has tried a number of figures from the former regime, issuing approximately 20 death sentences while it was affiliated with the Council of Ministers.”

He noted that “after 2012, it became a specialized court, with its judges appointed in accordance with the amended Judicial Organization Law No. 160 of 1979. They are administratively affiliated with the Supreme Judicial Council, and their rulings are not final but are subject to appeal before the Federal Court of Cassation, similar to other specialized courts, including those dealing with integrity and criminal cases.”

He explained that “Iraq has specialized criminal courts for terrorism, integrity, and customs cases, while the Iraqi High Criminal Court has jurisdiction over crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide.”He emphasized that “its rulings are subject to appeal before the Federal Court of Cassation, and all its judges are Iraqi nationals appointed in accordance with the Judicial Organization Law.”

"Crimes and Their Perpetrators"

He explained that “the law establishing the court did not specify the names of individuals to be tried, but rather defined the crimes falling within its jurisdiction, namely crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide,” stressing that “anyone proven to have committed these crimes will be referred to the court.”

He added, “The court does not prosecute everyone who held an executive, security, or party position under the previous regime. Rather, it hears cases involving complaints related to crimes against humanity, war crimes, or genocide,” noting that “the court had previously acquitted a former minister, as well as a former security official and a former party official, because there was insufficient evidence proving that they had committed such crimes.”

"Arrest Warrants"

He stressed that “the number of new complaints received by the court has become very limited. However, it is still examining thousands of cases, as there are currently about 3,300 arrest warrants that have yet to be executed against individuals accused of committing crimes against humanity during the previous regime.”

He pointed out that “all cases under consideration by the court relate to the period from July 17, 1968, to May 1, 2003,” adding that “the Constitution stipulates that the court will continue its work until all of its cases have been concluded.”

He explained that “there are shortcomings in the implementation of arrest warrants, in addition to the presence of a number of defendants outside Iraq, which requires preparing case files to seek the extradition of wanted persons through Interpol or the Arab Interior Ministers Council.”

He noted that “extradition procedures face numerous challenges, including the requirement by some countries to know the nature of the sentence or to receive guarantees that the death penalty will not be carried out, in addition to issues related to dual nationality and the absence of extradition agreements with certain countries.”

He added that “the court issues orders to seize the movable and immovable assets of the accused in accordance with the law, which provides for the seizure of their movable and real property as a means of compelling them to surrender themselves to the authorities. These decisions are circulated to the Ministry of Finance and the Real Estate Registration Directorate, which in turn notifies the relevant registration offices to implement the seizure orders. In some cases, wanted individuals are arrested when they visit their properties.”

"Number of Convicts"

He revealed that “the number of convicted persons since the court’s establishment has reached 160, including 26 who were sentenced to death. Of these, 20 death sentences were issued while the court was affiliated with the Council of Ministers, and six after it came under the Supreme Judicial Council. The number of acquitted individuals has reached approximately 270.”

Al-Lami emphasized that “the court is not competent to hear cases involving membership in the banned Ba’ath Party after 2003, as such cases fall under the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court pursuant to the 2016 Law on the Prohibition of the Ba’ath Party.” He clarified that “anyone who held a party position before 2003 but did not commit a crime against humanity is not tried before the Iraqi High Criminal Court.”

He pointed out that “gathering evidence and proving crimes represent the greatest challenges facing the court due to the many years that have passed since the crimes were committed. This requires balancing the need to ensure that perpetrators do not escape punishment with the need to avoid convicting any defendant on the basis of unreliable evidence.”

"Late Testimonies"

He added that “the court deals cautiously with delayed testimonies, given the considerable time that has elapsed since the fall of the regime and the establishment of the court, especially when such testimonies are submitted only after the regime’s collapse. Such testimonies are considered to carry less evidentiary value than those recorded immediately after the regime’s fall, for reasons deemed appropriate by the court, including the possibility of coaching or memory deterioration, both of which reduce their evidentiary value over time.”

He emphasized that “the court relies on official documents collected from security agencies after the fall of the regime, in addition to documents obtained from the Political Prisoners Foundation, information provided by other state institutions, including the National Security Service and the Intelligence Service, as well as defendants’ confessions corroborated by documentary and material evidence.”

"The Crimes Archive"

He added that “the court continues to receive new information and documents relating to certain crimes and proceeds with the corresponding investigation and trial procedures. The documents relied upon by the court are preserved in its archive, together with records from security and intelligence agencies, as well as other security and executive bodies.”

He cited “a case heard by the court last year involving a woman who was sentenced to life imprisonment after it was proven that she had informed on her husband to the security services during the previous regime, leading to his death sentence. The case was referred to the court by the Political Prisoners Foundation on the basis of official documents.”

"Saddam and His Crimes"

Al-Lami noted that “the charges against the convicted Saddam Hussein were numerous, but the evidence was complete in the Dujail case, and a verdict was issued. Under the law, legal proceedings in the remaining cases cease following the execution of the sentence, despite the existence of numerous other cases relating to different crimes.”

"The Assassination of Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr"

He added, “The assassination of Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr demonstrated the continued fear among some of the accused, even after the fall of the regime. One of them hesitated to mention Saddam’s name, and when the court asked during the trial who had issued the execution order, he replied that it had come from the Presidency. When asked who the President was, he hesitated, looked around nervously, and claimed it was Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, even though Saddam was the President at the time the crime was committed. This reflects the state of fear that Saddam instilled in his associates.”

