Delay hanging Saddam Hussein
THE European Union has appealed to the Iraqi government to work for reconciliation and to avoid carrying out the execution of Saddam Hussein after a court sentenced him to hang on Sunday.
THE European Union has appealed to the Iraqi government to work for reconciliation and to avoid carrying out the execution of Saddam Hussein after a court sentenced him to hang on Sunday.
Iraqi law says that the execution must take place within 30 days of the conclusion of any appeal.
The EU is worried that his execution could drag Iraq into all-out civil war. Most Sunnis still believe that Saddam was, or is, the legitimate president of Iraq whereas the Shia majority would be happy for him to hang.
The court proceedings leading up to Saddam’s sentence were flawed. Judges were replaced, defence lawyers murdered, and court procedure often ignored.
There is no doubt that 148 people were killed in the Shia-dominated town of Dujail in 1982 following a failed assassination attempt on Saddam. There is also no doubt that Saddam’s regime was dictatorial, brutal and repressive.
But these killings took place at the height of the Iran-Iraq war when hundreds of thousands of soldiers were dying on the southern battlefields. They also took place when the American government was a close ally of Saddam and was providing military expertise and financial support to his government.
To what extent is Saddam personally culpable for the Dujail killings in a time of war? The court found no evidence that he had personally ordered the killings, rather that he headed the regime that was responsible.
But if this precedent was accepted internationally, there is virtually no president that would not face prosecution after leaving office if his country had been at war, either at home or abroad. Even George W. Bush could find himself liable for the atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere.
Realistically Saddam cannot be let free after the crimes he has committed. But it would be wrong to execute him just because a kangaroo court found him guilty of being head of state.
Iraqi law says that the execution must take place within 30 days of the conclusion of any appeal.
The EU is worried that his execution could drag Iraq into all-out civil war. Most Sunnis still believe that Saddam was, or is, the legitimate president of Iraq whereas the Shia majority would be happy for him to hang.
The court proceedings leading up to Saddam’s sentence were flawed. Judges were replaced, defence lawyers murdered, and court procedure often ignored.
There is no doubt that 148 people were killed in the Shia-dominated town of Dujail in 1982 following a failed assassination attempt on Saddam. There is also no doubt that Saddam’s regime was dictatorial, brutal and repressive.
But these killings took place at the height of the Iran-Iraq war when hundreds of thousands of soldiers were dying on the southern battlefields. They also took place when the American government was a close ally of Saddam and was providing military expertise and financial support to his government.
To what extent is Saddam personally culpable for the Dujail killings in a time of war? The court found no evidence that he had personally ordered the killings, rather that he headed the regime that was responsible.
But if this precedent was accepted internationally, there is virtually no president that would not face prosecution after leaving office if his country had been at war, either at home or abroad. Even George W. Bush could find himself liable for the atrocities committed at Abu Ghraib and elsewhere.
Realistically Saddam cannot be let free after the crimes he has committed. But it would be wrong to execute him just because a kangaroo court found him guilty of being head of state.