Bush's Showcase Turning into a Farce
Gandalf Grey
By Anthony Scrivener QC: The US wanted a showcase, but it's staging a
dangerous farce
04 July 2004
The trial of Saddam Hussein and some of his nasty colleagues has already
degenerated into the realms of a promising theatrical farce. All everyone
wants is to give them a fair trial as quickly as possible and then hang
them - but this is not possible. They are not quite ready to go yet. In fact
the whole thing is likely to take so long that the grim reaper will probably
have got to many of the defendants first, the lawyers will have left the
case to their grandchildren to try, the judges will have changed from time
to time like the cast in a long-running farce on Broadway and then, for the
survivors, there is an appeal.
The United States wants this to be a showcase for democratic justice -
something to show for the hundreds of lives lost in this escapade, something
the Iraqis can look upon and admire as one of the fruits of losing the war -
and the great institution of justice US-style.
So who is actually producing and directing this production and who will be
selling the tickets and television rights? For advanced publicity you need
to listen to Professor Michael Scharf, US director of the war crimes
regional office, who acts as agent for the Bush administration and as stage
manager for the show.
He is pretty busy at the present time. He is busy training the military to
be judges for the Guantanamo Bay trials. In a recent interview, the
professor wished to assure the world that the whole show was in good hands:
"The United States will be involved in the trial but from behind the scenes,
more like a puppet master."
That should boost the sale of tickets. With the recent record of the Bush
administration on human rights and international diplomacy, we can be sure
this will be a true showcase for the cause. After all, with their experience
they could turn Hamlet into a comedy and a Punch and Judy show into adult
entertainment.
Professor Scharf, who speaks with the sort of authority of those who have
been touched by President Bush, promotes the production with enthusiasm. Of
course, the whole case is being run by the Iraqis for the Iraqis. The fact
that Iraq has not had the advantage of having a proper legal system for
years, thanks to you-know-who, does cause some problems, but this can only
add to the entertainment. After all, the Americans are able to fix most
things. It is not just a case of smashing the place up, although they are
good at that. They are also good at human rights, with a few unfortunate
exceptions.
The Iraqi Special Court statute has been drafted by the US. This must have
been done when President Bush was down at the ranch since it bears an
uncanny resemblance to the new International Criminal Court so profoundly
opposed by the Bush administration. We can only hope that they do not spot
this before the show gets on the road.
In keeping with the new spirit of justice and fairness invented by the Bush
administration, the professor, speaking with the authority of the
string-puller, was able to assure the world before the trial starts that it
will be very hard for Saddam to be acquitted. Nothing could be fairer than
that. At the same time he was able to introduce a new concept of "fairness"
into jurisprudence. When asked whether Saddam will get a fair trial he
replied: "It's all relative ... it's pretty fair." He should know - he is a
professor of law, fresh from training the military judges.
The Bush administration ploughed into the war with little regard as to how
to deal with the peace. It resembles a government of headless chickens: the
same lack of pre-planning is all too visible in the preparation for trial.
The trial is to take place in Baghdad, not in the international court in the
peacefulness of The Hague. Iraq is full of warring factions previously held
together by a ruthless regime. Shias, Sunnis and Kurds haveincompatible
agendas. There are old scores to settle. The previous Baathists are either
in secret gangs or keeping an anxious low profile. There is organised local
warfare and the whole country is treated as a playground by al-Qa'ida.
This is hardly the environment for a political trial, let alone one of this
magnitude. The court building will have to be surrounded by a ring of steel
with armed vehicles and troops. All participants will need 24-hour
protection. What effect will all this have on potential witnesses? What is
the plan?
So far, the response of the new Iraqi government has been to seek to
re-introduce the death penalty in a rush to get the convicted defendants.
What Iraq needs more than anything else is a period of reconciliation and
forgiveness, of the kind that worked so well in South Africa. A general
amnesty should be given so the ordinary people can concentrate on the
important things in life. This would help to create a better environment for
the trial to take place.
The re-introduction of the death penalty is self-defeating - it only adds to
the tension and marks out the character of the new regime. It would have
been much easier to hold the trial in the international court, away from
these pressures and fears and with experienced international judges, but it
is understandable that the new Iraqi government would wish to deal with
their own problems. However this creates practical problems.
Saddam and other defendants will no doubt use the trial as a political
platform, especially with the death penalty hanging over their heads. The
trial will involve hundreds of witnesses, if they can be got to court, and
lorry loads of documents. Experienced judges are needed to deal with this.
Even the judicial tactics adopted for the Milosevich trial at The Hague of
switching off the microphones during ranting may not be enough - a tougher
line may be necessary.
There is much to be said for having an experienced international jurist, who
is entirely unconnected with the allied invaders, on the tribunal.
There is a more fundamental flaw. The US should not have the role of puppet
master, enabling it to pull the strings behind the scenes like a colonial
master. Nothing could be more counter-productive than to have the invader
running the trial, openly or behind the scenes. The whole procedure becomes
tainted: the ordinary Iraqi will have no confidence in the proceedings, and
understandably so.
The Iraqi government should have turned to the United Nations or to
respected international jurists to fix the constitution of the tribunal and
its procedures. The US troops should stay in their military bases.
It will be difficult to make the trial fair for everyone concerned, but it
would certainly help if the Iraqi judges were not treated by the Americans
as puppets - this does relegate the proceedings to the level of a farce. The
central pillar for a fair trial is the independence of the tribunal. With
the Bush administration pulling the strings, this is demonstrably missing.
--
--
FAIR USE NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am
making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and
social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any
such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so
long as I'm the dictator." - GW Bush 12/18/2000.
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that
we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic
and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
---Theodore Roosevelt
"For us to get bogged down in the quagmire
of an Iraqi civil war would be the height of foolishness."
---Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, 1991