Human Rights Watch said yesterday that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was not given a fair trial, claiming in a report that attorneys and judges undermined the legitimacy of the process by staging repeated walkouts and failing to uphold standards of international law.
In a 97-page report, the group called the soundness of the guilty verdict "questionable" and said the Iraqi High Tribunal was not equipped to handle such a complex case. The document was based on observation of the trial and interviews with court officials, lawyers and other key parties, the group said.
Iraq is under Military Foriegn Occupation and he is considered a prisoner of War...
2006-12-30 01:59:48 · 18 answers · asked by skystriker65 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Of course he was not given a fair trial. He was not given a fair trial because there is no existing governing body that can ensure him a fair trial.
A fair trial is given to someone when there is no alternative, not as a default basic right. A fair trial is long and difficult. No country that celebrates efficiency above all is going to bring more effort on itself for no reason.
I tell you what is really funny for me:
Consider the debate about our presence in Iraq and troop levels. You hear about McCain's plan to increase troop levels. You hear about the Iraq Study Group, then how Bush will disregard its findings. You hear all the ideas of the Democratic candidates to be for President posturing themselves. You hear from all the people that say we should pull out now.
But, notice, no one is talking about what the Iraqi government or the Iraqi people want with repsect to our presence there. The tacit message is that what the Iraqi people or the Iraqi government thinks or wants with respect to our ongoing presence in Iraq is irrelevant. Or, the other possibility is there is no difference between what we want and what they want -- ie, the Iraqi and American government are essentially the same thing.
Then, all of a sudden, when we talk about Saddam Hussein's execution -- suddenly we are just Pontius Pilate doing what the Iraqis want. We have to respect what the Iraqis demand, we are just on the sidelines watching.
What a bunch of cynical crap it all is.
2006-12-30 02:10:42 · answer #1 · answered by Murphy 3 · 3⤊ 4⤋
His trial had turned into a Kangaroo Court with all the interuptions and murders during it.
You have to recall that there is a difference between a court verdict and his actual guilt. Was there any doubt that he committed the crimes he was accused of? No. Did the government have sufficient proof to link him? I don't know. I haven't been following the trial closely enough.
Do I think any of this matters? No. Would I be sad if, after reading the trial transcript, I came to the conclusion the prosecution never did prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (or whatever standard of proof this court needed)? No. Am I glad he's off this earth. You bet.
2006-12-30 02:11:56 · answer #2 · answered by harrisnish 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is a very good question and I would like to voice my opinion on this topic. First of all this "Human Rights Watch" must not have considered what this man had done to the innocent people/victims he had killed during his reign of power.This man began in the 1960's and became dictator in the late 70's. He had killed over 180,000 people in which some were even his own family members! Now I can't understand on why this committee believes that Saddam wasn't given a fair trial. When I see these mothers that had lost their children because of this man and the cruelty he placed on these people makes me just sick with grief. This so-called human being of a man didn't deserve to live after what he had done to this country. The High Tribunal may not have been equipped to handle such a complex case but the fact is this man massacred and killed thousands upon thousands of innocent people including women and children.These people were scared to death of this man and they can't forget what he had done thru the yrs of his reign. The evidence speaks for itself! Now Saddam is dead for what he had done in his past and he will meet his Maker to answer to his reign of crimes.He wasn't a "prisoner of war" He was a dictator of death,greed and power!
2006-12-30 02:47:43 · answer #3 · answered by shuggabhugga05 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
This report is an indication to me that Human Rights Watch ought to find new leadership and set new priorities. With all the untold human rights violations being perpetrated throughout the world, not a drop of ink should have been wasted on Saddam Hussein. It is possible to have committed publicly and indisputably so much evil that one no longer deserves a fair trial. Sure, an effort should be made to give him one anyway, but for the world community to scrutinize it is ludicrous.
2006-12-30 02:21:34 · answer #4 · answered by sargon 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No one expected a fair trial in Iraq, don't kid yourself! The verdict to hang Saddam was decided before the trial even began, this is the democracy that prevails in Arab countries, don't expect anything better, there is none there... except for the democracy of the Koran!
2006-12-30 02:05:02 · answer #5 · answered by markos m 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
the problem with society today is we spend too much time on the past things we can't control, to avoid doing the more difficicult things we can control on a daily basis. I believe in human rights through and through but this man was next to go. Fidel is riding his death bed, so the search to find any little discrepency is over. I'm tired of giving rights to people who clearly have chosen they don't want them. The man was a poison for his country. why would 90 percent of your country cheer when the leader is slaughtered, if, he didn't or wasn't doing anything wrong.
2006-12-30 02:11:27 · answer #6 · answered by ikeboywonder 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Everyone KNOWS he was a monster. His "people" are dancing in the streets. The clergy is thanking Allah that the "Baghdad Butcher" is burning in hell.
The Human Rights Watch would not find any kind of trial for Saddam fair. No money in that.
2006-12-30 02:04:17 · answer #7 · answered by Git r' done 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
No, I don't. Look, if one searches hard enough, one is able to find a source who believes that mankind never really walked on the moon or believes that Bigfoot is real. Besides, the decisions made regarding Saddam were made by his own people. Let it go, he's dead, let him rot.
2006-12-30 02:16:51 · answer #8 · answered by Rich B 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He is dead, does not matter what I agree or disagree with, nor what anyone else thinks. Won't change the facts he is dead. The group you are talking about is blatantly against capital punishment; so they come out against even mass murders' convictions.
2006-12-30 03:42:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Saddam was shown much more fairness, respect, and mercy than any of his victims. Yes his trial was fair.
2006-12-30 02:06:32 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