Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman on: Saddam Hassein/Iraq and PM Simitis.
Saddam Hussein/Iraq
Asked to explain why the Prime Minister believed that Saddam Hussein should be put on trial in Iraq, the Prime Minister’s Official Spokesman (PMOS) pointed out that it was the Iraqi people who had been systematically tyrannised by Saddam for so long. In our view, it was fair and just that the institutions which represented them should have the opportunity to try him in the same country. Asked to clarify the difference between this case and the trial of Slobodan Milosevic, the PMOS said that a tribunal had been set up in The Hague in any event to deal with events in the former Yugoslavia. He drew journalists’ attention to the Foreign Secretary’s words a little earlier today when he had explained some of the issues relating to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and domestic tribunals. His words spoke for themselves.
Asked the UK’s attitude towards the possible use of the death penalty for Saddam, the PMOS said that it remained the desire of both the British and US Governments that Saddam’s fate should rest with the Iraqi people. If he was to be tried by their institutions, obviously we would have to abide by their rules. The PMOS noted that we were now twenty-four hours on from when the news about Saddam’s capture had first broken. He acknowledged that the questions he was being asked regarding what was going to happen next were all legitimate as he appreciated the nature of news and the speed with which events were reported and moved on. However, it was important to recognise that some of the judicial and custodial issues relating to Saddam’s capture were still in their infancy. As was well known, the UK did not support the death penalty, as the Foreign Secretary had underlined again this morning. However, were that to be the outcome, then obviously it would be something we would have to accept. Put to him that the judicial system in Iraq was still fluid and that the death penalty might be abolished, the PMOS said that as Mr Straw had explained, the Coalition was helping the Iraqi administration to put in place all the necessary civil institutions. That included help on the legal side. It was also important to recognise that although Iraq had been brutalised and systematically degraded by Saddam, there were talented people inside that country - jurists and legal experts - with whom the Coalition was working with in any event. We would have to be a bit more patient.
Put to him that the UK’s Special Representative in Iraq, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, had said this morning that the UK would take no part in any trial which could lead to execution and whether this was an indication that the UK would withdraw its co-operation, the PMOS repeated that our position on the death penalty was well known. Equally, it was well known that countries, including some of the P5 on the UN Security Council, operated a legal system where the death penalty could be used in certain circumstances. He repeated that we were still only twenty-four hours on from when news about Saddam’s capture had first broken and some of these judicial issues were still being worked through. In that time, we had done our best to explain why it was that we believed Saddam’s fate should rest with the Iraqi people. We couldn’t be any clearer. Put to him that Sir Jeremy’s remarks appeared to be very categorical, the PMOS said that the Coalition was doing all it could to build up the necessary civil and legal institutions in Iraq, including policing and a military infrastructure. Obviously a key part of that was the judicial element. In our view, however, it was appropriate for the Iraqi authorities to address these issues themselves.
Asked about the possibility of an international court process in the light of the fact that the reason for the war on Iraq was because Saddam had flouted his international obligations, the PMOS said that the legal basis for the war was well known and well understood. But it was important to recognise that these issues did not exist in a vacuum. Saddam had obviously been responsible for the most appalling crimes, having gassed his own people, for example. The mass graves inside the country were filled with Iraqis. In our view it was fair and just that Saddam’s fate should rest with the Iraqi people. Given the country had now thrown off his yoke, it was not unreasonable that the people themselves should want justice. Asked for a reaction to Iran’s call for an international judicial process, the PMOS said that both the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary had stated the British Government’s view on this issue.
Questioned as to whether Saddam’s capture would put British troops in more danger in Iraq or whether it would mean that they would be coming home sooner than expected, the PMOS said that as the Prime Minister had pointed out in his statement yesterday, whilst everybody welcomed the news - and whatever people’s view of the war, you would have to be very hard-hearted not to be pleased that one of the world’s worst tyrants was now in captivity - no one was naive enough to presume that it marked the end of attacks in Iraq. It did not, as events this morning showed clearly. We were under no illusion that there would be further setbacks and challenges. However, it was clear that for many Iraqis who suffered under Saddam’s regime, the psychological effect of his capture was significant given that any threat of his return to power had now completely disappeared. As the Prime Minister had stated yesterday, this moment should be used for reconciliation.
