What If They Built a “Rule of Law” Complex in Iraq and Nobody Came?

The Washington Post reported on Tuesday:

Two former high-ranking Shiite government officials charged with kidnapping and killing scores of Sunnis were ordered released Monday after prosecutors dropped the case. The abrupt move renewed concerns about the willingness of Iraq’s leaders to act against sectarianism and cast doubts on U.S. efforts to build an independent judiciary.

The collapse of the trial stunned American and Iraqi officials who had spent more than a year assembling the case, which they said included a wide array of evidence.

"This shows that the judicial system in Iraq is horribly broken," said a U.S. legal adviser who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the case publicly. "And it sends a terrible signal: If you are Shia, then no worries; you can do whatever you want and nothing is going to happen to you."

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s decision to allow the case to proceed to trial was considered a significant step toward proving his Shiite-led government could hold Shiite officials accountable for sectarian crimes. The case was heard at the multimillion-dollar Rule of Law Complex, protected and supervised by the United States, which has said that the development of an impartial justice system is essential to Iraq’s long-term stability.

Fans of irony will note that Lewis "Scooter" Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice a year ago today. How did the U.S. government’s dedication to an "impartial justice system" work out there… anyone remember?

I wrote about this intended trial at my own blogospheric backwater in November, unable to resist needling the metaphor of a "Rule of Law Complex" in Baghdad that was (as I put it) "hiding out in a fortified bunker in Baghdad, in fear of the Iraqi government as much as anyone else." The Post’s report lets us know not much has changed:

Witness intimidation has been one of the most significant concerns in the trial. Many of the witnesses agreed to testify only because they believed their names would be kept secret, but their names were leaked and supporters of the former Health Ministry officials threatened to kill them or their families if they didn’t recant their testimony, American officials said. Many of the witnesses did not show up at the trial, though Iraqi law allows their testimony to be read if they do not attend.

The New York Times quoted a Sunni politician who was upset over the trial’s collapse, and smelled U.S. complicity:

“I don’t think that there was any fairness in this matter,” said Saleem Abdullah, a member of Parliament and a spokesman for Tawafiq, the main Sunni bloc. “We are still wondering what happened to Ali al-Mahdawi, who entered the Ministry of Health and didn’t come out. So where is he?”

Mr. Mahdawi, a Sunni, was the director general of health for Diyala Province. He attended a meeting at the Ministry of Health on June 12, 2006, and vanished. Mr. Abdullah blamed the Americans for failing to push Iraqis to hold a more rigorous trial.

The Americans “also have the suspicions, but they have political considerations too,” he said. “Maybe because Sadr recently froze the Mahdi Army, they are trying not to criticize or provoke him,” he added, referring to Mr. Sadr’s recent decision to extend a cease-fire for six more months.

Ahh, but never fear, Mr. Abdullah! Our government may not be willing to hold Iraq’s Shiite regime accountable in court for sectarian murders committed by its militias, but (as Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings noted in writing about the trial) we are willing to arm and pay Sunni militias to counter them.

All in a day’s work bringing Dubya’s "freedom agenda" to fruition, I guess.

Related posts:

1. The End of the Delusion in Iraq
2. GOP/Media Complex Blows Smoke In RE: Obama and Poland and Russia
3. On the Rule of Law and Crimes of Torture
4. al-Haramain Reply Filed; Constitution, Rule of Law in Judge Walker’s Hands
5. Jawad, Ghailani Cases Challenge US Torture Under Rule of Law