- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
U.S. Strips Immunity From New Iraq Govt
Email
ShareDecember 19, 2007 1:58 PM
ABC News' Kirit Radia and Matt Jaffe Report: The Iraqi government is reportedly furious with a measure passed by Congress that could hold the new Iraqi government responsible for torture or terror acts committed by the Saddam Hussein regime.
Iraqi Ambassador to the U.S. Samir Sumaida'ie told journalists Tuesday he has written a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to complain about the measure, passed as an amendment to defense policy legislation last week.
The Iraqi ambassador said the amendment would remove any immunity that covered the new Iraqi government against responsibility for acts committed by the Saddam Hussein regime.
ABC News obtained the text of the legislation, and while there is no specific mention of Iraq, it does mandate no immunity in U.S. courts for states considered "sponsors of terror" at the time of an act.
The legislation H.R. 1585 reads:
"A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States or of the States in any case not otherwise covered by this chapter in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death that was caused by an act of torture, extrajudicial killing, aircraft sabotage, hostage taking, or the provision of material support or resources for such an act if such act or provision of material support or resources is engaged in by an official, employee, or agent of such foreign state while acting within the scope of his or her office, employment, or agency."
The ambassador said the amendment could mean fines and punishments for the Iraqi government that could reach into the billions of dollars.
He argued, as has his government for the past several years, that the new Iraqi government is not responsible for the actions of the previous regime and that they were already victims under Saddam and do not need to pay for his crimes.
The U.S. State Department said they oppose the amendment.
"We do and did oppose the amendment when it was first proposed," said State Department deputy spokesperson Tom Casey. "I think people are still studying the final language."
Sumaida'ie told reporters he believed the amendment was quietly slipped into the legislation. It isn't clear who on Capitol Hill sponsored the amendment.
When asked about the amendment, an official in Senate Republican leader's Mitch McConnell's office said the amendment was part of the Defense Authorization Act the Senate passed last week, and blames the uproar on problems with the precise wording of the legislation, language that they are now trying to change: "There is an effort to fix it before it gets to the President," said the official.
December 19, 2007 in Romney, Mitt | Permalink | User Comments (13)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
"A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States or of the States in any case not otherwise covered by this chapter in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death that was caused by an act of torture.
Does this apply to the Bush sponsored torture?
Posted by: LeGrand | Dec 19, 2007 3:09:12 PM
How about some legislation to have Bush and Cheney impeached? Throw all the Bush administration criminals in jail where they belong! Almost eight years of these criminals systematically destroying the American way of life and ruining Americas reputation across the world.
Posted by: AJ | Dec 19, 2007 3:10:24 PM
A surprisingly bold and unapologetic back door strategy to destroy post-Saddam democracy in Iraq.
Sounds like the work of Murtha and Levin to me.
The Dems simply cannot allow success for the Iraqi people--no matter how many must die at the hands of al-Qaeda, the Mahdi army, and Iranian agents. Because it might mean acknowledging Bush was right in overthrowing Saddam--despite bad pre-war intelligence and the inept pre-Surge occupation.
Posted by: The War on The War on Terror | Dec 19, 2007 4:41:47 PM
How is it that the US can "strip" a government of a "sovereign state" of anything, thereby assuming an authority that is belied by the assistance and permission given to the Turks to invade the country.
Posted by: brianbwb | Dec 20, 2007 1:31:48 AM
iraq is soverign
Posted by: joe | Dec 20, 2007 2:17:34 AM
Assume if All governments passed the same legislations in their assemblies.
Eeraqis (Iraqis) can ask damages from US govt. for all deaths caused by saddam for using chemical weapons and war against Eeran(Iran)supported with weaponry to him by USA.
When will we stop screwing up with other people's countries.
Posted by: Shams Khan | Dec 20, 2007 8:18:23 AM
Hey Rusty!
So just what is the will of the American people regarding Iraq? Maybe the Democrats are starting to get a clue.
The Senate, by a vote of 70-25, approved $70 billion for combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, without any restrictions or timetables--adding another political victory to the recent string of wins by President Bush and GOP congressional leaders.
21 DEMOCRATS, including Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (Mich.), and Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) voted for the bill, while Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) was the only Republican to vote against it.
Time for you and Code Pink to organize another "Regime Change" in Congress, since the Democrats are not delivering for you.
Posted by: The War on The War on Terror | Dec 20, 2007 8:44:56 AM
Amazing-not just because of the blatant hypocracy of this administration blaming other sovereign nations of Civil Rights Abuses (except them and their friends who do it), but their placing the blame of their own myopia and incompetence upon those they forcefully installed in power! What does it take to end this madness???
Posted by: warmapril | Dec 20, 2007 3:25:24 PM
I think this was designed so that Syria and Iran can be sued in US courts--which means neo-con fingerprints are almost certainly on this piece of mischief. As usual, they screwed up.
Posted by: Bushfatigue | Dec 20, 2007 4:41:13 PM
On an elementary level...lets look at the first few words of this piece of legislation...
"A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States....etc...blah blah blah"
This is disgusting. We really are the world police. But I ask you...Do we have the right? Dont we have enough policing/policy problems of our own. Shouldnt we fix the 32 bit version before we move on to the 64 bit one? We really do feel that our style of government, policy, and LAW is adequate for everyone the globe over. Sick. If this is america then count me out. America is a land of free thought, (rumour has it....Religion), expression, and democracy (whatever the f$%&%k that is???) but it appears to only apply for those who are NOT terrorists inside our country. Count me out. I am taking my services elsewhere. You guys can pay for the filthy war. Have fun.
Posted by: john syracopoulos | Dec 20, 2007 4:49:58 PM
And do you really think the US government would comply if ANY other nation passed such a 'law' and it went to court, suing the US and/or the Presidency for war crimes? What if, say, France (!) brought a case fro ma citizen charging the US with war crimes- or ANY crime, for that matter- as a result of actions in Kosovo taken under the Clinton administration? Do you *really* think, for one SECOND, that the US is going to honor such a case, or allow it to go to trial, or even acknowledge its guilt in absebtia if it went ahead in the Hague? I think not. One more Blinding Flash of the Obvious: our government is full of liars and hypocrites. It's time for a Second American Revolution.
Posted by: Morgan Underwood | Dec 20, 2007 9:33:11 PM
(corrected) And do you really think the US government would comply if ANY other nation passed such a 'law' and it went to court, suing the US and/or the Presidency for war crimes? What if, say, France (!) brought a case from a citizen charging the US with war crimes- or ANY crime, for that matter- as a result of actions in Kosovo taken under the Clinton administration? Do you *really* think, for one SECOND, that the US is going to honor such a case, or allow it to go to trial, or even acknowledge its guilt in absentia if it went ahead in the Hague? I think not. One more Blinding Flash of the Obvious: our government is full of liars and hypocrites. It's time for a Second American Revolution.
Posted by: Morgan Underwood | Dec 20, 2007 9:34:52 PM
Why is the left so much more angry at Bush than the people that are actually the enemy of this country?
are you people really that delirious?
Posted by: Mark E. | Dec 21, 2007 10:29:45 AM
Post a comment
