'Harper's' Probes Case of Jailed AP Photog in Iraq

By: E&P Staff Can Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein possibly get a fair trial in Iraq? Scott Horton of Harper's magazine is the latest to look at the purported evidence, and fairness of his trial -- he is accused of aiding insurgents and was held without charges for well over a year -- in an article now at www.harper's.org.

"Iraq?s equivalent of the Zenger case is being conducted now before an Iraqi investigating judge," Horton writes. "In the dock sits the Pulitzer Prize-winning Associated Press photojournalist Bilal Hussein. The prosecution is brought by the American Pentagon, under a Secretary of Defense who states?rather unconvincingly?that ?the press is not the enemy.? I have just been given an update on the handling of the Bilal Hussein case from a Pentagon source who claimed to have been briefed on the proceedings."

Here is an excerpt.
*

Bilal?s case has been assigned to investigating Judge Dhia al-Kinani, who has already conducted a long series of evidentiary hearings in the case. The source said the Pentagon is confident that they will secure a conviction in the case. ?Nothing is being left to chance in this case. It?s important and a lot of resources are being thrown at it.? The Pentagon isn?t concerned about evidence or legal arguments. I wonder why. Some other points.

? Under strong pressure from the U.S. military, the investigating judge closed the case and imposed a gag order. This was requested principally because the U.S. military was concerned about unfavorable media coverage. The Pentagon media strategy involves leaking information as it finds convenient to ?friendly new media? (this I take to be wingnut bloggers), but restricting the flow of information to traditional media. The Iraqi judge is fully cooperating with his gag order....

? The Iraqi judge is also allowing the U.S. military to present evidence by witnesses through remote television hook-ups from undisclosed locations. This is done particularly to be sure that Bilal Hussein would not be able to cross-examine any witnesses.

? The Pentagon was particularly concerned about the prospect of Bilal Hussein getting effective defense from his lawyer, former federal prosecutor Paul Gardephe. The judge was told to refuse to allow Bilal Hussein?s U.S. lawyer to participate in the case. The judge accepted this advice. Consequently, the U.S. military has a five-man team to press its case, but Bilal Hussein?s lawyer is silenced and not permitted to participate?and all of this has occurred as a result of U.S. Government intervention with the court. The irony of course is that under Iraqi law, the U.S. military has no authority or right to appear and prosecute, but Bilal Hussein?s chosen counsel has an absolute right.

? The U.S. military continues to keep Hussein in their custody and will not allow his lawyer, Gardephe, access to him to conduct interviews or trial preparation without having both a U.S. military representative and an interpreter in the room at all times. Under international norms, this means that Bilal Hussein is not permitted access to counsel: a serious violation of his trial rights. And note that the violator is not the Iraqi authorities, who have no control over Bilal, but the United States Government.

? The Pentagon is convinced that regardless of the evidence presented and the arguments made, Bilal Hussein will be convicted based on its influence wielding and pressure tactics. ?The judge announced on the opening day that he would recommend conviction and refer the matter to the Central Criminal Court of Iraq. This was before any evidence or arguments had been produced. Our folks were elated, but concerned that his somewhat rash statement would undermine the credibility of the proceedings. They had expected him to say this only at the end of the proceedings.?