Saddam Gets His Day in Court

According to the Kuwait News Agency (KUNA), "[d]uring the trial, Saddam will be in a wooden cage that was made six months earlier."

That's not a bad idea.

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- The lawyer for Saddam Hussein said Tuesday he will ask a tribunal for a three-month adjournment of the former Iraqi dictator's trial for a 1982 massacre.

Saddam and seven senior members of his 23-year regime go on trial Wednesday to face charges they ordered the killings of nearly 150 people from the mainly Shiite town of Dujail following a failed attempt on Saddam's life.

Khalil Dulaimi told The Associated Press he would ask during Wednesday's opening session for more time to prepare Saddam's defense and arrange for Arab and Western lawyers to join him in the defense team.

The defense also will challenge the court's competence to try Saddam.

"We will dispute the legitimacy of the court as we've been doing every day. We will claim it is unconstitutional and not competent to try the legitimate president of Iraq," Dulaimi said.

"Saddam Hussein is Iraq's legitimate president while the court is illegitimate because the U.S. invasion is illegal and everything that has been built upon it is just as illegal," he said.

The court is expected to grant an adjournment if the defense asks for one, court officials have said.

Dulaimi met with Saddam for 90 minutes Tuesday at a location other than the usual place of detention for the ousted Iraqi leader. Dulaimi would not elaborate.

...Saddam was in high spirits and "very optimistic" on the eve of the start of his trial, Dulaimi said.

"I have just left him five minutes ago. His morale is very, very, very high and he is very optimistic and confident of his innocence, although the court is ... unjust," Dulaimi said.

...Court officials have said they are trying Saddam on the Dujail massacre first because it was the easiest and quickest case to put together. Other cases they are investigating — including a crackdown on the Kurds that killed an estimated 180,000 people — involve much larger numbers of victims, more witnesses and more documentation.

...An American adviser to Saddam's defense team said Tuesday the former dictator's rights were violated after his capture. Former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark said "the fundamental human rights that have been violated" include Saddam's right to a lawyer of his own choosing, access to facilities to prepare his defense, and access to a proper constituted court to challenge the charges.

Saddam Hussein certainly has a right to legal representation.

Still, it seems inappropriate to me for Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general under President Johnson, to be an advocate for Saddam. Insisting that his "fundamental human rights" have been violated seems absurd.

Can't Saddam get a lawyer from France or some other country hostile to U.S. efforts in Iraq?

Perhaps someone from a country that was waist-deep in the Oil for Food scandal?
Observers from Amnesty International will be at the trial "in order to assess its fairness and to make clear the organisation's commitment to helping ensure that victims of human rights abuses gain access to justice, both for its own sake and as an important element in breaking the cycle of impunity that often facilitates gross human rights violations."
AI's press release declares that "Saddam Hussein and his co-accused, if convicted, should not be sentenced to death and executed."

AI is in a difficult spot here.

For over thirty years, the organization has "documented massive and gross violations of human rights under the government of Saddam Hussein and called repeatedly on the international community to act."

Although AI is finally getting the opportunity to see justice done in the name of all of Saddam's victims, it has sent a three-person delegation to make sure that it's the sort of justice that AI approves. No death penalty. In short, AI will be fighting to protect Saddam.

According to a Kurdistan Regional Government website:
The ex-leader's followers have called for attacks to mark the trial's start.

An internet statement attributed to the Baath party urged supporters to "salute the leader... by firing bullets and mortars of death at the occupier".

...Saddam Hussein's lawyers are expected to challenge the court's right to conduct the trial.

"We will dispute the legitimacy of the court as we've been doing every day. We will claim it is unconstitutional and not competent to try the legitimate president of Iraq," Mr Dulaimi said.

Human rights groups, too, have expressed concerns.

A Human Rights Watch report says the Iraqi Special Tribunal "runs the risk of violating international standards for fair trials".

...But the United States said it expected the trial - the first time an Arab leader has been tried for crimes against his own people - to meet "basic international standards".
Saddam's crimes were on such a grand scale that I don't think it would be possible for justice to be done. Not in this life. There simply is no punishment to fit the crime.

In theory, I oppose the death penalty. Therefore, I don't think that executing him would be an appropriate sentence.

However, I do have faith that one day God will judge Saddam, and then justice will be done.

In the meantime, he should spend the rest of his life in his little wooden cage, writing letters to his victims' families, begging for forgiveness.

He had so many victims, I doubt he could accomplish that task even if he spent every waking hour in the years he has left devoted to the assignment. I don't think he has that much longer before he must face his final judgment day to receive his sentence for eternity.

I really don't see how it's possible that Saddam's "morale is very, very, very high and he is very optimistic and confident of his innocence."

It's delusional.