Happy New Year to everyone, and hopefully 2009 will be a good year for us all.  Especially in Iraq.  We’ll see how it goes, and I will be sure to post what I can about any of the issues and problems associated with the hand over.  One thing I did pick up on in this article, was the issue of Iraqi prisoners.  

   U.S. troops across Iraq remain under U.S. command but their operations must now be authorised by a joint committee. They can detain Iraqis only with a warrant from an Iraqi judge and are to leave the streets of Iraqi towns and cities by mid-2009.

Some 15,000 prisoners held at U.S. military detention camps must now be charged with crimes under Iraqi law or freed. 

   I really hope that Iraq’s legal system will be able to properly deal with this, and I have to think that out of those 15,000 that there are still a few with some fight in them.  We’ll see how this goes, and I am sure we will be carefully watching who gets released and where they go.

   As for a joint committee authorizing operations, I am somewhat skeptical.  My fear for this would be OPSEC and this part of the handover will take a lot of trust.  All we can do is wait and see.  -Matt 

—————————————————————— 

Iraqi troops take charge of Baghdad’s Green Zone

Thu Jan 1, 2009 9:56am EST

* U.S. troops come under Iraqi mandate

* PM marks “sovereignty” with national holiday

* Iraqi forces assume control of Green Zone

By Waleed Ibrahim and Tim Cocks

BAGHDAD, Jan 1 (Reuters) - U.S. forces in Iraq came under an Iraqi mandate on Thursday, an event the country’s leader said had finally restored Iraq’s sovereignty nearly six years after the invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

In one immediate change, U.S. forces handed over responsibility to Iraqi troops for the Green Zone, a fortified swathe of central Baghdad off limits to most Iraqis, who widely view it as a symbol of foreign military occupation.

 “The Justice Department began their presentation to the American people with a lie,” Connolly said

I think this quote and the photo says everything I have to say about this whole thing.  -Matt  

—————————————————————— 

Blackwater radio logs: Guards took incoming fire

12/19/2008

By MATT APUZZO and LARA JAKES 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Radio logs from a deadly 2007 shooting in Baghdad cast doubt on U.S. government claims that Blackwater Worldwide security guards were unprovoked when they killed 14 Iraqi civilians. The transcripts of Blackwater radio reports, obtained by The Associated Press, describe a hectic eight minutes in which the guards repeatedly reported incoming gunfire from insurgents and Iraqi police.

Five guards face manslaughter and weapons charges for their roles in the shootings. A sixth has pleaded guilty. Prosecutors said the men unleashed a gruesome attack on unarmed Iraqis, including women, children and people trying to escape.

But the radio logs from the Sept. 16, 2007 shooting suggest otherwise. Copies of the logs were turned over to prosecutors by Blackwater.

Because Blackwater guards were authorized to fire in self-defense, any evidence their convoy was attacked will make it harder for the Justice Department to prove they acted unlawfully.

The logs, which document radio traffic heard by the company’s dispatch center inside the U.S.-controlled Green Zone, show that the Blackwater convoy known as Raven 23 reported taking small arms fire_or SAF_ from insurgents within one minute of shutting down traffic in Baghdad’s Nisoor Square.

“Mult insuirg SAF @ R23,” the log states at 12:12 p.m.

One minute later, the Raven 23 convoy reported taking fire from Iraqi police: “R23 rpts IPs shooting @ R23.”

   This story just gets me every time I read about it.  This is such a tough deal for everyone involved, and the emotions involved with this will make the trial very interesting.  -Matt 

—————————————————————— 

Killing in Afghanistan hits very close to home

by Bruce Alpert, The Times-Picayune

Tuesday December 16, 2008, 10:08 PM

WASHINGTON — Paula Loyd, a social scientist helping U.S. troops adjust to the cultural and political landscape of war-ravaged Afghanistan, was talking to residents of a village near Kandihar last month when, without warning, one of the men ignited a container of flammable liquid and tossed it at her, setting her on fire.

