If there was any national unity in Iraq, you would think
it would be in trying Saddam Hussein. Everybody involed
with the US and UK hates him... so what's up?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml.../ixnewstop.html

Saddam trial in disarray as judge quits
Colin Freeman
(Filed: 15/01/2006)

The trial of Saddam Hussein was thrown into disarray last night after the resignation of its chief judge in protest at government criticism of the way he has run the court.

Rizgar Mohammed Amin, who chairs the five-strong panel trying Saddam and seven co-defendants for war crimes, handed in his notice after repeated accusations that he had failed to keep those in the dock under proper control.


Judge Amin was criticised for being too lenient

It was not clear last night whether his resignation had been accepted. But the mere fact that he has signalled his desire to quit is a serious blow to the credibility of the Iraqi war crimes tribunal, which was set up under the tutelage of both British and American officials.

Since the hearings began in October they have frequently degenerated into a mixture of chaos and grim farce, with Saddam and his half-brother, Barzan al-Tikriti, constantly interrupting the judge and mocking witnesses as they have given evidence about massacres.

Mr Amin, 48, a Kurd, allowed the defendants some leeway in order to preserve the court's image of impartiality, but in doing so has attracted furious criticism that he was being too lenient.

Among those pressing him to take a tougher line were understood to be officials from Iraq's new Shia-dominated government, whose constituency suffered the brunt of Saddam's brutality during his time in power.

News of his resignation followed similar reports late on Friday night that were initially denied by Iraqi officials amid apparent efforts to get him to change his mind.

"He had complaints from the government that he was being too soft in dealing with Saddam Hussein and his co-defendants," one official said.

"Government leaders want things to go faster. There's too much pressure… All this is too much: it is a question of integrity. I am not sure if he will go back on his decision. I don't think it's possible."

Spokesmen for the tribunal were not available for comment on a weekend following this week's Eid al-Adha holiday.

One official working with the court, which is trying the former Iraqi leader and seven others for crimes against humanity, said: "We just don't know what's going on."

The court now faces the daunting task of replacing Mr Amin, who, despite the criticism levelled at him, is generally considered among the more capable Iraqi legal minds willing to work for the court.

His supporters say he has brought a degree of courtesy and dignity to the proceedings rarely seen in Arab courts, sending out a message to Iraqis that the rule of law is now paramount.

Moreover, he has been one of only two judges in the court willing to show their faces and have their voices heard. Most of the others have declined to do so, fearing retribution.

In an interview last November Mr Amin conceded that his family worried about him and he had taken on two bodyguards after pressure from friends. But he stressed: "A judge should never be afraid."

Saddam and the seven others are being tried on mass murder charges for killings in Dujail in 1982 in retaliation at an assassination attempt.

The court is due to deal with numerous other cases, including the massacres of tens of thousands of Kurds and Shias in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

It's good to see that there are some people left in this world with some Integrity.
It sounds to me like the Judge is being pressured into being a "Railroad Judge". Look back to the people who supported Saddam durying his days of tyranny. Maybe Saddam has a Lot to say that will never be heard.

I think it's all about timing...no one cares about
the a*ss...they just want the trial to fit into the
political agenda...which it doesn't...that's how they
want to do "show trials"...Russians set the rule...neo-cons
are just trackin' them. Dog & pony show. If he'd been done
like his sons...it would all be over...but they needed a show.
Now the script doesn't meet the agenda...bad judge.

The world would have been a better place if when they found Saddam had someone just rolled a grenade into his hole.

I hope they televise his hanging though.

The world would be a better place if Mr. Saddam could speak about all the secrets George Herbert Walker Bush41 doesn't want to be known.

About Saddam's good friend DONALD RUMSFELD

About those photos of smiles and handshakes

About how Bush41 propped Saddam up for years and sided with him

About how Bush41 then double crossed him, as Bush41 does to every NON FAMILY member

That is what I would like to know

We should never have been there. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11
(neither did Afghanastan, neither did anyone not in BUSHFAMILY mirror.)

And we blew up another 18 innocents looking for a distraction the other day.

I laugh at how stupid BUSHFAMILY thinks we are, and pity those that don't get it.

It's too bad he didn't fight back when cornered, I agree.
I'm not too sure about televising capital punishment.
The affect may not be what one would expect.

I still wonder what it says that most the judges
are afraid to show their faces, that most witnesses
are afraid to show their faces. A hanging might look
like a Klan meeting if this precident is continued.
People standing around smiling after hanging
someone just dredges up some very bad memories
where I come from, and I wonder what the Sunnies
would think. I keep coming back to the fact that Sunnies
are the majority of Muslims in the region. I bet Iran's
president would like it though.

I can hear him now, "See, that's what America's
former allies can expect from them. They wink at him
when he kills his opposition, then hang him for it later."

There is no desire to actaully try Saddam from the point of view of those who dragged us into war, in fact the opposite is true. There is no way that they want to have the defense bring to the attention of the world who his collaborators were. After all they meet those collaborators everytime they stand in front of a mirror.

