…
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said Monday that he opposes bringing captured Iraqi president Saddam Hussein before a tribunal that might sentence him to death.
“The UN does not support death penalty. In all the courts we have set up (UN officials) have not included death penalty,” Annan said in a brief encounter with reporters at the United Nations.
“And so as secretary general and the UN as an organization are not going to turn around and support a death penalty,” Annan said.
Last week, Iraq’s Governing Council adopted a measure setting up a special war crimes tribunal.
Council members have said since Saddam’s capture Saturday that he would be tried before the special tribunal and could face the death penalty.
You can bet that France, Germany and some other countries will join the UN in trying to dictate to the Iraqi people what kind of justice the Iraqi people can legitimately subject Saddam to. I wonder if the UN and these countries will be criticisized as vociferously as the US is when claims are made that the US is interfering with Iraqi's right to govern their own affairs. Heck, if Sharia Law permits stoning Saddam to death in the middle of a public square and the Iraqis choose this form of punishment, I say let it happen.
Seriously speaking, what is the influence of Kofi Annan in all this. Saddam is captured by the US military, held by US military and will probably be tried by an Iraqi tribunal (hand-picked and trained by the US) under Iraqi laws (special laws will be passed, in all probability). The only way UN will become relevant if Saddam is tried under some sort of International War Crimes Tribunal (Iran is harping about it) or International Court system. I don't think US has any interest in making it happen. Why make Saddam sing like a parrot in front of the whole world, when he is likely to spill some choice beans about his dealings with the West in the good ol' days.
There is actually a lot of US interest in having Hussein sing about his sweet deals with France, Russia, Germany, the Arab world and others who opposed the war.
I sort of agree with UTD here. The good old days won’t be that much of a revelation or embarassment. The picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam won’t be a major disclosure. More embarassing for an awful lot of countries will be the last 12 years. Words probably can’t describe the physical reaction of certain world leaders upon learning of Saddam’s capture. Let’s try a picture:
No wonder France and Germany will be in the forefront to call for a Quick (with a capital 'Q') trial and a swift closure on this dude. Who likes their dirty laundry in public.
Seminole... you mean, it was not for their vows of undying love for Saddam??? Liar liar.
If it was all about the bad guy and the democracy crap, then why create such a whooplah about WMD before the war??? No one believed you and the case was weak. Bush's answer yesterday was quite unconvincing (to me). Honestly.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
Heck, if Sharia Law permits stoning Saddam to death in the middle of a public square and the Iraqis choose this form of punishment, I say let it happen.
[/QUOTE]
Yet the Nigerian adulterer stoning case caused an uproar amongst you hypocrites!
With these guys, if Islam follows their egotistical self-serving policy then its all good. Where not these guys crying foul due to human rights about stonings before.
The UN and EU countries are following their 50 year old policy. Capital Punishment is wrong. Now all of a sudden they are supposed to change? They didnt do it with Milosovic. They dont want it implemented in any country. So what is the difference now?