With Loyd, 36, engulfed in flames, the attacker fled, running about 50 yards in the direction of Don Ayala, a New Orleans man working as a private security contractor to protect Loyd and other members of her Army Human Terrain System team. Ayala, according to an affidavit from an Army special agent, drew his pistol but did not fire, instead extending his arm to knock the attacker, Abdul Salam, to the ground.

Assisted by soldiers from C Company, 2-2 Infantry Battalion, Ayala subdued Salam, and handcuffed him with plastic restraints, although the man continued to resist, according to the affidavit. About 10 minutes later, a soldier passed word to Ayala and the U.S. soldiers that Loyd’s condition was very bad.

   Good move and this will help their case.  The photo below, is the photo that the news has just posted.  The irony is that the photo shows each one in their former military uniform, and rightly so.  It is a reminder to the public that these guys not only served their country as civilian contractors, but also served as Soldiers and Marines.  Does that mean they are less patriotic, or that their sacrifice is any less significant, now that they are security contractors? I don’t think so, and the way the press demonizes this industry is despicable.  How many civilian contractors have died in support or defense of the client?  So 230,000 plus civilian contractors supporting and defending an all volunteer military and diplomatic corps in this war, and this is the thanks we get?  

     I want justice served, just like anyone else out there.  But to make out these men to be public enemy number one, is crap.  These men were tasked with protecting people in a war zone, a war zone in which the enemy wears no uniform and obeys no laws.  This is a war, where vehicles are used as weapons, and suicide bombers could be a woman or child, and survival sometimes requires extreme measures to defend against such things.  I will not second guess what these men had to do to survive this incident, because I wasn’t there. To me, these men are innocent until proven guilty, and that their service to country in this war, both in the military and as a civilian contractors, is significant. Perhaps we should bring back the draft, just to show the other half of this country how significant that service really is? Thanks to Jeff for sending me this by the way, and Semper Fi. -Head Jundi

——————————————————————-  

5 Blackwater guards surrender to feds

Charged with killing 17 civilians, they seek trial in pro-gun state, not D.C.

The Associated Press

Dec. 8, 2008

WASHINGTON - Five Blackwater Worldwide security guards surrendered Monday in an investigation into a deadly 2007 shooting in a busy Baghdad intersection.

The five guards are charged with manslaughter and using a machine gun in a crime of violence. Though they are charged in a sealed indictment in Washington, they surrendered at a federal courthouse in Salt Lake City. The Justice Department is preparing to make the charges public later Monday.

Seventeen Iraqis were killed in the September 2007 shooting. Witnesses said the heavily armed U.S. contractors opened fire unprovoked, killing innocent motorists and children at a crowded intersection. Blackwater, the largest security contractor in Iraq, says its guards were ambushed by insurgents while responding to a car bombing.

   I want to applaud Tara for writing this, and I agree with this assessment. Especially this part, which includes that crap that the New York Times wrote. -Head Jundi

“The New York Times editorial board has called the SOFA’s exclusions of protection for contractors “an acceptable price to pay to show this country’s commitment to the rule of law.” A diplomatic concession that blatantly and offensively treats one class of American citizen differently than others hardly demonstrates the U.S. commitment to the rule of law.” 

—————————————————————— 

SOFA Discards Contractors and the Rule of Law

December 04, 2008

JURIST Guest Columnist Tara Lee, a former Navy JAG now a partner at DLA Piper (US) LLP, says that having a Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq that abdicates the jurisdictional reach of the United States over contractors (not just security contractors) who are US citizens acting on its behalf is too high a price to pay for recognizing Iraq’s sovereignty….

Earlier this week the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq issued a report that is highly critical of the absence of due process in Iraq’s criminal justice system. The UN Report notes that “many detainees have been deprived of their liberty for months or even years, often under precarious physical conditions, without access to defence counsel, or without being formally charged with a crime or produced before a judge. Continuing allegations of widespread torture and ill-treatment of inmates are of particular concern.” The report is particularly timely, given that as of January 1, 2009, U.S. citizens who are contractors in Iraq will be subject to the jurisdiction of Iraqi criminal and civil courts, according to the terms of the Status of Forces Agreement signed on November 17, 2009.

