Excellent. Sovereign justice system, but looking for help from the international community.
You have a problem with this? The sooner the Iraqi people see that they can take care of themselves, the sooner the US and the UN can get the fudge out and let them get back to running their own country.
Excellent. Sovereign justice system, but looking for help from the international community.
You have a problem with this? The sooner the Iraqi people see that they can take care of themselves, the sooner the US and the UN can get the fudge out and let them get back to running their own country.
The law fails to:
"Require that judges and prosecutors have experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes"
"Permit the appointment of non-Iraqi prosecutors or investigative judges, even if they have relevant experience investigating and prosecuting serious human rights crimes."
"Require that international judges with expertise trying serious human rights crimes sit on the bench alongside Iraqis. This would assist, not replace, Iraqi judges in ensuring justice for the horrific crimes committed.?
"Prohibit the death penalty or trials in absentia"
"Ensure that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt"
"Sufficiently address protection of witnesses and victims or security for the tribunal and its staff."
"The Iraqi Governing Council issued the tribunal law without providing any opportunity for transparent consultation or public comment. The drafting should have been transparent to help ensure an effective and fair accountability process"
As far as punishment goes, I think he should be placed naked in a glass cell in the middle of downtown Baghdad for the Iraqis to see how weak and pathetic he really is. Let's saturate him in shame. And he'll be there to watch Baghdad prosper under his absence. And Baghdad will be there to leer at him and piss on his walls.
Wow, must have thought that one out...
I think the fact that he was captured without a shot fired, in a "rat hole", disheveled, dirty and cowardly on tape will resonate an image that most Iraqis would have never believed...that he was a pussy.
I'm happy he's been captured. But unhappy as to what the insurgents will react to this. There were insurgents in Germany after WWII who didn't care that Hitler was dead. They just kept on fighting...outnumbered of course by allied troops they failed...but look at what is happening in Iraq.
The law fails to:"Require that judges and prosecutors have experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes" "Permit the appointment of non-Iraqi prosecutors or investigative judges, even if they have relevant experience investigating and prosecuting serious human rights crimes." "Require that international judges with expertise trying serious human rights crimes sit on the bench alongside Iraqis. This would assist, not replace, Iraqi judges in ensuring justice for the horrific crimes committed.?
As far as I'm concerned, the Iraqis consulting the international war crimes court for advice covers all of these. This should be an *Iraqi* court, not an ICC court in Iraq, which is what those would do, IMHO. This is a chance for the Iraqi people to actually act on their own, for their own selves. Having the international community shepherding them along by the hand would be patronizing and insulting, if I were in their shoes. It is the Iraqi responsibility to perform well and civilly, knowing the world is watching very carefully.
*Requiring* them to allow outside intervention only says "We don't trust you. We can do better. We know better than you. Step aside for your betters." Bull.
Quote:
"Prohibit the death penalty or trials in absentia"
Not something I have a problem with, to be honest... and that's something for the Iraqi court to decide, isn't it?
Quote:
"Ensure that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt"
One possible point, if that is indeed missing from the law. (But come on - do you seriously think that that is going to be a problem in this particular case? He did a damned good job of documenting it for the court.)
Quote:
"Sufficiently address protection of witnesses and victims or security for the tribunal and its staff."
Not entirely sure why this is a necessary point for the court... to ensure witnesses speaking freely?
Quote:
"The Iraqi Governing Council issued the tribunal law without providing any opportunity for transparent consultation or public comment. The drafting should have been transparent to help ensure an effective and fair accountability process"
Transparent to *whom* for consultation?? The Iraqi people, the international community, or HRW? Agree on the former if that was missing, but the latter two are simply condescending again.
As far as punishment goes, I think he should be placed naked in a glass cell in the middle of downtown Baghdad for the Iraqis to see how weak and pathetic he really is. Let's saturate him in shame. And he'll be there to watch Baghdad prosper under his absence. And Baghdad will be there to leer at him and piss on his walls.
The ICC can?t judge him, Saddam?s crimes took place before it was established and therefore it cannot judge him, so no matter what the ICC is out of the question.
