GOI AMNESTY LAW MEETINGS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BAGHDAD 001238 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/21/2018 TAGS: KJUS PREL PGOV PINS IZ SUBJECT: GOI AMNESTY LAW MEETINGS Classified By: Deputy PolCouns Ellen Germain for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d ) ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: GoI officials held two recent meetings to discuss the problems with Amnesty Law implementation and to explore potential solutions. According to Minister of Human Rights Wijdan Salim, the first meeting on April 17 focused on finger-pointing, with participants blaming each other for the current impasses in implementing the law. The second meeting on April 19 concentrated on bridging the gap between amnesty release orders and actual releases. The participants in the second meeting will recommend to Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih that he establish an inter-ministerial committee that will have oversight over judicial release orders in certain controversial cases. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (C) Minister of Human Rights Wijdan Salim told POLOFF that on April 17 GoI representatives had a "heated" two and a half hour meeting to discuss problems with Amnesty Law implementation. Participants included Wijdan, Deputy Minister of Justice Posho, Chief Justice Medhat Al-Mahmoud, Chief Prosecutor Ghadanfer, Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, Hadi Al-Amiri (Badr head of the CoR Security and Defense Committee),Abd al-Karim Al-Samaraee (IIP member of the CoR Security and Defense Committee),and Omar Al-Jaboori (human rights advisor to VP Hashimi). ¶3. (C) According to Wijdan, at the beginning of the meeting, Medhat accused the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) of refusing to release those approved for amnesty. (Note: According to the regulations, amnesty requests are adjudicated by four-member committees appointed by the Higher Judicial Council (HJC, headed by Medhat). The HJC sends the order to the appropriate ministry, and it is that ministry's responsibility to release the detainee. End Note.) Medhat also said that given the rampant corruption in the original application process, in which applications were being sold instead of given out, there is now a new process in place. This eliminates the need for applications by detainees or their families, as all detainee files will automatically go to the judicial committee for review. Wijdan argued that this does not solve the problem and will only increase corruption, citing examples of Iraqis now having to pay one million dinars ($838) to send their files to the judge. Wijdan also complained that the files of those released or 
approved for release are not being properly documented. According to her, Al-Jaboori was upset at her concerns and wanted to see people released quickly, regardless of procedures. Al-Samaraee argued that the MoJ should release those approved for amnesty and threatened to investigate the HJC for misconduct. All present responded that Al-Samaraee had no right to investigate the independent HJC. The Sunni participants emphasized that all detainees who had been detained for more than a year without trial must be released and were upset that the HJC was ignoring this article in the law. ¶4. (C) Wijdan said the meeting ended with all the participants blaming each other, although Medhat, Ghadanfer, Al-Samaraee, Al-Amiri, and Wijdan agreed to meet again on April 19 in Medhat,s office. Wijdan said that she emphasized the following two points at that meeting: (1) every release needs to be properly documented; and (2) amnesty cannot be authorized for those not eligible for release under the law. She believes the relevant ministry should have a week to object to any decisions it deems extralegal, such as when detainees are granted amnesty even though their crimes are exempted from amnesty under the law. ¶5. (C) Wijdan also said that Minister of Justice Safa Al-Safi sent a letter on April 18 to the Ministry of Interior (MoI),Ministry of Defense (MoD),and Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (MoLSA) telling them not to follow the adjudicating committees, amnesty release orders. In the letter, Dr. Safa stated that no ministry should release any detainees granted amnesty until an MoJ committee reviews each judicial amnesty order. (Note: Dr. Safa has reportedly established an MoJ committee to review each amnesty release order. End Note.) The HJC reportedly sent a letter back to Dr. Safa telling him it is "not your job" to review HJC decisions. ¶6. (C) According to Wijdan, the April 19 meeting focused on possible solutions for the current impasse in amnesty implementation. Participants included Wijdan, Jum'aa Hussein Zamil (MoJ Director General of the Iraqi Corrections Service),Medhat, Ghadanfer, Al-Amiri, Al-Samaraee, and Al-Jaboori. The participants recommended establishing an inter-ministerial committee that will look at certain controversial cases or cases they believe were not properly decided under the statute. This committee would review the cases after they were decided by the HJC adjudicating committee. The committee will include representatives from BAGHDAD 00001238 002 OF 002 the MoI, MoD, MoLSA, MoJ, and Ministry of Human Rights. Wijdan said that the participants will now write letters to Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, who was not at the meeting, asking him to establish this committee. ¶7. (C) COMMENT: The Amnesty Law has not been implemented particularly well thus far. As far as we can tell, actual release numbers are far less than the number of releases claimed by the HJC. The MoJ is refusing to abide by the release orders, citing discrepancies in how amnesty was granted. We have seen examples of amnesty being granted to detainees who do not legally qualify according to the statute. If Wijdan,s claim that the process is not being properly documented is true, that could pose future problems if a released detainee commits another crime within five years. However, these two meetings are a positive step since it seems the relevant actors are trying to address the problems and find solutions, which will need to bridge the gap between the HJC and relevant ministries. END COMMENT. BUTENIS