Saddam "trial": Six judges so far and counting

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/09/28/do2801.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2006/09/28/ixopinion.html

Saddam's trial wouldn't pass for justice in a dictatorship

<snip>We like to claim that this is an "open court", but the deliberations are often so embarrassing that the microphones are turned off. When the Iraqis are allowed to watch the actual session, they see a hideous hybrid of Western due process and the traditional Iraqi kangaroo court, taking place against a background of murder and mayhem.

The result is legal chaos. The first judge was called Barawiz Mahomed Mahmoud al-Merani, and he got the hearing off to a flying start by being assassinated in March 2005. The next trembling jurist to be handed the gavel was called Rizgar Armin, but under him the court soon resembled a class of nightmare 16-year-olds in the charge of a seriously rattled supply teacher. He gave up in January, claiming ill-health.

The Iraqi court officials then announced that his number two would be taking over, a distinguished and learned geezer called Sayeed al-Hammashi. Everybody agreed that he would be a fabulous choice, until it was pointed out to the Americans that he was a former member of Saddam's ruling Ba'ath party, and, ahem, his nomination was withdrawn.

They then found a Kurdish judge, one Abdel Rahman, and he seemed ideal. Surely, everyone said, we can rely on a Kurd to come down hard on Saddam for his crimes at Halabjah. But Abdel Rahman resigned shortly afterwards, claiming that he had come under unbearable political pressure.

[orpupilofnature57]

1. Not for naught but ,how much justice does one tyrant get? I just

figure since so much of My money goes there for them to have Democracy ,I have a right to Saddam's Speedy and fair trial.

[Erika]

2. What a blanking farce

And the Iraqis could care less about the trial or its results.

[BuyingThyme]

3. Trials against leaders of occupied countries don't count anyways.