     So this is what the prosecutors have to come to?  Using some weapons related drug law to get these guys?  That’s pretty low. Or the debate about jurisdiction will be interesting.  How are they not connected with the State Department, when their job is to protect DoS employees.  Hell, they even have to train to a specific State Department standard, just to be a protector of DoS and contract with them. Not to mention a clearance, so they can actually be around DoS folk.  

     In my opinion, DoS needs to do the right thing and own up to the fact that Blackwater was working for them and do more to stand up for them.  It’s the least they could do.  How many Blackwater employees died while protecting DoS people?  And from what I gather, out of all of the thousands of missions, not one DoS employee was killed over in Iraq.  That is a record that speaks for itself.  -Head Jundi

——————————————————————- 

Blackwater Guards Indicted In Deadly Baghdad Shooting

5 Face Trial Over Incident That Killed 17 Civilians, Sources Say

By Del Quentin Wilber

Washington Post Staff Writer

Saturday, December 6, 2008

Five Blackwater Worldwide Security guards have been charged in a September 2007 shooting that left 17 Iraqi civilians dead and raised questions about the U.S. government’s use of security contractors in combat zones, according to two sources familiar with the case.

The guards, all former U.S. military personnel, worked as security contractors for the State Department, assigned to protect U.S. diplomats and other nonmilitary officials in Iraq.

Federal prosecutors obtained the indictment Thursday, and it was sealed. Channing Phillips, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the District, declined to comment on the investigation. The exact nature of the charges could not be determined. The five security guards are expected to surrender to authorities on Monday, the sources said.

   Another gem.  These guys have a couple of awesome posts about the legalities of conducting anti-piracy operations out on the high seas.  They specifically talk about Blackwater and what they can or cannot do out there.  -Head Jundi

—————————————————————— 

About ExportLawBlog

ExportLawBlog is written and maintained by Clif Burns, Carolyn Lindsey, Illya Antonenko and Martin Gold.

   So it is law, and January 1, 2009 is the date.  In the meantime, maybe the DoS and DoD can answer these questions for those contractors operating in Iraq as we speak?  

***** 

Will there be retroactive application of criminal jurisdiction?(It is unclear whether Iraqi law will preclude ex post facto prosecutions based on allegedly criminal acts that occurred before January 1, 2009.)              

The agreement includes language about the “parties” retaining their rights to legitimate self-defense as defined in applicable international law. “Parties” to the agreement only includes the US government and the Iraqi government, thus apparently excluding contractors from the right to self-defense.  Will there be further guidance forthcoming as to contractors’ rights to self-defense, especially for those contractors who are required or authorized to carry weapons?                                                                                                          

Will the 1934 extradition treaty with Iraq mean that US citizens now in the US will be extradited back to Iraq for trial?

Will contractor equipment in Iraq be subject to pre- or post-judgment attachment when a civil suit is filed against a contractor?

Will there be retroactive application of civil jurisdiction? 

How will the statutes of limitations apply for tort and contract claims, and will this mean that contractors be sued on January 1, 2009 in Iraq based on occurrences in the past? 

***** 

     All of these questions were asked at the briefing given by the DoD and DoS, by legal experts, and they had no answer!  Amazing that we have gotten this far with this document, and these kinds of questions have not been answered.  Talk about being thrown under the bus. 

     I suggest that if you are reading this, and you are a security contractor operating in Iraq as we speak, then ask your company to press the DoD and DoS about these issues.  Or as a civilian, you can write the DoD and DoS and express your concern. -Head Jundi

——————————————————————–

Iraqi Parliament approves security pact

By Alissa Rubin, Campbell Robertson and Stephen Farrell

Thursday, November 27, 2008

BAGHDAD: The Iraqi Parliament ratified a long-delayed security agreement on Thursday that lays out a three-year timetable for the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.

     Boy, so the paragraph that jumps up at me in this article, is this one:

 But the question of whether Iraqis could use the agreement to prosecute contractors for previous incidents wasn’t addressed in the new agreement. When security company officials asked Thursday, “We told them that’s a question we don’t know the answer to,” said a State Department official, who spoke to reporters about the meetings under the condition of anonymity.

