US Charges Contractor at Iraq Post in Stabbing

Go to Original
By Michael R. Gordon

Baghdad - The American military has charged a contractor with assault in a case that may emerge as a major test of the military's legal jurisdiction over civilians who accompany the armed forces into the field, military officials and legal experts said Friday.

The charge was made under expanded authority that the United States Congress provided the military to crack down on contractor abuses. It is the first time since 1968 that a contractor has been charged under military law.

While the exact scope of the new authority has yet to be tested in court, experts said there might be some circumstances in which it could be interpreted to apply to security contractors, like those supplied by Blackwater.

The contractor in the coming case, Alaa Mohammad Ali, was working as an interpreter at a combat outpost near Hit, a town in Anbar Province. He was accused of stabbing a fellow contractor with a knife in the chest and sternum on Feb. 23. He was detained at Camp Victory, an American military base near the Baghdad airport, later that month. According to military officials, Mr. Ali has Canadian and Iraqi citizenship. A pretrial hearing has been scheduled for Thursday, at which an Army officer will determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support the charge.

"It is an important case because it is a test of the permissible limits of military criminal jurisdiction," said Eugene R. Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, a nonprofit organization.

During the Vietnam War, the military charged civilians under the Uniform Code of Military Justice for various crimes but was thwarted when federal courts reversed some convictions on the grounds that Congress had never formally declared war.

In 2006, Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, sponsored an amendment to a military spending bill in an effort to stem contractor abuses. It expanded the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to give the military the right to charge civilians who not only serve with or accompany the armed forces if war is declared, but also during a "contingency operation."

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates issued a memo on March 10 outlining procedures to carry out the legislation.

According to his memo, when offenses are committed, American commanders are to contact the Justice Department to give them the opportunity to transfer the case to the United States for trial under existing legal procedures. But if the Justice Department does not take on such a case, Mr. Gates wrote, "commanders should be prepared to act."

The Ali case represents the first instance in which the military decided to use its expanded authority.

Details of the case first emerged this week when Michael J. Navarre, who served in the Judge Advocate General's Corps in the Navy and is now an associate at the Washington law firm Steptoe & Johnson, disclosed them on a blog for experts on military law.

Mr. Ali has been provided with a military lawyer, officials said. The New York Times submitted a request through the military to talk with the lawyer, but did not receive a response.

At the pretrial hearing, Mr. Ali will have the right to be represented by a lawyer, present evidence and cross-examine witnesses. The Army officer who presides over that hearing will issue a recommendation on how to proceed, but the decision on whether to convene a trial will be made by Lt. Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, the day-to-day commander of military forces in Iraq.

The broader issue is what the case may mean for the effort to stem contractor abuses while protecting the rights of civilians. Some experts say that the expanded authority from Congress provides an important tool for bringing corrupt and violent contractors to justice.

The case "is a huge first step from a legal and policy standpoint," said Peter W. Singer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who has written about the role of private contractors. Before Congress expanded the military's authority, Mr. Singer said, "you had an absolute vacuum in terms of law and policy and you had people abusing that vacuum. Contractors were committing pretty serious crimes, extending from prisoner abuses up to civilian shootings."

Lt. Col. Matt Ramsey, deputy staff judge advocate for the Multinational Corps, which is handling the case, said the expanded authority under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, or U.C.M.J., to prosecute contractors was an important tool for military commanders.

"Contractors have assumed an essential role supporting combat forces in Iraq," Col. Ramsey said. "Congress extended U.C.M.J. jurisdiction over civilians who accompany our armed forces during contingency operations, and this change provides commanders with another important and necessary means of establishing good order and discipline across the force."

But some legal experts say that the case raises important legal issues. Civilians generally have a right to broader protections, including the right to trial by a jury of their peers. If this case goes to trial, it will be decided by a military judge or, if the defendant opts for a jury trial, a panel appointed by General Austin. While Congress has voted to give the American military additional authority to prosecute civilians, the constitutionality of that authority may be challenged if the case goes to trial.

"It is a significant test case because the constitutionality of the new amendment will be litigated," Mr. Navarre said. "There is a question as to whether the Congress extended the power of the military too far."

Mr. Fidell agreed that the Ali case could establish an important precedent.

"Military jurisdiction is classically intended for people in uniform," he said. "There is a potential constitutional issue here. The mere fact that Congress passed it is not the end of the conversation. I would be surprised if the Supreme Court invalidated it, but I would be more surprised if the issue was not raised."