Saddam Execution Thread

[Asim Aquil]

Changing judges, killing his lawyers... Yeah it was a fair trial

If fair trials are not important why not shoot him between the eyes?

Also there's going to be holy hell from the sunni insurgency after his execution. There will be a clear Shia vs Sunni goal and objective for this war.

[Shek]

The UN secretary general also said that the Iraq war was illegal. So if the UN certification of the elections is good enough for you, then the secretary general's words should also be enough to convince you that the war was illegal, right?

As for US troops leaving if the Iraqis asked them,

I'm not coming to anyone's defence. I'm merely pointing out the sham that they called a "trial" and the hypocrisy that results in the "victor's justice".

Gamercube,

You linked to an article about the Transitional National Assembly government, not the goverment that holds power today. Is that your level of knowledge about Iraq? In fact, Iraq requested and received UN approval for renewal of the mandate for coalition forces in Iraq last month. Your hypothethical, even though incorrect as it is, is moot!

[Shek]

The UN secretary general also said that the Iraq war was illegal.

Kofi Annan's statement isn't even consistent with prior UN Secretary Generals. Let's look how 678 played out back in 1993 . . .

[Shek]

Changing judges, killing his lawyers... Yeah it was a fair trial

If fair trials are not important why not shoot him between the eyes?

Also there's going to be holy hell from the sunni insurgency after his execution. There will be a clear Shia vs Sunni goal and objective for this war.

Did Saddam not receive legal representation?

[Low-tech]

saddam was definitely tried in a micky mouse court.

[THL]

saddam was definitely tried in a micky mouse court.

Mickey Mouse or not, still a better court than he deserved.

[Shek]

saddam was definitely tried in a micky mouse court.

How so? Was the evidence fabricated? What legal shortcomings were there in the process?

[Shek]

Here's the unofficial "English Translation of the Dujail Judgment, Dec. 2006."

http://law.case.edu/saddamtrial/dujail/opinion.asp

For all those who contend that this was a mickey mouse court and unfair, I'd love to discuss what specifically in the judgement you object to.

[Bluesman]

What some of you barrack-room lawyers are overlooking with your claims of unfairness and cries of illegitimate authority, or seem to be unaware of, is the fact that Saddam was NOT on trial to determine his guilt or innocence. There is no reasonable question about that. It was not in doubt, and if by 'fair' you mean he could be acquited by clever use of legal code and spirited defense, then you simply do not acknowledge the role of this procedure.

It is about DOCUMENTATION, and the formal 'defense' that was mounted was NEVER about getting him released after a 'Not Guilty' verdict. Wasn't gonna happen, and should not have, PERIOD, no matter what antics were gotten up to by the defense team and defendents.

History needed a formal guilty verdict, lest the legitimate sentence be questioned in the future by bad men with evil intent. The form was followed, the blocks were checked and the inevitable happened, JUST AS IT SHOULD HAVE. Any other result would have been a travesty, so keep this in mind as you make the utterly indefensible, irrelevant and completely true argument that Saddam never had a chance in his trial: if you had insisted on and gotten your 'normal' trial that may have resulted in Saddam's acquittal, you would have abetted all of the evil that he was unquestionably and objectively proven to have committed.

So...still think it's a kangaroo court? Still wish Saddam's trial had the role of determining his guilt or innocence? Still believe he is entitled to assumptions of innocence and the full rights of any standard defendant? If you answered 'Yes!' to ANY of those questions, you're being obtuse, stubborn and unreasonable.

[Low-tech]

How so? Was the evidence fabricated? What legal shortcomings were there in the process?

im not defending this guy, its not like i think he was framed or nothing.

i just think the trial, if conducted as it was, in any secular democracy in the world, would either been thrown out or deemed like a no-contest for which another re-trial would be in order.

the musical chairs of lawyers and judges that occured, the outbursts and courtroom drama, , the assassinations that took place<not to mention his principle defense lawyer was assassinated by POLICE>.

gave every appearence of a 3 ring circus.

i think it left most iraqis with feeling that it was really not much different than the trials the man himself presided over maybe with a touch of the jerry springer show.

but what the hell do i know about the law in iraq, maybe policemen can murder defense lawyers as some sort of strategy to effect the outcome of trails,maybe the cabinet can just replace a judge or any official at any time, for any reason and continue............i dont know.

[Bluesman]

im not defending this guy, its not like i think he was framed or nothing.

Re-read my post. You're not thinking about the trial properly. This is NOT a normal criminal prosecution, in which it is necessary to start with the premise that it remains to be seen which side is presenting the objective truth. In THIS case, that's already known, and the whole procedure proceeds from there.

i just think the trial, if conducted as it was, in any secular democracy in the world, would either been thrown out or deemed like a no-contest for which another re-trial would be in order.

