Saddam's lawyer pushes for trial in Europe

[Stunt]

What do you guys think of the location of the Saddam trial? Do you think it will be fair in Iraq? Should he be tried elsewhere as his lawyers are pushing?

Source

Defence lawyer says Saddam Hussein should be tried in Europe

STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) - A lawyer for Saddam Hussein said in an interview broadcast Sunday that any trial against the ousted Iraqi president should be held in Europe.

London-based lawyer Giovanni di Stefano added that the team would argue that Saddam was immune to prosecution under the Iraqi constitution.

Di Stefano told Swedish television network SVT that Saddam's defence team would like to see the trial in Sweden, Austria, Switzerland or The Hague, Netherlands.

"I would favour Sweden, more than any other country, where we are likely . . . to obtain a fair trial," di Stefano said, adding "it's not safe" in Iraq. "In the unlikely event that our client is tried and convicted he can go straight to a detention centre in Sweden."

The Swedish Foreign Ministry had no comment late Sunday.

Iraqi officials said this week the ousted leader could appear before a special tribunal within two months, but have since backtracked. Iraqi authorities have also said Saddam will face 14 thoroughly documented cases relating to alleged crimes committed during his 23-year rule. Many carry the death penalty.

Di Stefano, one of several lawyers defending the former leader, said Saddam was immune to prosecution under the Iraqi constitution.

"The constitution of Iraq was deposited with the United Nations in 1969. It was accepted and it was ratified and to this day it has not been altered," di Stefano said. "We avail ourselves to sovereign immunity, end of story."

He also suggested the defence team had received guarantees Saddam would not face the death penalty.

"The Americans, the British, the Italians will not allow that, they will not allow the death penalty to be imposed, and the president of Iraq has confirmed to us he will be signing no warrant of execution as would be required under Iraqi law."

No member of the Iraqi government has publicly ruled out the death sentence for Saddam.

Di Stefano said last year that Saddam should be released from custody and allowed to live in exile in Sweden, Austria or Switzerland.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

He should be given the same treatment as other infamous war criminals guilty of genocide: a show trial in Europe and a swift execution!

 

[Steeplerot]

My opinion is try him somewhere neutral and let him call witnesses even if they are in the US administration(or formerly)....

We can clean up 2 governments of filth and genocidal maniacs for the cost of one war.....

 

[imported_Tango]

He should face a trial at the international court of Aja, and if proven guilty of genocide sentenced to lifetime prison. Milosevic got his trial at l'Aja, and did much worse things than Saddam.

 

[Last Rezort]

Let him off! i mean he only killed a few thousand

 

[tommywishbone]

Bring him to the US and put him on trial with his co-defendant George W. Bush. One trial will save the people a little money and take care of two lunatics at the same time. Saddam was a mass murderer whose power was gone; Bush is a mass murderer whose power is only growing stronger.

And yes, I did answer the poll.

 

[yllus]

On the side of the defendant, sure, let him be tried anywhere he pleases. What court in the world isn't going to hand down a guilty verdict? I suppose the various courts might differ when it comes to sentences. Iraq is strongly pro-death penalty.

On the side of the Iraqi nation, I think a major element of the cleansing process relies of his own people bringing their former tyrant to justice. It's another step towards standing the nation on its own two feet.

 

[Forsythe]

Kinda makes sense, he won't be in a country where he'll have to sleep on the ground. In sweden he'll have tv, acces to the internet, the only problem is that he'll be locked away. Because he'll get lige, no probation no matter where he goes.

 

[Steeplerot]

No internet for saddam, next thing you know he will be bored trolling in here........CaD needs another minion like he needs another bushel of corn.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'd like to see a trial outside of Iraq, because then it would be harder for the prosecution to hide evidence. I would like to hear both sides of the story, and we havent gotten much on our end.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Why does the location of the trial have any impact?

It is the jury, evidence and witnesses that will determine the verdict.

Are those in favor of a moved location expecting that the location will have an impact on one of the three items bolded?

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Why does the location of the trial have any impact?

It is the jury, evidence and witnesses that will determine the verdict.

Are those in favor of a moved location expecting that the location will have an impact on one of the three items bolded?

I'd expect the jury to be more objective if they weren't iraqi's, it might safer, and the witnesses might have bigger lust to witness.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Why does the location of the trial have any impact?

It is the jury, evidence and witnesses that will determine the verdict.

Are those in favor of a moved location expecting that the location will have an impact on one of the three items bolded?

Well...

First, jury. Depends.

Who will be the jury? From where? How would this change selection? Don't know.

Second, evidence. I think so.
Elections notwithstanding, we occupy Iraq. We have the might and influence to supress evidence if we wish. Will we? Well how could we ever know? Given the propensity of this administration to classify a great deal that turned out later to not be needed, I wouldn't be suprised. At least if it's moved to Sweden or some such, the suggestion that "embarrasing" evidence
be supressed is less likely.

Third, witnesses.
People may be more willing to speak elsewhere. As you know, Iraq is not a friendly place now. Security has failed there. Removing them from Iraq to testify couldn't hurt.

