Should the trial of Saddam Hussein be left to an Iraqi tribunal

Essay by metalhead2006College, Undergraduate September 2006

download word file, 9 pages 3.0

Downloaded 16 times

On December 14, 2003, an unshaven and dirty Saddam Hussein was dragged out of an underground "spider hole", near the Iraqi city of Tikrit. The capture by United Sates armed forces was soon confirmed in a press conference which opened with the U.S. civil administrator in Iraq, Paul Bramar, elegantly announcing, "ladies and gentlemen... we got him". Bramar concluded the speech by stating that Saddam Hussein is commended for his cooperation and that he will be tried in front of court of law, however details are still unknown. Six months later on July 1, 2004, the first hearing took place under an Iraqu tribunal.

Saddam Hussein, who was born on April 28, 1937 was the president of the republic of Iraq from 1979 until April 9, 2003. The dictator is currently charged with numerable crimes against humanity including gassing of up to 100,000 Iraqi curds, and several war crimes such as employing the use of chemical weapons.

These actions however are only considered true crimes when declared so by the Americans. It can be argued that Hussein's actions can be justified by his necessity to commit them, and even that they are comparable to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. It is nonetheless, popular belief that these were indeed punishable crimes, and that the culprit must be brought to justice. The debate that has recently arisen however concerns the question of who should try Saddam and how it should be done. George .W. Bush has reached the conclusion that because the dictators committed these crimes against the Iraqi people, it is they who should decide Saddam's fate. Those who oppose this idea on the other hand criticize that Iraq does not currently posses the stability to successfully carry this out and that an international court should be erected instead. This...