I have no doubts that Saddam is an evil man, but, I have been watching the news for many years and I know that most of what we are told is bullshtt. I also know that there are places on this earth where genocide is ignored. I watched as Mr. Bush said we were invading Iraq because Saddam was about to nuke us, and I have watched the freakin' media obey him like a puppy. I watched the media pick John Kerry, a destinguished War Hero, apart and slime him like so much dog doo-doo, and I watch daily as the media makes Mr. Bush into some kind of American Idol. I believe I have enough evidence to tell me that just because the Media and Our Government tell me someone is bad is no reason to believe it. I have no choice but wonder if there was no OIL in Iraq, would Saddam still be ruling it? I have heard that in North Korea, things are pretty touchy, but I guess they don't have enough OIL.

If we want Iraq to have a chance at turning out OK we need to fully back this judge behind the scenes, he seems to be the only major player who gets it. I doubt Saddam has much to say, the fair trial is needed both as a matter of justice and as a lesson for the peoples of the region regarding true fairness.

The ones pressuring him care only about revenge, the judge cares about Iraq.

I agree it would have been better if he'd fought back, how I feel about public execution depends on how the trial is conducted. The way this judge wants to do it I think it would actually help Iraq by combining the justice of a more than fair trial (so many lessons for society in it) with a violent element that would make it more comprehensable, with the show trial the political leaders want it would be both deplorable and very destructive to Iraq.

When a defendent in the US disrupts the courtroom, aren't they sometimes placed in a separate room and shown the trial on closed circuit TV? And they are also on camera?

Why can't they do that with Saddam?

Actually there are two reasons, one is there is usually far more latitude given in cases about crimes against humanity or deposed heads of state, the other is the need to both convince the Sunni that it's a matter of justice (not revenge and domination) and keep him from becoming a martyr.

According to an interview I read with one of the Soldiers who captured Saddam, Saddam was about two seconds away from meeting Mr. Grenade when he stuck his ugly puss out of that hole.

I think the way the Eastern mind functions will percieve a public hanging of Saddam much differently than a Western mind would. You know how cruel an Asian mentality can be, normal to them is abhorent to us.

How can a country so on the verge of civil war... so unstable... with so many different interests ever be expected to carry out such a trial at this juncture ?

It seems to me to be (or should have been) a predictable outcome. Lawyers murdered... the court threatened by terrorist attack... the judge apparently under pressure all the way around...

and they really thought they could try Saddam at this point ?

They should have simply put him on ice or held the trial elsewhere...

My bet is that the US (Bush) was behind the premature trial.

Sure... he should be tried and punished... but only when the system is in place to have a legitimate trial safe and secure from outside factors and threats.

I don't think holding the trial elsewhere would make the statement which needs to be made.

I imagine there are people in Iraq who either fear or hope for Saddam's aqquittal right now.

When the Iraqis see Saddam dancing at the end of a rope that it is going to clear the air and drive home the point HE AIN'T COMING BACK TO POWER.

The U.S. just executes the court condemned out of public view....not much difference in the mentality in the end though, is there? We like our executions more "sanitarily" carried out.....of course, it's no secret I'm against state sanctioned executions....

Maybe not... but it doesn't look like the current trial is making that statement either.

It seems that the statement implied by the current circumstance could be, among others...

We (or rather the Iraqis) can't try Saddam in a proper fashion
We can't secure our own court from our own people
We still fear Saddam and his loyalists
We are being railroaded into this by the USA
and... as a result
this trial is not legitimate or we would not have these problems in bringing
Saddam to justice

I agree as to the end result being what is needed... but at the rate things are going the trial is likely to be viewed as a complete farce. Judges resigning tend to give that kind of appearance. As a result, will any outcome be viewed as legitimate throughout the Middle Eastern nations ?

Point taken.



It's true NVA and VC were able to call on blood lust...but so were we.
That "mental switch" thrown at the onset of battle is something us "civilized"
folk don't often admit...but it's the core of combat success. That's why
barroom brawlers should never push combat vets - they may have body
parts falling off before they know what happened.

After the disclosure of presidential & DOJ endorsed torture, I no longer
claim the high road for Western civilization. We all run in the pack when
the Dogs of War are loosed, but the kennel club- who never knew war-
don't have the same justification.

Brutal action in the field - brutal action in the rear -
two different worlds. I accept the first and damn the second.
The engagement of combatants must be brutal. But civilized
folk try to turn off the rage when the gunsmoke and the ringing in
the ears, from the firefight clears.

The REAL problem is when they are held on just well enough to cause gangrene, I agree with your statements.

I have to agree with Graham, at least to the extent that I for one am in no hurry to see Saddam executed, and would like some time to hear what he has to say, what he might reveal. It is not that he isn't one of the most despicable men on the planet, but none of the many thousands that he murdered or had murdered will come back to life if he goes to his death any sooner. Better that his trial reflects true justice, and that we get some information. Now he most certainly will lie quite a bit, but that's okay, because what he says can be checked out. And I would expect that some of what he says will be the truth.