|
Is the death penalty a fitting sentence for Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein?
There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein was a monster, as dictators go. His trial by his own people, culminating in a death sentence, has dominated the world’s headlines, not least because it gave rise to various controversies.
There was controversy as to whether Saddam should have been tried by an international tribunal at The Hague. Once the decision was taken for Saddam to be tried in Iraq, there was controversy as to whether the prisoner should be hanged.
Speaking personally, I am in principle against capital punishment. It is an atrocious form of justice and morally unethical. It violates the basic human right to life. I believe that justice is not served by taking away life, and that punishment should not bar the way to spiritual repentance.
It is relevant to point out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church holds that “if bloodless means are sufficient to defend human lives against an aggressor and to protect public order and the safety of persons, public authority must limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.”
Pope John Paul II roundly denounced capital punishment and euthanasia as murder in his Encyclical Evangelium Vitae.
On the other hand, once Saddam was tried by his people according to the law of the land, who are we to contest their sovereignty and their culture? At this point in time, the Iraqi authorities can still decide not to proceed with the death sentence, or the appeals court can decide to go all the way. Sensitive political considerations are bound to arise up to the last minute.
If Saddam is executed, he would be elevated to the status of a martyr in the eyes of a significant body of opinion, mainly in the Arab world. If he is spared capital punishment and is held as a prisoner under maximum security, he is bound to be considered as a potential leader, waiting to be released, and to make a comeback, with all the vengefulness of which he is capable.
In captivity, Saddam will have the status of a figurehead inspiring revolt and resistance to the democratically-elected authorities, who have been struggling to unify the people of Iraq.
The dilemma is real. Its solution is urgent. The solution of this dilemma, probably arrived at in haste, will settle Saddam’s fate.
Adrian Vassallo is a Labour MP
The core issue at stake is whether Saddam Hussein should hang or not. My reply is quite categorical – no.
As a member of the Maltese delegation to the Council of Europe I fully agree with the statement issued by the Parliamentary Assembly’s chairman René van der Linden who stated that although the crimes committed by Saddam Hussein are appalling, and it is right that he be judged and punished for them, the sentence of the death penalty sends a dangerous message to the region: that the new Iraq is to be built on vengeance rather than respect for fundamental human values. He argued that today Iraq does not need more death.
I personally feel that capital punishment is wrong even for the worst of crimes.
Malta as a Council of Europe member state should be decidedly against such a death penalty since it is not carried out in the 46 nations of the said Council.
To be fair, from an Arab perspective the view might be different since capital punishment is an established fact in all or virtually all Arab societies and is not in itself controversial. I am under the impression that it is also recognised in Islamic law but it is worth mentioning that in spite of this Arab culture there have been various Arabs who have been vocal against the imposition of the said death penalty in his regard. Particularly the Sunnis, the Palestinians who at one stage saw him as a champion and especially Iraqi Sunnis and most of all people from Saddam’s home town.
What also irked me were two facts. The various reports regarding alleged procedural discrepancies in the trial itself as well as the claim that the timing of the sentence could have been linked to the American elections. The Observer alleged that US embassy lawyers in Baghdad lobbied the judiciary for the verdict to be made known before the US mid-term elections for the two Houses.
While Saddam was atrocious in his behaviour he was not fundamentalist. On the other hand I consider the death penalty in itself to be an act of fundamentalism.
Many commentators even in the moderate Gulf countries are of the opinion that whatever one’s views of the former Iraqi dictator and his crimes, his trial was a farce with a predetermined verdict of death by hanging.
It is understandable from their perspective that Iran, as well as the Kurds, the Kuwaitis and the Iraqi Shi’as favoured his hanging although this remains unacceptable from our point of view.
While I have no regrets that Hussein has been found guilty I would have been far more comforted had the trial been moved to an international arena. To consider the sentence as ‘a major achievement for Iraq’s young democracy and its constitutional government’ can at best be described as yet another Bush lapsus.
Leo Brincat is a Labour MP and delegate to the Council of Europe
|
