....critics decry the court as another example of the Bush administration's go-it-alone approach and question whether Iraq's court system -- crippled by decades of corruption and isolation -- has the expertise or the credibility to handle complex war crimes cases on its own. While the statute provides for international advisers and possibly non-Iraqi judges, it creates no formal role for the United Nations.

....In eschewing U.N. sponsorship, the Iraqi court takes an untested approach to prosecuting crimes against humanity, say international law experts. It is neither fully international -- like the Yugoslavia and Rwanda courts -- or a hybrid modeled after the tribunal in Sierra Leone, where some positions are held by Sierra Leone nationals but the majority of the judges are from other countries.

Rather, under the Iraqi framework, the role of foreign jurists is far more limited and informal. The only official roles established for international experts are for "advisers" to provide assistance and for "observers" to monitor the court's performance.

The governing council can, but is not required to, appoint non-Iraqis to serve as judges. Many critical posts, including all investigative judges and prosecutors, must be filled by Iraqi nationals. (The statute actually contains a provision that all judges must be Iraqi nationals, but Chalabi says that does not reflect the final version.)