Asked if President Bush and the Prime Minister had discussed who should make the announcement about Saddam’s arrest and whether the President had given the Prime Minister permission to do so, the PMOS said that the two leaders had spoken after the announcement had been made, although there had been contacts between Downing Street and the White House throughout the course of yesterday morning. He pointed out that once the news, sourced to an Iranian news agency and Kurdish sources, had first snapped on the wires, people were being left in little doubt from whoever they spoke to of its veracity. Consequently, the Prime Minister hadn’t been telling anybody anything they didn’t already know.
Asked if Saddam had been offered any concessions in exchange for information relating to WMD, the PMOS said that he hadn’t heard the suggestion being mentioned or discussed. He repeated that in our view the fate of Saddam should rest with the Iraqi people. Clearly there would be a process of interrogation, as you would expect. However, Mr Straw had injected a note of realism as to how fruitful that might be, given Saddam’s history and his relationship with the truth.
Asked if there was any unease within Downing Street about the way that Saddam had been paraded on television yesterday given the legal rights afforded to prisoners of war, the PMOS said that when announcing news of such significance, it was inevitable that people would want to see the proof - especially since Saddam had had such a hold over the Iraqi people, despite being removed from power in April. A judgement had therefore been taken that it was in the public - Iraqi - interest to see the pictures yesterday. He also took the opportunity to remind journalists of the scepticism relating to the announcement of the deaths of Saddam’s two sons until pictures had been shown as proof.
Asked if British troops had been involved in the capture of Saddam, the PMOS said that he had nothing to add to what had already been said about this matter yesterday by the US authorities. Asked to confirm reports that Saddam had been removed from Iraq to Qatar, the PMOS repeated that he had no more to say other than the fact that Saddam was in the Coalition’s custody in a US facility. Pressed as to whether he was still in Iraq, the PMOS said that he had nothing more to say about this issue.
Asked how long Saddam could remain in US custody and if we really believed that Iraq had the wherewithal to put him on trial, the PMOS said that there was a limit to the questions that could be answered at this point. We were only twenty-four hours on from the news of his arrest. That said, the IGC had established a special tribunal to try members of Saddam’s regime. Although it was not fully operational by any extent, work was ongoing to get it up and running. Asked if the UK would want to see Saddam in Iraqi custody as soon as possible, the PMOS said yes, consistent with the necessary judicial processes being in place and after appropriate interrogation. The Foreign Secretary had taken the opportunity to explain the importance of having the proper principles of justice fully established. Put to him that the details of what to do with Saddam must have already been thrashed out some time ago by the US, UK and the Iraqi authorities, the PMOS said that the Coalition, together with the Iraqi Governing Council, were doing all that could be done to rebuild Iraq, including the judicial system. We would not be talking about Saddam standing trial in Iraq were that to be inconsistent with the wishes of the Iraqi people and the Governing Council. Asked if the UK would welcome the idea of international observers to ensure that any trial was fair, the PMOS said that we were not even close to having a court in Iraq at this point. That said, as Jack Straw had commented, no one should be under-whelmed by the ability of the Iraqi people themselves to manage these affairs. They were talented and gifted people.
PM Simitis
Asked about the Prime Minister’s meeting today with Prime Minister Simitis of Greece, the PMOS said that despite the fact the two Prime Ministers had attended the European Council in Brussels at the weekend, they had not been able to have a formal bilateral. However, given the Greek Prime Minister was in the UK on private business today, they were taking the opportunity to meet up. Obviously they would want to review the events at the weekend and discuss how to move forward on the issues that could not be resolved in Brussels. Asked when the UK was due to hold the EU Presidency again, the PMOS said that we would assume the position in the second half of 2005, after Ireland, Holland and Luxembourg.
delicious
digg
facebook