IF all of what I wrote above were NOT true, you'd be correct. But nothing needs be proven here, ie, Saddam's absolute guilt. Not the point.

the musical chairs of lawyers and judges that occured, the outbursts and courtroom drama, , the assassinations that took place<not to mention his principle defense lawyer was assassinated by POLICE>.

gave every appearence of a 3 ring circus

Gave me the impression of grim determination and GUTS to press ahead. Bravo, Iraqis!

i think it left most iraqis with feeling that it was really not much different than the trials the man himself presided over maybe with a touch of the jerry springer show

I've been reading stories all morning re: the huge numbers of applicants for the hangman job. One guy said that there wasn't a house in Iraq that had not felt Saddam's hand.

As for the sentence, tell me you don't really feel that Saddam's fate is a misapplication of justice, or that Saddam's victims deserved what they got. How can you possibly compare the two? Saddam killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of innocent people...and for this he's going to hang. You simply cannot believe that Saddam's trial and the kangaroo courts afforded to his victims (if they even got THAT) are in any way equivalent.

but what the hell do i know about the law in iraq, maybe policemen can murder defense lawyers as some sort of strategy to effect the outcome of trails,maybe the cabinet can just replace a judge or any official at any time, for any reason and continue............i dont know.

What you witnessed and pronounced as unacceptable chaos in the workings of the rule of law was actually justice being carried out despite the same ole / same ole situation that the iraqi nation had gotten sick of and were in the process of changing: Saddam brutalizing his own people in order to benefit himself. The deal this time, though, resulted in a win for the Little Guy, and the dictator is going to meet his end at the hand of the people that he had total sway over for more than three decades.

I hold that trial up as an example of a thirst for justice and a determination to do the Right Thing, even when faced with evil. You see it differently, and for that, I'm a little sad; you're missing the human triumph in this story.

[Ray]

Hang Saddam and kiss ME goodbye!

[gunnut]

If he deserves the death sentence for killing a few hundred people, I wonder what sentences Bush and Blair deserve for being responsible for the deaths of lakhs (hundreds of thousands) of Iraqi civilians?

So I guess you would agree that the Indian military is responsible for murdering hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis during all those border wars? Would you like to bring them up on war crime charges?

[gunnut]

The UN secretary general also said that the Iraq war was illegal. So if the UN certification of the elections is good enough for you, then the secretary general's words should also be enough to convince you that the war was illegal, right?

Wait a second here.

UN certified the Iraq election. Kofi Annan did not certify the election.

UN did not say the war was illegal. Kofi Annan said the war was illegal.

[Ironduke]

Saddam's execution 'is imminent'

Final preparations are being made in Baghdad for the execution of the former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, which reports say could be imminent.

Defence lawyers lodged an appeal in a US court, but unnamed Iraqi officials said he could hang early on Saturday.

Iraqi leaders were meeting US military officers to determine the final arrangements for the execution.

Earlier, the US denied reports that Saddam Hussein had already been transferred to Iraqi custody.

His final appeal was rejected on Tuesday.

Eid concern

No official details have been made public about when the death sentence will be carried out, although the US State Department urged all its embassies to increase security.

Iraq's Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has said he wants the execution to take place before the end of the year.

Several reports quoted senior Iraqi officials as saying the execution would take place at 0600 local time (0300 GMT) on Saturday.

That would be before the start of the Islamic holiday of Eid, which begins at noon on Saturday (0900 GMT) and continues into next week.

Under Iraqi law Saddam Hussein could be hanged at any time over the next four weeks.

However, the judge assigned to witness his death said it would happen on Friday or Saturday.

The BBC's Adam Brookes, in Washington says the Bush administration is keen to portray the process leading up to the execution as a matter purely for the Iraqi government and its court system.

Maximum security

Earlier on Friday, Saddam Hussein's lawyers said they were notified that he had been transferred to Iraqi custody, an assertion then denied by the US.

"There has been no change in his status," US State Department spokesman Tom Casey said late on Friday.

It is thought he will remain in US custody until the execution is carried out.

When he is taken to the gallows Saddam Hussein will be nominally transferred to Iraqi custody, but the US will continue guarding him to maintain maximum security.

US forces in Iraq are braced for any backlash following the execution, defence department officials said.

The BBC's Peter Greste in Baghdad says all the legal hurdles are now understood to have been cleared and that if anything is likely to hold up the execution, it will be administrative details.

'Dignity of victims'

The former Iraqi leader has been in US military custody at Camp Cropper in Baghdad. It is not clear whether he is still being held there as his execution approaches.

His lawyers said they had been asked to collect Saddam Hussein's personal effects on Friday.

Mr Maliki said there would be no delay in carrying out the death sentence.

"No-one can oppose the decision to execute the criminal Saddam," he was quoted by AFP news agency as saying.

"Those who reject the execution of Saddam are undermining the dignity of Iraq's martyrs."

Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death by an Iraqi court on 5 November after a year-long trial over the killings of 148 Shias from the village of Dujail in the 1980s.

A trial in a second case, alleging genocide against Kurds, continues against him.

The former Iraqi leader was captured by US troops on 13 December 2004, after a tip-off.

He was found hiding in a tiny cellar at a farmhouse near his hometown of Tikrit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6218245.stm