Appeals Court: Do Not Charge Iraqi Arms Dealer
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
WASHINGTON – The Federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia yesterday dismissed an appeal from the Justice Department seeking to charge an Iraqi man who is a former U.S. resident with trafficking arms to Saddam Hussein’s regime in 1998, when the man in question was living in Baghdad.
The decision could set back the federal government’s prosecution of foreign nationals who traded with Saddam Hussein when his regime was under United Nations sanctions.
In the ruling yesterday, the appeals court agreed with a lower court’s conclusion that the Justice Department failed to adequately prove that the man in question, Sabri Yakou, was bound by American prohibitions on dealing arms to Iraq under the Arms Export Control Act because he was not a current American resident.
Mr. Yakou, beginning in 1998, brokered a sale of armed patrol boats from Malaysia to Iraq. On November 4, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lisa Schertler argued that Mr. Yakou was subject to American laws because he never formally terminated a green card that allowed him to live in America between 1986 and 1993. Indeed, up until 2000, he used his green card to re-enter America when visiting his family here. In October 2003, U.S. authorities in Iraq arrested his son, who is an American citizen, on the grounds that he violated the arms embargo.
The opinion says Mr. Yakou voluntarily came to America that month when “a federal agent from Immigration and Customs Enforcement contacted him while he was on business in Thailand and suggested he could assist his son.” After his arrival, Mr. Yakou was also arrested on the charge that he and his son conspired to sell the patrol boats to Iraq.
In the opinion of the appeals court, Judge Rogers wrote, “Yakou has not been subject to removal proceedings; nor has he sought readmission to the United States by means of a reentry permit or a returning resident’s visa.” Because he made no effort to renew his status as a resident here, the court found that there ware no grounds to charge him under an American statute.
Justice Department officials could not be reached to comment on whether they will appeal the decision.
