|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Monday, 26 July 2004 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Saddam Hussein before courts by Dr. L. M. Jayaratne Saddam Hussein's fate is hanging by a thread. It is in the hands of the judges trying him in the special Iraqi tribunal. Also it is pertinant before coming to the charges faced by him, to consider the whys and wherefores for the problem to befall him.
There was no shade of sympathy or compassion shown to anyone in situations of aggression and defiance. That is Saddam. There was no one to curb his dictatorial powers and he reigned supreme for nearly three decades. The curtain dropped on June 28th for the transfer of sovereignty to Iraq, two days earlier than expected due to security reasons with handpicked Ilyad Allawi as interim Prime Minister. Even on the day of the transfer of sovereignty violence continued resulting in the death of many soldiers and citizens. The interim government proposed by the American-Bush administration was not going to solace all sections of Iraqis as there is dissension even today. The view and hope of US is the establishment of democratically elected government in the not too distant future. S.H was first produced on July 1st before the special tribunal to answer the charges - seven in number. This special tribunal is devoid of the trappings of S.H's Kangaroo type courts established under his regime where presumption of innocence was never heard of leave alone tolerated. He is arrogant and conceited and refused to sign any documents probably on the advice of his lawyers but the tribunal is going to dispense fair justice as far as possible. It is an Iraqi court based on Iraqi justice system. This fairness is amply 'demonstrated' by affording an opportunity to millions to see the trial on television. This will pave the way to anyone to observe whether there is any violence to justice. The charges are broadly based on the massacre of his own people - Kurds and Shiite Muslims and the invasion of Kuwait. He is anyway fortunate and lucky not to face a trial of a court established by his own ousted regime. The string of charges include genocide, war crimes, ethnic violence and human rights violations. Specifically the charges are: (1) Killing of five religious leaders of Shia religious faction 1974. (2) Killing members of political parties in the last 30 years. (3) Killing of Kurds. (4) The charge of ethnic cleansing. (5) Gassing of Kurds in the village of Halabja. (6) Invasion of Kuwait in 1990. (7) The suppression of rebels against S. H. after the victory by the US forces in Kuwait. Affording an opportunity by Iraq to the world of seeing the trial on television can be considered a lavish display of justice and fairplay for how else could a person see the tyrant being tried. This is the first time a despot of Middle East is brought to justice in a court of law. Millions of television viewers are shocked at the attitude of S.H in the dock. He showed no respect for the judges - it was the scantiest to say the least. He is charged with eleven others but his case was taken first. Disorientated though he appeared to be in the dock, hubris was high as not to give the respect due to a court of law. According to judicial parlance and the practice in courts of law, whoever it may be and however high he may be in position in life, he will be treated just the same way as any other accused. His appellations are not the concern of the judges. But S.H's attitude is deplorable for he considered himself the President and wished to be addressed as President of Iraq being in the dock. He had the audacity to ask the judge gesticulatingly, perhaps, "I have introduced myself to you, but you have not introduced yourself to me, so who are you?" The villainy, tyranny and despotism are betrayed in this attitude of S.H. These words can form the basis of contempt of court but the judge stopped short of it. Gesticulations of any sort before a judge cannot be permitted nor tolerated be he a defendant, accused or a witness. SH relies for his defence on his 'legal immunity' from prosecution which is only available to a ruling President. He persistently refused to be recognised that he is no longer the President. His other defence is that the charges are politically motivated. He felt humiliated and demeaning to be seated in a court of law in a wooden enclosure as he perhaps is used to sitting in gold plated washrooms! S.H's trial in Iraq is criticised and at the same time praised by certain sections of the public. Some are of the view that he should be tried according to Iraqi justice whereas others say that he should be tried by an independent tribunal like the International Criminal Court. If it is in Iraq there will not be much of delay whereas in the I.C.C there can be a tremendous delay. The million dollar question is whether there can be a fair trial in Iraq. It is undeniable that he is dreaded by the people. Witnesses may not come forward so easily to give evidence for fear of reprisals. It is left to be seen. S.H's memory is still fresh to remember who burnt his effigies and toppled his statue to the ground. G.B's aim is to rid Iraq of S.H and establish a society that will spread freedom and justice in the Middle East. T.B. steadfastly supported G.B. with his men and mind. It is the wish of Iraqis and the whole world that justice will prevail and peace and freedom will return to Iraq at the conclusion of the trial - a trial by the Iraqis for Iraqis in Iraq. (The writer is former Governor, S.P and ex-justice) |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
He was, as he is now claiming before the judges the President of Iraq
until he was deposed in December 2003. It cannot be denied that he
despotically governed the country. Despite the economic sanctions imposed
by the United States spreading over a period of ten years impoverishing
certain sections of Iraqi population, he ruled to his own satisfaction and
glory. He did not spare death to anyone, not even to his dear sons-in-law
who went against his policies and rules whereas he lived in extreme luxury
to the exclusion of all others. This was evidenced by the many palaces
built around Baghdad for himself and his concubines.