The Iraqi?s will and should be allowed to judge him, if anyone is serious about letting Iraq run it self, this would be the best way to begin.
Who and how he will be judged is still not clear, I think it will be decided in January, before the Iraqi?s wanted to judge him in absintia, luckily they wont have to now.
International this and that don?t give any credibility, it only displaces responsibility. They can disband the UN, ICC and all rest, or not, I really don?t care what they think or say.
Osama can?t be judged by any man since he is food for worms.
As far as I'm concerned, the Iraqis consulting the international war crimes court for advice covers all of these. This should be an *Iraqi* court, not an ICC court in Iraq, which is what those would do, IMHO. This is a chance for the Iraqi people to actually act on their own, for their own selves. Having the international community shepherding them along by the hand would be patronizing and insulting, if I were in their shoes. It is the Iraqi responsibility to perform well and civilly, knowing the world is watching very carefully.
*Requiring* them to allow outside intervention only says "We don't trust you. We can do better. We know better than you. Step aside for your betters." Bull.
"Bullshit?"
I'm sorry I'm just delirious at this point. You think the inexperienced iraqi-led war tribune would be just as good if not better than an experienced international one?
The law only requires that international jurists assist iraqi jurists (if needed, and which isn't the same thing as having international jurists in the first place). It doesn't "cover" judges and prosecutors with no "experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes." It doesn't cover it one bit.
Saddam's trial belongs to the Iraqi people run by the international community.
Otherwise, it looks like this:
A show trial.
International involvement does not condescend. Rather, it would give the trial legitimacy and fairness.
Unless you think we should remove the consulting international jurists too.
You think the inexperienced iraqi-led war tribune would be just as good if not better than an experienced international one?
You're missing the point, I feel. Which may be moot, given the strident tone. (In which case we should drop this - you're not going to convince me, I'm not going to convince you.)
Experience is, pardon me, irrelevant. Sovereignty is. Otherwise, the entire concept of *letting the Iraqi's govern themselves* is a sham.
Quote:
The law only requires that international jurists assist iraqi jurists (if needed, and which isn't the same thing as having international jurists in the first place). It doesn't "cover" judges and prosecutors with no "experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes." It doesn't cover it one bit.
Saddam's trial belongs to the Iraqi people run by the international community.
?!?!?!?!?!
Well, that's that then.
"Run by the international community" That's certainly *oh* so putting it into the hands of the Iraqis, isn't it?
Poor Iraqis... can't *possibly* govern themselves without your *generous* hand holding... uh-huh. Sounds like imperialism to me, under another guise.
Quote:
[b]Otherwise, it looks like this:
A show trial.[/b
No, it looks like a show trial on the part of the UN if it's run *completely* by international courts.
It's an Iraqi court, or should be primarily. They are requesting help in certain areas. That's fantastic. It's more than they *NEED* to do.
Quote:
International involvement does not condescend. Rather, it would give the trial legitimacy and fairness.
Unless you think we should remove the consulting international jurists too.
Wow... keep popping those strawmen up and putting words in my mouth, please. Never said that, did I? Nope. In fact, I applaud the Iraqi request for assistance. I think it's the right thing to do.
[i]Originally posted by ShawnJ You think the inexperienced iraqi-led war tribune would be just as good if not better than an experienced international one?
International involvement does not condescend. Rather, it would give the trial legitimacy and fairness.
[/B]
Which internationally experienced tribunal are you thinking of?
Who have they judged and who should assemble this tribunal.
SPJ you're the one who's delirious. Saddam's trial could never look like "A show trial" because Saddam is overwhelmingly guilty. Oh wait no I'm sorry he's "innocent until proven guilty".
This trial will be a process where the Iraqis can lay out all the horrible shit Saddam has done and will end with him being hung. What's wrong with that?
Oh wait no the US is doing something illegal. I'm sure they didn't read Saddam his Miranda Rights. I think we better let him go.
