Cornell International Law Journal


Genocide, International Law, Criminal Justice, article, Iraq, Legitimacy, Burden of proof, Evidence, Evidence (Law)


In this article in the Symposium on Milosevic & Hussein on Trial, the author discusses procedural challenges to proving genocide in the trial of Saddam Hussein to argue that the legitimacy of the Iraqi Special Tribunal (IST) & the proof of genocide rest on a sense of fairness, transparency, & completion of trials on a reasonable schedule. The Geneva Convention definition of genocide is discussed in terms of the impact of general verses specific intent in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). A historical analysis of the colonial creation of Iraq relates Saddam's style of government control to his desire to maintain power, & the geopolitics of oil in the country. Saddam's genocides of the Kurds & the Marsh Arabs are contextualized in the historical events of the Iran-Iraq war, the Gulf War, the chemical warfare on the Kurdish peoples, the draining of the marshes, & persecution of the Marsh Arabs. Creation of the IST under the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) is comparatively analyzed with alternative court models, & the probability of success or failure of the two cases of genocide are discussed. The author predicts many challenges for the prosecutorial success of genocide in the case of Saddam Hussein, & advocates procedural balance to secure the legitimacy of the IST. J. Harwell

Included in

Law Commons