by TChris

The Army has charged three soldiers with manslaughter and a fourth with assault.

[I]nvestigators concluded that the soldiers had transported the two Iraqis to the bridge and pushed them off. Mr. Fadhil drowned, and Mr. Fadel swam ashore ....

The four were also charged with lying about their actions.

These crimes (and others described in the linked article) raise questions about jurisdiction over soldiers who commit crimes against Iraqis now that Iraq is "fully sovereign."

Despite an agreement to consult on military matters, Iraq and the United States lack a formal accord governing the status of foreign forces and are relying on an American occupation directive covering several important matters. But no commander believes American troops will be subject to Iraqi justice at this time.

Why doesn't a "fully sovereign" country have criminal jurisdiction over crimes committed against its citizens on its own soil?