Human Rights Watch said Monday that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was not given a fair trial, claiming in a report that attorneys and judges undermined the legitimacy of the process by staging repeated walkouts and failing to uphold standards of international law.

Ousted Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein addresses the court during his trial held in Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone on November 8. Saddam's defence team has welcomed a report by US-based Human Rights Watch that denounced his trial for crimes against humanity as fundamentally flawed, and called for international action to end the "farce." [AFP]

In a 97-page report, the group called the soundness of the guilty verdict "questionable" and said the Iraqi High Tribunal was not equipped to handle such a complex case. The document was based on observation of the trial and interviews with court officials, lawyers and other key parties, the group said.

The New York-based rights group said it found "serious procedural flaws," citing shortcomings in the timely disclosure of incriminating evidence. It also said the defendants were not allowed to properly confront witnesses, and the judges at times did not maintain an impartial demeanor.

"The court's conduct, as documented in this report, reflects a basic lack of understanding of fundamental fair trial principles, and how to uphold them in the conduct of a relatively complex trial," the report said. "The result is a trial that did not meet key fair trial standards. Under such circumstances, the soundness of the verdict is questionable."

The group also chastized defence lawyers for staging repeated walkouts, saying the tactic "created the strong impression that some counsel deliberately sought to delay or obstruct the course of the trial."

On November 5, the court sentenced Saddam and two other senior members of his regime to death by hanging for ordering the execution of nearly 150 Shi'ite Muslims from the Iraqi city of Dujail following a 1982 attempt on Saddam's life.

The Iraqi court was created in 2003 after the US invasion to prosecute cases of human rights violations in Iraq.

The report said defence lawyers were provided with inferior protection, with three being killed in the course of the trial. Witnesses, too, were left unprotected following their testimony, it said.

Defence attorneys were inadequately trained in international criminal law and their performance was "generally poor," the report said.

"No consistent and identifiable argument as to why the prosecution case was wrong or flawed was developed," it said.

Human Rights Watch, which is against the death penalty in general, also said the death sentence against Saddam is "an inherently cruel and inhumane punishment," and "in the wake of an unfair trial is indefensible."

An appeals court is expected to rule on the verdict and death sentence by mid-January. Saddam's defence team must present an appeal to a higher, nine-judge panel by December 5.

Last week, Saddam's lawyer complained that the court was ignoring his requests for documents to appeal the guilty verdict. There was no immediate comment from Iraqi court officials.

"The verdict against President Saddam Hussein is purely political and all the conditions of a fair trial as stipulated under international law have been gravely violated, including the right to appeal the verdict in a court of cassation," Saddam's chief lawyer, Khalil al-Dulaimi, said in a written statement.