Thursday, December 08, 2005
On Trying Saddam
And Saddam himself rejects the authority of the court. That's OK, up to a point; many criminals who have no respect for the American judicial system are nevertheless tried, convicted, and on rare occasions put to death by that system. What is essential is that the tribunal assert its own authorityI am grateful to John for putting this into a reasonable context -- I have been focusing on the American aspects of the trial and not thinking about it's ramifications in Iraq.
That's what I find disturbing about the proceedings in Iraq. They have value in that Saddam's horrific crimes are revealed; or, more accurately, his long-known crimes are recited in a forum where it is hard for the American media to avoid mentioning them. But the near-chaos that is allowed to prevail is inexcusable....
...This is unacceptable. A court must assert its own authority within its domain. Saddam's ability to joust with the presiding judge can only be interpreted by Iraqis as a sign of the fledgling government's weakness.
There are some important question springing from this.
- Witnesses, because they are maintaining anonimity are afraid of Saddam and his followers. Why? Is it the insurgency? Something else?
- Why is the court allowing this behavior on his part?
- Are we not coaching the court behind the scenes?
I am forced to consider all the trials that we broadcast on TV. I missed Hindrocket's points because, frankly, misbehavior on the part of defendants has become common on television in this country. Many trials that we see nothing else of, including baliffs enforcing order, we do see defendant misconduct all over TV. The widely broadcast and viewed OJ trial was very much a case of the inmates running the asylum. And then there are the fictional court shows. Are the Iraqi's learning from us, but from all the wrong places?
I learned in my recent jury duty that we do not have a very good handle on our court system anymore. The partial acquittal/hung jury in the Al-Arian case this week makes the case concerning our out of control judicial system even more.
In the trial of Saddam, we are seeing weakness in the new government - that is understandable, but we are also seeing the fruits of seeds we have planted in our own nation. Our courts are far less serious places than they used to be. From television, to frivolous litigation, to weak judges, to lawyers without morality our system of jurisprudence has become an often silly place. How can we blame those we seek to teach if they follow suit?
