The Death Sentence of Saddam Hussein

That Saddam Hussein was responsible for terrible atrocities in Iraq has never been the issue in current proceedings. Many of those who are congratulating the Iraqi justice system for the 5 November 2006 verdict seem to think there is something impressive in the fact that a group of hand-picked judges reached a foregone conclusion.~ GROTIAN MOMENT: The Saddam Hussein Trial Blog

Those who have followed my Good Blog link to the Grotian Moment blog covering the trial of Saddam Hussein are aware of what an excellent blog this is. The credentials of the legal experts are impressive, the commentary is not biased by politics or religion, and the issues raised are thought provoking.

With the sentencing of Hussein to death by hanging, the Grotian Moment raises an important issue of justice—and international law:

The real test was whether they could hold a trial worthy of the name. And on this count, even those who are most charitable to the Saddam trial find there is a bone that sticks in their throats. Taken at its best, this trial barely passed the test. While that may be good enough for a finding of guilt, international law clearly states that a trial which is flawed from the standpoint of due process can never result in a sentence of death.

No matter what you may think of Hussein, there remains these questions regarding the justice of a trial that was definitely flawed.

• The first judge resigned, claiming that he was subject to unacceptable pressure.
• Three of the Hussein’s defense lawyers were murdered.
• International law clearly states that one “cannot execute a person unless he or she has received a fair trial that respects the highest international standards.”

Whether you or I believe that Saddam Hussein is guilty and should die for his crimes in not the point. What is the point is whether a human being should and can be executed when the judicial system was as defective as the one that has condemned him.

I am very interested in your opinion.