The trial of Iraq's vice president on terrorism charges has raised fears of the further politicisation of the Iraqi justice system, writes Salah Nasrawi A decision by Iraq's judiciary to put the country's Sunni vice president on trial on terrorism charges has reinforced fears of further security disruptions as the country's political and sectarian crisis continues. The controversy has also cast shadows over Iraq's legal system and highlighted the need for the justice system to assist in peace-building in the country, which has long been ravaged by dictatorship, invasion and civil war. On Sunday, Iraq's Supreme Judicial Council said it had referred Sunni Vice President Tariq Al-Hashemi for trial on charges of terrorism. A date for the trial has not been set, but the country's Interior Ministry immediately imposed a travel ban on Al-Hashemi. Earlier, the council had accused Al-Hashemi and 16 of his guards of carrying out 150 attacks against Iraqi security forces and civilians between 2005 and 2011. The case has sparked the country's worst political dispute since the United States withdrew its troops from Iraq in December, pitting Shia Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki against senior members of the Sunni-backed Iraqiya bloc. Among the charges made by the nine-judge panel against Al-Hashemi's guards were the killing of two higher court judges, an assassination attempt on a lawmaker, and a suicide car bomb attack on the offices of Iraq's Integrity Commission that left 23 people dead and 43 wounded. A spokesman for the council said the charges were based on confessions from three of the guards. Among the confessions aired on Iraqi state TV was one by a man who gave details of several roadside bombings and shootings targeting government and security officials in 2009. The alleged terrorists said that the orders had come either from Al-Hashemi or from his son-in-law, Ahmed Qahtan, who is also chief of staff at Al-Hashemi's office. Al-Hashemi has denied the accusations, but sought refuge in the semi-autonomous Iraqi region of Kurdistan shortly before an arrest warrant was issued against him. Kurdish officials said they would not hand him over to the Baghdad government, suggesting that the trial be held in a city under Kurdish control. On Monday, Al-Hashemi defended himself against the charges, which he said were based on statements made under coercion. He said they had been politically motivated in order to destroy Al-Maliki's opponents. Since the accusations were made public in December tensions have been building in Iraq amid a wider row between the Sunni-backed Iraqiya bloc, of which Al-Hashemi is a member, and the Shia-led government. The Iraqiya bloc began a boycott of the parliament and the cabinet in December in protest against what it called the "marginalisation" of Sunnis by Al-Maliki's administration. It has since called on Al-Maliki to either respect a power-sharing deal or to resign. Sunni lawmakers and ministers later returned to work in an attempt to ease the tensions, hoping that a national conference proposed by Iraqi President Jalal Talabani to be held over the coming weeks would help the rival factions to find solutions to the crisis. Nevertheless, Iraqiya leader Iyad Allawi has warned that if the conference fails to end the dispute, the bloc will take its case to the Arab summit meeting scheduled in Baghdad next month, a step that would extend the crisis beyond Iraq's border and further deepen the sectarian divide. The row coincided with a string of bombings on Shia targets in December and January, which prompted fears of a return to the kind of sectarian bloodshed that peaked five years ago in the aftermath of the 2003 US-led invasion of the country. On Sunday, a suicide car bomber killed two dozen Iraqi police officers and cadets in an attack on a crowd outside a Baghdad police academy. As politicians bicker and the violence continues, the allegations against Al-Hashemi have provided an opportunity to reflect on Iraq's law-and-order system, which critics say is inadequate and highly politicised. Iraq ranks highly on the international failed-states index, and like other state institutions the judiciary is said to be notoriously corrupt. Hundreds of thousands of people have died in violence and others been subjected to human-right abuses by all sides in the country's nine-year civil conflict. Most of these victims have been forgotten, and few of the perpetrators have been prosecuted. There is now growing debate in Iraq about whether the country will be able to institutionalise democracy without at the same time meeting the demands for justice of ordinary Iraqis. Critics argue that there is a need for more work to be done to address issues of guilt and responsibility and to end the impunity that has often been granted to those who have perpetrated crimes against humanity. Cases such as that against Al-Hashemi have underlined the need for proper legal procedures to be put in place in Iraq, in order to address the human-rights violations committed during the post-US occupation period. Many Iraqis fear that even if the charges against Al-Hashemi are substantiated, the trial could still be politically motivated. Al-Maliki has admitted that he was aware of the accusations against Al-Hashemi some three years before they were made public. The admission has raised criticisms of Al-Maliki, particularly as to why he did not take action if he knew of the accusations three years ago. For his part, Al-Hashemi has questioned why he has been "singled out" by the Shia-led government, insinuating that Shia militias are still at large after killing people in the years following the US occupation. There have also been questions as to whether Iraqi courts are able to investigate and prosecute the perpetrators of the crimes that have taken place in the country, some of which, such as allegations of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment, come under international human rights law. Some Iraqis argue that there may be a need to use international mechanisms in order to ensure that those responsible for human-rights abuses in Iraq are brought to account. In Al-Hashemi's case, critics say the judges on the trial panel have been named by officials sympathetic to Al-Maliki. Al-Hashemi has threatened that he will appeal to an international tribunal if the Iraqi judiciary fails him. The trial is expected to raise feelings that are very much part of the complex mix of emotions that has overwhelmed Iraq as it struggles to reconcile itself with the aftermath of the US occupation and to move on into the future. It has long been argued that the legacy of the post-invasion conflict in Iraq is too complicated to be dealt with in the absence of an approach that ensures justice for the victims of human-rights violations committed under the regime of former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, the US occupiers and Iraq's new rulers. For this reason, a system of transitional justice, with strict and well-defined mechanisms to address human-rights violations, remains Iraq's best hope to deal with the unfinished business of reckoning. At the heart of this transitional justice system lie the principles of truth, reconciliation, and justice. Al-Hashemi's trial will serve as a test case of whether Iraq is able to introduce such a system.