A breath of fresh air. The New York Times Editorial
Quote:
It would be good if some of those questions could now be resolved. And it is critical that the dictator be given a fair and open trial to exact justice for his crimes, to give some solace to the people he terrorized and to give pause to other despots. The trial must be above any suspicion that it is merely an exercise in retribution or propaganda. While every effort should be made to maximize Iraqi involvement, Iraq's judicial institutions are too weak to handle the case. Although last week's creation of an Iraqi war crimes tribunal was a promising step, we would suggest this trial be conducted in Iraq under United Nations auspices by international and Iraqi judges. A tribunal picked by Americans would lack legitimacy.
Here's a shocker for you... sit down... really. I don't know if your prejudices about me and innate knowledge of my viewpoints are going to be able to handle this, but...
I agree with the two underlined sentences.
Look at the timeline that's being proposed however - July is when the Iraqi govt is supposed to take over for themselves. Wait until then... which is the plan. There's time to put it in place... *BY* the Iraqis.
Not the US... and NOT THE UN.
Got it?
A tribunal picked by the UN has *ZERO* more legitimacy.
Here's a shocker for you... sit down... really. I don't know if your prejudices about me and innate knowledge of my viewpoints are going to be able to handle this, but...
I agree with the two underlined sentences.
Look at the timeline that's being proposed however - July is when the Iraqi govt is supposed to take over for themselves. Wait until then... which is the plan. There's time to put it in place... *BY* the Iraqis.
Not the US... and NOT THE UN.
Got it?
A tribunal picked by the UN has *ZERO* more legitimacy.
I don't expect the situation with Iraq's judicial system to change that drastically by then.
The British government, which privately shared some of the unease of human rights groups over the establishment of the tribunal, had cautioned the Iraqi governing council against a speedy move to wards creating a tribunal and recommended that Iraq seek help from international bodies such as the UN. This advice was ignored.
After the Rwandan genocide and the Balkans massacres, international tribunals were set up. In Sierra Leone, there was a compromise, with the trials held in the country, with international judges sitting alongside Sierra Leone.
But under the Iraqi governing council's guidelines, there is no place for international judges as yet. This could be problematic, as there have been no independent judges in Iraq for decades.
`Any tribunal established on behalf of the Coalition Provisional Authority will not be able to rid itself of the perception and the fact that it is an instrument of American power,'' said Paul van Zyl of the International Center for Transitional Justice. ``Any justice it dispenses will be of dubious legality and questionable legitimacy.''
Richard Dicker, director of the international justice program at Human Rights Watch, said he was concerned officials didn't consider bringing in judges who have worked on major war crimes trials in other countries.
``After three decades of Baath Party rule, the capacity of Iraqi judges to conduct incredibly complicated trials has been greatly diminished,'' he said by telephone from New York. He said he worried about the tribunal's ability to provide fair trials.
Two recent studies of the Iraqi judicial system, obtained by AP, describe a legal system riddled with corruption and incompetence. One was conducted in August by the United Nations; the other in June by the Justice Department.
``A degraded justice system and inadequate and outdated legal framework is not capable of rendering fair and effective justice for violations of international humanitarian law and other serious criminal offenses involving the prior regime,'' the U.N. study said.
But do *NOT* *force* it on them, or it's just another form of imperialism. They need to create their own self-governance. Doing it for them in anyone else's name is wrong, whether that name is US or UN.
The place is even more backwards than I imagined. They'll need outside help. Judge, Prosecutor, Defense, the whole shtick. The real question is what's the right mix.
Oh no doubt about that - but the fact is that doing it *for* them, particularly if they don't *want* you to is just plain wrong, no matter who is doing it, or for what justification.
I mean jeez, the US jumped in and toppled Saddam when there was actually *some* support for it in the populace, and caught hell for it. "Imperialist" was bandied about.
Now that the Iraqis have *some* voice finally is the time to educate them on how to proceed. Shoving it down their throats is no better than what the US did.
Comments
BUT I get up this morning to look at the news from " ...my internet ......source
news.com.au
Yep NEWS AS IN RUPURT FARKIN MURDOCH
and what do I see..not a singe picture of Saddam but instead they post an image of FARKIN communist flag waving iraqis celebrating.
A sea of $$$$ing red flags.
Well how FARKIN amazing...