     My guess is that they do know the answer, and they have been withholding that information to insure there wasn’t any real protest by the companies.  Especially Blackwater, because if the Iraqis can go back in time and prosecute contractors for previous incidents, well then that will cause a stampede of litigation.  Obviously the Iraqis would want to go after those implicated in the Nisour Square incident as the first case.  But where would it stop, and how far will they go back?  This smells.  

   To me, I think the companies were pretty much in wait and see mode, with what they ‘thought’ was the SOFA. Hell, I even posted the copy that was released over at Fox News.  But if this paragraph up top is an indicator of the holes in this thing, then I think all of us in this industry deserve a full explanation of what really is going to happen?  And why is there an Arabic draft available only to Iraqi lawmakers, yet no official copy of the final draft in English for the rest of us to read?  

   The other thing that gets me, is that the companies should not be surprised about anything.  If they would have had the guts to confront the client about this matter, and demand to be included in the loop, then we wouldn’t be playing this guessing game right now.  How many of us have died in defense of the client/Coalition? There are 230,000 plus civilian contractors in this world wide war, and we continue to be treated like the elephant in the room that no one wants to acknowledge. -Head Jundi

——————————————————————-

US-Iraq Pact Ends Contractor Immunity

November 21, 2008

Knight Ridder

WASHINGTON - Contractors working for the United States in Iraq, including armed security outfits such as Blackwater Inc., will be subject to Iraqi law under the new U.S.-Iraq security pact. Not only that, they could face Iraqi prosecution for acts committed when they supposedly had immunity from Iraqi law, U.S. officials said Nov. 20.

A new U.S.-Iraq security agreement doesn’t specifically prevent Iraqi officials from bringing criminal charges retroactively in cases such as the September 2007 shooting deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians by contractors protecting a State Department convoy, officials told security company officials during meetings in Washington Thursday.

The news caught company officials by surprise.

“We are still trying to make sense of it,” said Anne E. Tyrrell, a spokeswoman for Blackwater Inc., whose security guards have been involved in some of the most controversial incidents in Iraq, including the Sept. 16, 2007, shooting at al Nisoor Square in Baghdad.

     Boy, this is a terrible story.  Obviously Ayala was severely impacted by the incident, to do such a thing as shoot this combatant point blank to the head.  I wasn’t there, nor will I judge.  But you can see the kind of emotions this could have brought up–to see your comrade be purposely burned by some random individual in a village.  I know I would be furious.  But that gives no justification to be the judge and jury for such a horrific criminal act, by just killing the guy out right.  

     Although, Ayala could make the argument that he saw the guy move wrong, or reach for something, and that is why he fired.  But still, if he purposely executed an unarmed individual, despite the horrible act this Afghani committed, then that is wrong.

     All I have to say at this point is that Ayala is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If he did in fact commit this act, then he should pay the price. I would hold that standard towards anyone in the military, law enforcement, and the security contracting community, and justice should be served.

   On another note, this sounds like the Human Terrain Systems contract BAE has, where they use civilian anthropologists in military civilian affairs units out in the field.  It is an initiative to better understand the villages, so the military forces know how to best work with them. And the reason we use anthropologists like this, is because the military cannot home grow that type of resource to meet the demands of the war effort.  And that is where BAE stepped in, by filling that need. -Head Jundi

——————————————————————

Contractor Charged With Murder in Afghan’s Death

By Jerry Markon

Washington Post Staff Writer

Thursday, November 20, 2008; B05

A defense contractor who once protected top foreign leaders was charged yesterday with second-degree murder in the shooting of an Afghan civilian who had attacked one of his colleagues with a flammable liquid during a routine patrol.

Don M. Ayala, 46, of New Orleans was charged in U.S. District Court in Alexandria in the Nov. 4 shooting. Court documents said he works in Afghanistan for Rockville-based BAE Systems, but he formerly provided personal security to the Iraqi prime minister and the Afghan president.