Saddam trial grossly unfair, says rights body (Human Rights Watch)

[cosmicone]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Saddam_trial_is_unfair_says_rights_body/articleshow/484985.cms

BAGHDAD: The Iraqi court that sentenced Saddam Hussein to hang this month was guilty of shortcomings so serious that a fair trial for the former president was all but impossible, an international rights watchdog said on Monday.

There were so many procedural flaws that the verdict could be viewed only as unsound, New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a 97-page report on the trial, which it said was among the most important since Nuremberg after World War Two.

It lambasted Iraqi government officials for making statements it said had undermined the independence of the court.

"The tribunal squandered an important opportunity to deliver credible justice to the people of Iraq. And its imposition of the death penalty after an unfair trial is indefensible," said Nehal Bhuta, author of the report that was based on dozens of interviews with judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers.
</snip>

This is really looking bad now, not to mention an unnecessary hot potato.

[dipsydoodle]

1. BBC link : Saddam trial 'flawed and unsound'

HRW said "serious administrative, procedural and substantive legal defects" meant the 5 November trial for crimes against humanity was not fair.

The Iraqi government has dismissed the report, telling the BBC that the trial was both "just and fair".

The ex-Iraqi leader has two weeks to lodge an appeal but his lawyer claims he has been blocked from doing so.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6163938.stm

[Benhurst]

2. A case of Truth, Justice and

The BushAmerican Way.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

3. Any trial of Saddam in which Rumsfeld is not a witness is a sham.

"You sold him how much VX, Mr. Rumsfeld?"













"Some sweet Rummy skin!" :rofl:

[gratuitous]

4. The Bush administration can even fuck this up

How do you make Saddam Hussein a sympathetic victim? Impossible, some would say. But if you railroad him in a kangaroo court, that's exactly what you've done. The Iraqis should never have been given the responsibility for trying Saddam; he should have been turned over to an international tribunal. That is, you don't ask the victims to try their tormentor. But for obvious reasons, the Bush administration can never let Saddam be tried before an impartial criminal tribunal.

And now there will always be questions about the extent of Saddam's guilt, and his partisans (and there are more than a few) will resolve those questions by claiming that he was innocent. Bush's determination to have Saddam executed at the earliest possible date further forecloses any serious inquiry into this dark chapter of human history. One might legitimately wonder why, and the picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand so enthusiastically provides some context.

[alcibiades_mystery]

5. HRW just saying what everybody already knows

If they wanted this farce to be legitimate, they would have petitioned to have Hussein transferred to the Hague for a proper trial by an impartial international tribunal, held in conditions of relative safety for participants, with clear principles of jurisprudence guiding the proceedings. What they had instead was a laughingstock of a show trial, held without any consistent principles of jurisprudence in conditions that saw numerous defense attorneys and their family members murdered in the street, and the main judge resign in fear, doubt, or disgrace.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

6. Strange.

[coalition_unwilling]

7. How do you say "kangaroo court" in Arabic??? n/t

[Cass]

8. Hussein should have been tried at the Hague. It was a big blunder to do otherwise.

And if they go ahead and hang him, that will really pour gasoline onto the fire. Poor handling of this important task, IMO.