Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Saturday

Interview With Barry Carter

Aired December 20, 2003 - 18:15   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: It has been another violent day in Iraq. But that didn't stop the leader of a coalition ally from making a surprise visit to his troops. Let's go to CNN's Rym Brahimi in Baghdad for the latest from there.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In a surprise visit to Iraq Jose Maria Aznar went to visit the Spanish troops at a base in the south of the country, about 1,300 Spanish troops had arrived in August. They were supposed to leave at the end of the year, but now they have been told that they are going to leave in another six months from now.

JOSE MARIA AZNAR, PRESIDENT OF SPAIN (through translator) The threats of today's world cannot be dealt with within Spain, but also working here every day. We are not only helping Iraqis, we are not only helping the whole region, but we are also helping to promote freedom, stability, peace and prosperity in Spain. And it is very important that you know this, because all Spaniards thank you, support you and the Spanish government supports you and encourages you in your present duties and is unconditionally by your side.

BRAHIMI: Jose Maria Aznar had lunch with the troops and then left four hours later. Spain has been one of the staunchest allies to the United States, not only in this postwar Iraq period but also during the war and before the war against Iraq. Now the Spanish premier arrived unannounced. That seems to be the trend for several high ranking officials over coalition countries. And the main reason, of course, is security. There is still persisting violence in several areas of the country. Some score settling killings we are hearing reports of.

Also on this day reports by Iraqi police that in the northeast of the country not far from Kirkut three policemen were killed by US troops who apparently may have mistaken then for bandits. And in a nearby town known as Jallula (ph) US troops say that they were engaged by insurgents, 15 insurgents. The US troops say they killed three of them and wounded two others. This is Rym Brahimi reporting from Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LIN: Well, it is pretty much a cinch. Saddam Hussein can't get a change of venue to someplace where no one has ever heard of him. But how will the deposed Iraqi leader face justice? Who is going to try him and how? Let's ask an expert in international law, Professor Barry Carter of Georgetown Law School joins us now from Washington. Barry, thank you very much for being here.

BARRY CARTER, PROFESSOR, GEORGETOWN LAW SCHOOL: Good evening.

LIN: What are some of the options. Right now, the Iraqi Governing Council says that it wants to basically be in charge of the trial process, is that likely to happen and is that the only option?

CARTER: Well, the most realistic options are either the Iraqis, in either the present Iraqi government or the new one would try him. Or there would be a hybrid Iraqi international court. But if I step back for a second, we've got to remember that Saddam Hussein is guilty by all evidence of some horrible atrocities, mass murder, torcher, rape. We categorize those -- international law professors -- as war crimes or crimes against humanity. And in theory, any court of any legitimate country can try him under the idea of universal jurisdiction. But the US has him in his custody. And so, the question is who is the US going to turn him over to? Who is the US going to agree to?

LIN: Who do you think?

CARTER: Well, the US now is saying -- the Bush administration that they want the Iraqis to try him.

LIN: But they have to say that now don't they, really, because the United States is in the process of helping to establish a government in Iraq. I mean, the very legitimacy of that government may be tested by the government itself.

CARTER: That is a very good point. And I think there is a good argument for making sure Iraq is involved, maybe not the present tribunal, because that's under the government that was set up by the US. But if they have a new government after we turn over Saddam, and it is going to take awhile before this trial occurs, months if not years, the new government could try him. The problem that you have is that Iraqi judiciary is in disarray. The new government would be just getting organized. And people might question how well they do the task of trying a very difficult, complicated case.

LIN: All right, so do you think this case should go to the Hague then?

CARTER: No, the Hague actually doesn't have jurisdiction. But what could be done is you could set up a new tribunal of Iraqis and of international judges. The model Sierra Leone, an African country that recently had a civil war that was quite brutal. People had their hands hacked off by machetes and all. So they have set up a special tribunal of eight judges, five international, three Sierra Leone to try really bad war criminals in Sierra Leone for violations of international and Sierra Leone law. It is a hybrid. And it is going to move it appears relatively quickly. And everyone is going to sense that there is some justice, some due processes occurring.

LIN: Well, for some, the sense of justice would be nothing short of Saddam Hussein getting the death penalty.

CARTER: Well, that is a great question. I think the important thing for the US to think about, since we have him, is making sure that the Iraqis and the world feel that justice is done. So that is why we have to have a good tribunal. And I think a hybrid one is a good idea. One problem with any international tribunal is that Europe, or a lot of European countries and many other countries don't believe in the death penalty.

LIN: Great Britain is that being one of them?

CARTER: Yes, one of our allies. Any country that is a member of the European Union, including Great Britain, or even the European Court of Human Rights, which includes Russia have had to forsake the death penalty. The death penalty is not allowed in Europe. And so it might be hard to get international agreement to a tribunal that doesn't allow the death penalty.