He pointed out that “the accused, Sa’dun Sabri, who was convicted in the case concerning the killing of Sayyid Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, stated during the investigation that Tahir Jalil al-Haboush, who had served as Director General of Security and Head of the Intelligence Service under the former regime, was responsible for the assassination of the religious authority, Sayyid Muhammad Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr.”

Tahir al-Haboush, a key figure in the assassination of Sayyid Muhammad Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr, was among those implicated.

Al-Lami revealed that “the accused, Sa’dun Sabri, stated that he was at the Rashid Hotel in March 1999 when he was summoned by the Director General of Security, Tahir Jalil al-Haboush. While there, al-Haboush received a telephone call informing him of the assassination of Sayyid Muhammad Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr and his two sons. He was then instructed to travel to Najaf Governorate to assume the position of Security Director, coinciding with the imposition of a security cordon around the city by the Republican Guard.”

He added that “the accused also stated that the investigation into the crime was conducted by the Baghdad Security Directorate under the supervision of Tahir Jalil al-Haboush and that one of the suspects had been arrested and later released. He further confirmed that the Director General of Security had full knowledge of the perpetrators of the crime.”

He continued, “These confessions include an acknowledgment that Tahir Jalil al-Haboush was directly informed of the assassination. The accused, Sa’dun, adopted the official narrative of the former regime regarding the incident, stating that al-Haboush ordered the release of one of the suspected killers. This raises questions about the nature of al-Haboush’s role in the case.”

He emphasized that “the court tried the defendants for the killing of followers of Grand Ayatollah Muhammad Muhammad Sadiq al-Sadr and worshippers during Friday prayers in Sadr City after they had been subjected to arrest, torture, and execution. The defendants were sentenced to death, including those convicted of the killing of former MP Falah Shanshal and members of his family.”

He added, “The prosecution of perpetrators of crimes against humanity continues because such crimes are not subject to a statute of limitations under Iraqi law.”

"The Ajaj Case and the Mass Graves"

Al-Lami explained that “the victims in the Ajaj case were survivors of the chemical bombardment and military attacks on the northern regions. However, they were arrested by military units and treated as suspects or opponents of the former regime despite being unarmed civilians.”

He indicated that “the detainees were transferred deep into the southern Iraqi desert, where women and children were separated from the men, and in many cases families were torn apart. A systematic policy of starvation was then implemented against them with the intention of killing them and reducing their numbers, according to the confessions of the accused, Ajaj, and the complainants.”

He added that “the detainees were subjected to killing, torture, humiliation, and the rape of women. Women who refused to comply with the accused were subjected to torture or threatened with death. The abuse also extended to children, who were beaten with cables.”

He continued, “Hunger, thirst, and the extreme temperatures during the month of July led to the deaths of a large number of detainees. The prisoners were forced to transport the bodies and bury them outside the prison. However, the rocky nature of the ground prevented them from digging graves, so the bodies were covered with stones, only to be devoured by stray dogs at night.”

He revealed that “the Federal Court of Cassation has upheld the death sentence against Ajaj, and the procedures are currently before the Presidency of the Republic.”

"Powers of the Presidency of the Republic"

Al-Lami emphasized that “the Presidency of the Republic does not constitutionally or legally possess the authority to amend, reduce, or overturn death sentences issued by the Iraqi High Criminal Court. Its role is limited to issuing the presidential decree authorizing the execution of the sentence.”

He explained that “Article (27) of the Iraqi High Criminal Court Law explicitly stipulates that such sentences may not be reduced or overturned by the President of the Republic or by any other authority.”

He added that “the Federal Supreme Court, in Decision No. (28) of 2007, implicitly affirmed that the judgments issued by the Iraqi High Criminal Court relate to crimes against humanity, which are international crimes and therefore are not subject to special pardons.”

He pointed out that “the President of the Republic also has no authority to grant special pardons for genocide, war crimes, terrorism, or financial and administrative corruption,” stressing that “all judgments issued by the Iraqi High Criminal Court are excluded from the general amnesty laws enacted since 2003.”

"Victims of the Ajaj Case"

Al-Lami explained that “the number of complainants in the case reached approximately 227, while others died before they were able to file complaints,” noting that “the court identified 1,068 victims, including those who were killed, forcibly disappeared, tortured, or subjected to rape.”

He added that “the accused confessed that the number of detainees exceeded 3,000, all of whom were of Kurdish ethnicity, while the fate of a large number of them remains unknown.”

He pointed out that “the accused led security forces to the locations of mass graves near the prison, where human remains were discovered at one of the sites. However, the exhumation process was suspended in accordance with the Mass Graves Protection Law, and the case file was referred to the Mass Graves Protection Commission.”

"Other Cases"

Al-Lami emphasized that “the court does not take into account the level of media attention given to a case but rather the available evidence and facts,” explaining that “there are other cases no less significant than the Ajaj case, including the assassination of the martyred religious authority, Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, which involved detailed confessions lasting more than three hours during the trial and resulted in death sentences that were subsequently carried out.”

He added that “the court also heard cases involving genocide and other crimes that claimed hundreds of victims, and a number of death sentences were issued in those cases.”

"Freezing Funds"

Al-Lami explained that “procedures for seizing the assets of the accused cease upon the death of the accused. Furthermore, after the court became affiliated with the Supreme Judicial Council, it no longer automatically issues decisions to confiscate assets, unlike the practice followed when it was affiliated with the Council of Ministers.”