SEE BELOW THIS IS ALL WE FARKIN GOT TO SEE
Hussein Likely to Face Iraqi-led Tribunal (NYTimes)
You have a problem with this? The sooner the Iraqi people see that they can take care of themselves, the sooner the US and the UN can get the fudge out and let them get back to running their own country.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Excellent. Sovereign justice system, but looking for help from the international community.
You have a problem with this? The sooner the Iraqi people see that they can take care of themselves, the sooner the US and the UN can get the fudge out and let them get back to running their own country.
The law fails to:
- "Require that judges and prosecutors have experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes"
- "Permit the appointment of non-Iraqi prosecutors or investigative judges, even if they have relevant experience investigating and prosecuting serious human rights crimes."
- "Require that international judges with expertise trying serious human rights crimes sit on the bench alongside Iraqis. This would assist, not replace, Iraqi judges in ensuring justice for the horrific crimes committed.?
- "Prohibit the death penalty or trials in absentia"
- "Ensure that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt"
- "Sufficiently address protection of witnesses and victims or security for the tribunal and its staff."
"The Iraqi Governing Council issued the tribunal law without providing any opportunity for transparent consultation or public comment. The drafting should have been transparent to help ensure an effective and fair accountability process"You don't have a problem with that?
Iraq: Law Creating War Crimes Tribunal Flawed (HRW)
Originally posted by tonton
As far as punishment goes, I think he should be placed naked in a glass cell in the middle of downtown Baghdad for the Iraqis to see how weak and pathetic he really is. Let's saturate him in shame. And he'll be there to watch Baghdad prosper under his absence. And Baghdad will be there to leer at him and piss on his walls.
Wow, must have thought that one out...
I think the fact that he was captured without a shot fired, in a "rat hole", disheveled, dirty and cowardly on tape will resonate an image that most Iraqis would have never believed...that he was a pussy.
I'm happy he's been captured. But unhappy as to what the insurgents will react to this. There were insurgents in Germany after WWII who didn't care that Hitler was dead. They just kept on fighting...outnumbered of course by allied troops they failed...but look at what is happening in Iraq.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
The law fails to:"Require that judges and prosecutors have experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes"
"Permit the appointment of non-Iraqi prosecutors or investigative judges, even if they have relevant experience investigating and prosecuting serious human rights crimes."
"Require that international judges with expertise trying serious human rights crimes sit on the bench alongside Iraqis. This would assist, not replace, Iraqi judges in ensuring justice for the horrific crimes committed.?
As far as I'm concerned, the Iraqis consulting the international war crimes court for advice covers all of these. This should be an *Iraqi* court, not an ICC court in Iraq, which is what those would do, IMHO. This is a chance for the Iraqi people to actually act on their own, for their own selves. Having the international community shepherding them along by the hand would be patronizing and insulting, if I were in their shoes. It is the Iraqi responsibility to perform well and civilly, knowing the world is watching very carefully.
*Requiring* them to allow outside intervention only says "We don't trust you. We can do better. We know better than you. Step aside for your betters." Bull.
"Prohibit the death penalty or trials in absentia"
Not something I have a problem with, to be honest... and that's something for the Iraqi court to decide, isn't it?
"Ensure that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt"
One possible point, if that is indeed missing from the law. (But come on - do you seriously think that that is going to be a problem in this particular case? He did a damned good job of documenting it for the court.)
"Sufficiently address protection of witnesses and victims or security for the tribunal and its staff."
Not entirely sure why this is a necessary point for the court... to ensure witnesses speaking freely?
"The Iraqi Governing Council issued the tribunal law without providing any opportunity for transparent consultation or public comment. The drafting should have been transparent to help ensure an effective and fair accountability process"
Transparent to *whom* for consultation?? The Iraqi people, the international community, or HRW? Agree on the former if that was missing, but the latter two are simply condescending again.
You don't have a problem with that?
Iraq: Law Creating War Crimes Tribunal Flawed (HRW)
Nope, not really. A couple of possible points to consider, but nothing that I would see as a showstopper.
