Saddam's trial

by Hassan A. Barari

No one can take issue with the fact that Saddam Hussein's regime was among the most brutal and fascist regimes the last millennium has witnessed. His atrocities are well documented. Even his supporters admit they were carried out. Therefore, getting rid of him should be seen as a positive step towards building a more benign Middle East. Furthermore, Saddam must be tried for his crimes. That is exactly what the interim government is doing through its decision to set up a special Iraqi tribunal.

Saddam's is a lost case, and even the best lawyers on earth cannot defend him. Puzzling, though, is the decision of some Jordanian lawyers to defend him, referring to him as the leader of the "national movement of Iraq against occupation".

The Iraqis do not see him as such. Why should the Jordanian lawyers volunteer to do such a job when an overwhelming majority of Iraqi people suffered badly under his rule? They sure are aware that they are seen as supportive of the deposed dictator? Ironically, those who defend him are the same people who are asking for democracy, human rights and pluralism. One cannot reconcile these values with defending Saddam.

Some lawyers may really be motivated by the thought of gaining cheap popularity. They believe that they can make political capital out of supporting Saddam. They also seem to bring together two distinct but related matters. Resisting the American occupation doesn't have to come with support for the discredited regime. A more prudent way would be to show sympathy to the Iraqi people and not to a hated regime.

Having said that, however, one cannot help but cast doubt on the timing of the trial. First of all, the current interim government is totally illegitimate, as it was installed by a colonial power. The Iraqis did not choose this government. Until an elected government assumes power, such trial would be irrelevant. Moreover, many argue that the trial is another ploy designed to serve the American administration rather than the Iraqi interest. It may be easily seen as collaboration between the Iraqi interim government and the CIA.

A more sensible conduct on the part of this government would entail embarking on genuine reforms and other priorities, in order to reconstruct Iraq and build its national institutions. It would be wiser if this government postponed the trial until after general election in Iraq. What lies ahead is very challenging. Iraq needs the help of all actors in the region to avert a possible civil war in case the current system falls apart.

Obviously, this government lacks legitimacy, and the timing of the trial is closely linked with the interest of the American president who is not sure of his chances to get reelected. The trial of Saddam by an illegitimate government will only makes Saddam a martyr, a status that he certainly does not deserve.

This article originally appeared in the Tuesday, July 6, 2004 edition of the Jordan Times. It is used here with permission.