LIN: That is going to be an interesting process. Barry Carter, I think you've laid the groundwork there. We'll see how this evolves. Thank you very much. Barry Carter, Georgetown University.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired December 20, 2003 - 18:15   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: It has been another violent day in Iraq. But that didn't stop the leader of a coalition ally from making a surprise visit to his troops. Let's go to CNN's Rym Brahimi in Baghdad for the latest from there.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RYM BRAHIMI, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In a surprise visit to Iraq Jose Maria Aznar went to visit the Spanish troops at a base in the south of the country, about 1,300 Spanish troops had arrived in August. They were supposed to leave at the end of the year, but now they have been told that they are going to leave in another six months from now.

JOSE MARIA AZNAR, PRESIDENT OF SPAIN (through translator) The threats of today's world cannot be dealt with within Spain, but also working here every day. We are not only helping Iraqis, we are not only helping the whole region, but we are also helping to promote freedom, stability, peace and prosperity in Spain. And it is very important that you know this, because all Spaniards thank you, support you and the Spanish government supports you and encourages you in your present duties and is unconditionally by your side.

BRAHIMI: Jose Maria Aznar had lunch with the troops and then left four hours later. Spain has been one of the staunchest allies to the United States, not only in this postwar Iraq period but also during the war and before the war against Iraq. Now the Spanish premier arrived unannounced. That seems to be the trend for several high ranking officials over coalition countries. And the main reason, of course, is security. There is still persisting violence in several areas of the country. Some score settling killings we are hearing reports of.

Also on this day reports by Iraqi police that in the northeast of the country not far from Kirkut three policemen were killed by US troops who apparently may have mistaken then for bandits. And in a nearby town known as Jallula (ph) US troops say that they were engaged by insurgents, 15 insurgents. The US troops say they killed three of them and wounded two others. This is Rym Brahimi reporting from Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LIN: Well, it is pretty much a cinch. Saddam Hussein can't get a change of venue to someplace where no one has ever heard of him. But how will the deposed Iraqi leader face justice? Who is going to try him and how? Let's ask an expert in international law, Professor Barry Carter of Georgetown Law School joins us now from Washington. Barry, thank you very much for being here.

BARRY CARTER, PROFESSOR, GEORGETOWN LAW SCHOOL: Good evening.

LIN: What are some of the options. Right now, the Iraqi Governing Council says that it wants to basically be in charge of the trial process, is that likely to happen and is that the only option?

CARTER: Well, the most realistic options are either the Iraqis, in either the present Iraqi government or the new one would try him. Or there would be a hybrid Iraqi international court. But if I step back for a second, we've got to remember that Saddam Hussein is guilty by all evidence of some horrible atrocities, mass murder, torcher, rape. We categorize those -- international law professors -- as war crimes or crimes against humanity. And in theory, any court of any legitimate country can try him under the idea of universal jurisdiction. But the US has him in his custody. And so, the question is who is the US going to turn him over to? Who is the US going to agree to?

LIN: Who do you think?

CARTER: Well, the US now is saying -- the Bush administration that they want the Iraqis to try him.

LIN: But they have to say that now don't they, really, because the United States is in the process of helping to establish a government in Iraq. I mean, the very legitimacy of that government may be tested by the government itself.

CARTER: That is a very good point. And I think there is a good argument for making sure Iraq is involved, maybe not the present tribunal, because that's under the government that was set up by the US. But if they have a new government after we turn over Saddam, and it is going to take awhile before this trial occurs, months if not years, the new government could try him. The problem that you have is that Iraqi judiciary is in disarray. The new government would be just getting organized. And people might question how well they do the task of trying a very difficult, complicated case.

LIN: All right, so do you think this case should go to the Hague then?

CARTER: No, the Hague actually doesn't have jurisdiction. But what could be done is you could set up a new tribunal of Iraqis and of international judges. The model Sierra Leone, an African country that recently had a civil war that was quite brutal. People had their hands hacked off by machetes and all. So they have set up a special tribunal of eight judges, five international, three Sierra Leone to try really bad war criminals in Sierra Leone for violations of international and Sierra Leone law. It is a hybrid. And it is going to move it appears relatively quickly. And everyone is going to sense that there is some justice, some due processes occurring.

LIN: Well, for some, the sense of justice would be nothing short of Saddam Hussein getting the death penalty.

CARTER: Well, that is a great question. I think the important thing for the US to think about, since we have him, is making sure that the Iraqis and the world feel that justice is done. So that is why we have to have a good tribunal. And I think a hybrid one is a good idea. One problem with any international tribunal is that Europe, or a lot of European countries and many other countries don't believe in the death penalty.

LIN: Great Britain is that being one of them?

CARTER: Yes, one of our allies. Any country that is a member of the European Union, including Great Britain, or even the European Court of Human Rights, which includes Russia have had to forsake the death penalty. The death penalty is not allowed in Europe. And so it might be hard to get international agreement to a tribunal that doesn't allow the death penalty.

LIN: That is going to be an interesting process. Barry Carter, I think you've laid the groundwork there. We'll see how this evolves. Thank you very much. Barry Carter, Georgetown University.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com