A fourth.
The judge or judges
Where are they going to find judges in Iraq that are impartial or could not be pressured by the Iraq govt or the US? I can tell you that will be a problem in Iraq.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
I'd like to see a trial outside of Iraq, because then it would be harder for the prosecution to hide evidence. I would like to hear both sides of the story, and we havent gotten much on our end.

then saddam's lawyers might actually see some of the evidence they are using, at least now saddam's lawyers have not seen a thing and only met with him twice

its not starting to look fair

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Why does the location of the trial have any impact?

It is the jury, evidence and witnesses that will determine the verdict.

Are those in favor of a moved location expecting that the location will have an impact on one of the three items bolded?

I'd expect the jury to be more objective if they weren't iraqi's, it might safer, and the witnesses might have bigger lust to witness.

He should be tried and judged by Iraqi's for crimes against Iraq. Let the IRaqi justice/system control the process. The rest of the world was not interested when he was in power, why should they meddle when he is being held accountable for what he did in power. Let his own countrymen judge him.

The WWII trials were due to crimes that crossed national borders. That then justified international participation.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Why does the location of the trial have any impact?

It is the jury, evidence and witnesses that will determine the verdict.

Are those in favor of a moved location expecting that the location will have an impact on one of the three items bolded?

I'd expect the jury to be more objective if they weren't iraqi's, it might safer, and the witnesses might have bigger lust to witness.

He should be tried and judged by Iraqi's for crimes against Iraq. Let the IRaqi justice/system control the process. The rest of the world was not interested when he was in power, why should they meddle when he is being held accountable for what he did in power. Let his own countrymen judge him.

The WWII trials were due to crimes that crossed national borders. That then justified international participation.

I see no specific reason for him to do trial in Iraq, i see no reason for him not to do so. It could be in uganda for all i care. But one thing i know, just because he's a bad dictator it doesn't mean he shouldn't have a fair trial. Don't know if iraq can give him that. Haag would be my choice, and then return him to Iraq.

 

[judasmachine]

Saddam (CIA puppet once upon a time)+New Iraq Government (new CIA puppet)=Kangaroo Court

 

[walkur]

He should be tried and judged by Iraqi's for crimes against Iraq. Let the IRaqi justice/system control the process. The rest of the world was not interested when he was in power, why should they meddle when he is being held accountable for what he did in power. Let his own countrymen judge him.

The WWII trials were due to crimes that crossed national borders. That then justified international participation.

I fully agree...

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: walkur

He should be tried and judged by Iraqi's for crimes against Iraq. Let the IRaqi justice/system control the process. The rest of the world was not interested when he was in power, why should they meddle when he is being held accountable for what he did in power. Let his own countrymen judge him.

The WWII trials were due to crimes that crossed national borders. That then justified international participation.

I fully agree...

Isn't one of the reasons for his detention that he illegally invaded Kuwait? Doesn't that count as crossing national borders?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Why not do the trial in the Hague in the Netherlands ?

Historically isn't that where most modern day war crime trials are held ?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: walkur

He should be tried and judged by Iraqi's for crimes against Iraq. Let the IRaqi justice/system control the process. The rest of the world was not interested when he was in power, why should they meddle when he is being held accountable for what he did in power. Let his own countrymen judge him.

The WWII trials were due to crimes that crossed national borders. That then justified international participation.

I fully agree...

Isn't one of the reasons for his detention that he illegally invaded Kuwait? Doesn't that count as crossing national borders?

If they wish to use the defense that Kuwaitt was a province of Iraq, then they can not use the issue that Kuwaitt is an different state (national border). The lawyers can not have it both ways.

Where the trial is held, should not matter; What matters is that it (the trial) is controlled by Iraqis and the Iraqi people as a whole feel that the process is fair.

There will always be Iraqis (that were in favor of Saddam and protected by him) that will disagree with the judical process because of who they were and the potential of being a furture target because of that association.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Why not do the trial in the Hague in the Netherlands ?

Historically isn't that where most modern day war crime trials are held ?

Because he's Iraqi and if the Iraqi's want to try him that is their pergerative isn't it?

 

[Cruise51]

Sweden is about as neutral as you can get... Why not there?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Cruise51
Sweden is about as neutral as you can get... Why not there?

Goes back to the choice of the Iraqi system if they wish to move the trial.
They can choose where the trial should be held.

Let Saddams lawyers present justification for the move to the Iraqi court.

The world can watch the proceedings and second guess all they want; but this is an Iraqi matter.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Cruise51
Sweden is about as neutral as you can get... Why not there?

Goes back to the choice of the Iraqi system if they wish to move the trial.
They can choose where the trial should be held.

Let Saddams lawyers present justification for the move to the Iraqi court.

The world can watch the proceedings and second guess all they want; but this is an Iraqi matter.

First, I don't care where Saddam is tried, the only thing I worry about is how the world will view how fairly he is tried. With that said I think it should be up to the new Iraqi goverment where to try him AND what to try him for. It's their call.