Originally posted by tonton
As far as punishment goes, I think he should be placed naked in a glass cell in the middle of downtown Baghdad for the Iraqis to see how weak and pathetic he really is. Let's saturate him in shame. And he'll be there to watch Baghdad prosper under his absence. And Baghdad will be there to leer at him and piss on his walls.
Treat him like David Blaine?!? You monster!
The Iraqi?s will and should be allowed to judge him, if anyone is serious about letting Iraq run it self, this would be the best way to begin.
Who and how he will be judged is still not clear, I think it will be decided in January, before the Iraqi?s wanted to judge him in absintia, luckily they wont have to now.
International this and that don?t give any credibility, it only displaces responsibility. They can disband the UN, ICC and all rest, or not, I really don?t care what they think or say.
Osama can?t be judged by any man since he is food for worms.
Regards.
Originally posted by Kickaha
As far as I'm concerned, the Iraqis consulting the international war crimes court for advice covers all of these. This should be an *Iraqi* court, not an ICC court in Iraq, which is what those would do, IMHO. This is a chance for the Iraqi people to actually act on their own, for their own selves. Having the international community shepherding them along by the hand would be patronizing and insulting, if I were in their shoes. It is the Iraqi responsibility to perform well and civilly, knowing the world is watching very carefully.
*Requiring* them to allow outside intervention only says "We don't trust you. We can do better. We know better than you. Step aside for your betters." Bull.
"Bullshit?"
I'm sorry I'm just delirious at this point. You think the inexperienced iraqi-led war tribune would be just as good if not better than an experienced international one?
The law only requires that international jurists assist iraqi jurists (if needed, and which isn't the same thing as having international jurists in the first place). It doesn't "cover" judges and prosecutors with no "experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes." It doesn't cover it one bit.
Saddam's trial belongs to the Iraqi people run by the international community.
Otherwise, it looks like this:
A show trial.
International involvement does not condescend. Rather, it would give the trial legitimacy and fairness.
Unless you think we should remove the consulting international jurists too.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
"Bullshit?"
I'm sorry I'm just delirious at this point.
Yeah, I noticed that...
You think the inexperienced iraqi-led war tribune would be just as good if not better than an experienced international one?
You're missing the point, I feel. Which may be moot, given the strident tone. (In which case we should drop this - you're not going to convince me, I'm not going to convince you.)
Experience is, pardon me, irrelevant. Sovereignty is. Otherwise, the entire concept of *letting the Iraqi's govern themselves* is a sham.
The law only requires that international jurists assist iraqi jurists (if needed, and which isn't the same thing as having international jurists in the first place). It doesn't "cover" judges and prosecutors with no "experience working on complex criminal cases and cases involving serious human rights crimes." It doesn't cover it one bit.
Saddam's trial belongs to the Iraqi people run by the international community.
?!?!?!?!?!
Well, that's that then.
"Run by the international community" That's certainly *oh* so putting it into the hands of the Iraqis, isn't it?
Poor Iraqis... can't *possibly* govern themselves without your *generous* hand holding... uh-huh. Sounds like imperialism to me, under another guise.
[b]Otherwise, it looks like this:
A show trial.[/b
No, it looks like a show trial on the part of the UN if it's run *completely* by international courts.
It's an Iraqi court, or should be primarily. They are requesting help in certain areas. That's fantastic. It's more than they *NEED* to do.
International involvement does not condescend. Rather, it would give the trial legitimacy and fairness.
Unless you think we should remove the consulting international jurists too.
Wow... keep popping those strawmen up and putting words in my mouth, please. Never said that, did I? Nope. In fact, I applaud the Iraqi request for assistance. I think it's the right thing to do.
But the point is that IT IS THEIR CHOICE.
Their country, their choice.
(Kinda like 'her body, her choice'... you know?)
[i]Originally posted by ShawnJ You think the inexperienced iraqi-led war tribune would be just as good if not better than an experienced international one?
International involvement does not condescend. Rather, it would give the trial legitimacy and fairness.
[/B]
Which internationally experienced tribunal are you thinking of?
Who have they judged and who should assemble this tribunal.
This trial will be a process where the Iraqis can lay out all the horrible shit Saddam has done and will end with him being hung. What's wrong with that?
Oh wait no the US is doing something illegal. I'm sure they didn't read Saddam his Miranda Rights. I think we better let him go.
It would be good if some of those questions could now be resolved. And it is critical that the dictator be given a fair and open trial to exact justice for his crimes, to give some solace to the people he terrorized and to give pause to other despots. The trial must be above any suspicion that it is merely an exercise in retribution or propaganda. While every effort should be made to maximize Iraqi involvement, Iraq's judicial institutions are too weak to handle the case. Although last week's creation of an Iraqi war crimes tribunal was a promising step, we would suggest this trial be conducted in Iraq under United Nations auspices by international and Iraqi judges. A tribunal picked by Americans would lack legitimacy.
I agree with the two underlined sentences.
Look at the timeline that's being proposed however - July is when the Iraqi govt is supposed to take over for themselves. Wait until then... which is the plan. There's time to put it in place... *BY* the Iraqis.
Not the US... and NOT THE UN.
Got it?
A tribunal picked by the UN has *ZERO* more legitimacy.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Here's a shocker for you... sit down... really. I don't know if your prejudices about me and innate knowledge of my viewpoints are going to be able to handle this, but...
I agree with the two underlined sentences.
Look at the timeline that's being proposed however - July is when the Iraqi govt is supposed to take over for themselves. Wait until then... which is the plan. There's time to put it in place... *BY* the Iraqis.
Not the US... and NOT THE UN.
Got it?
A tribunal picked by the UN has *ZERO* more legitimacy.
I don't expect the situation with Iraq's judicial system to change that drastically by then.
Guardian Unlimited article
The British government, which privately shared some of the unease of human rights groups over the establishment of the tribunal, had cautioned the Iraqi governing council against a speedy move to wards creating a tribunal and recommended that Iraq seek help from international bodies such as the UN. This advice was ignored.
After the Rwandan genocide and the Balkans massacres, international tribunals were set up. In Sierra Leone, there was a compromise, with the trials held in the country, with international judges sitting alongside Sierra Leone.
But under the Iraqi governing council's guidelines, there is no place for international judges as yet. This could be problematic, as there have been no independent judges in Iraq for decades.
Atlanta Journal-Constitution Article
`Any tribunal established on behalf of the Coalition Provisional Authority will not be able to rid itself of the perception and the fact that it is an instrument of American power,'' said Paul van Zyl of the International Center for Transitional Justice. ``Any justice it dispenses will be of dubious legality and questionable legitimacy.''
Richard Dicker, director of the international justice program at Human Rights Watch, said he was concerned officials didn't consider bringing in judges who have worked on major war crimes trials in other countries.
``After three decades of Baath Party rule, the capacity of Iraqi judges to conduct incredibly complicated trials has been greatly diminished,'' he said by telephone from New York. He said he worried about the tribunal's ability to provide fair trials.
Two recent studies of the Iraqi judicial system, obtained by AP, describe a legal system riddled with corruption and incompetence. One was conducted in August by the United Nations; the other in June by the Justice Department.
``A degraded justice system and inadequate and outdated legal framework is not capable of rendering fair and effective justice for violations of international humanitarian law and other serious criminal offenses involving the prior regime,'' the U.N. study said.
I just don't know about this one.
But do *NOT* *force* it on them, or it's just another form of imperialism. They need to create their own self-governance. Doing it for them in anyone else's name is wrong, whether that name is US or UN.
The place is even more backwards than I imagined. They'll need outside help. Judge, Prosecutor, Defense, the whole shtick. The real question is what's the right mix.
I mean jeez, the US jumped in and toppled Saddam when there was actually *some* support for it in the populace, and caught hell for it. "Imperialist" was bandied about.
Now that the Iraqis have *some* voice finally is the time to educate them on how to proceed. Shoving it down their throats is no better than what the US did.
It's kinda like Voldemort has been vanquished, isn't it?
And all the Deatheaters are wondering What To Do.
Great news and great way to kick off the week.
Kudos to the United States Armed Forces: Well Done and Hang Tough!
Aries 1B
8)
(Now with contact lenses!)