by Jibril Hambel 

They’re selling postcards of the hanging, they’re painting the passports brown,
The beauty parlor is filled with sailors, the circus is in town....
The riot squad are restless, they need somewhere to go
As Lady and I look out tonite, on Desolation Row...”
—Desolation Row, Bob Dylan

TRAVESTIES

Former U.S. Attorney General and lawyer on the late Saddam Hussein’s legal team, Ramsey Clark, was ejected from court on the day the verdict was read because he passed a note to the judge calling  the entire trial of the former dictator  “a travesty”.  The farcical elements of the trial and execution of Hussein would not end there however. How could they? So many had so much riding on what turned out to be in the end a clumsily directed and poorly acted revenge tragedy. Watching such inept tragedy is usually comical. Unless of course you're bleeding real blood and dying a real death during the performance.

When the news began carrying details of the verdict and sentencing procedures, more than a few of us were fascinated by statements alluding to the fact that the sentence must be carried out within 30 days of the final appeal. Knowing that Saddam was to be tried for the Anfal massacres, we wondered how he would withstand the rigors of another trial if he were deceased.

The absurdity of this didn’t occur to those who should have heeded it most. The kangaroo court, followed by the lynch mob theatrics of the execution could be fixed, they seemed to think. All we have to do is say in the press is that we have “dropped the charges” against Saddam in the Anfal hearings. And so they did.

Whoever said comedy was one step beyond tragedy must’ve seen this one coming.

WAR MAKES THIEVES AND PEACE HANGS THEM

I asked Clark in Amman on the eve of the verdict if there was a model court that Hussein should have been tried in. Was there an apt analogy in Nuremberg or the Hague? He pointed out that he had been an active proponent of just such a court since the late 1960s, though he admits that a perfect model has yet to be established. He was adamant, however, in light of the present legal and civil morass surrounding the Saddam trials, that such a legislative body was sorely needed.

In response to the verdict, fellow lawyer on the defense team, Kurtis Doebbler, issued the following, unequivocal statement:

The verdict of guilty and the trial of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has failed the Iraqi people and failed the rule of law. It is an abuse of justice.

Politically it sends a clear message to the Iraqi people: if they want to defend themselves, they cannot look to law, they cannot look to the U.S. government, they cannot look to the occupation government the U.S. setup in Iraq … They must defend themselves using all necessary means by which national liberation movements are permitted to defend themselves.

The trial of the Iraqi President has been declared unfair by every independent expert who has reviewed it. It constitutes the worse form of “victors’ injustice”. It pays to bear in mind that—in addition to the many reports issued by the defense team and others about blatant obstructions to preparing their case by the Coalition and their Iraqi representatives in the form of the Iraqi Special Tribunal (IST)—the entire process was conducted in Baghdad’s Green Zone during a time of widespread instability and violence. At least three defense lawyers have been killed by parties alleging ties to the present Iraqi government, and witnesses for both sides have reported bullying, threats and physical violence. At least one witness for the defence, according to Hussein’s legal team, has been murdered.

Conducting such a high-profile trial in the midst of such rampant violence and unrest, however, is simply the most glaring of the many illegalities and inconsistencies in this legal charade. In the U.S., many cases are moved outside the city or state where crimes were committed for security reasons and the choosing of an impartial jury. Why, then, a choice was not made to try the former Iraqi president on neutral ground remains a mystery. Unless you subscribe to the theory that this was never meant to be a real trial at all, but simply another trump card for Bush and Company during an election season. The evidence on hand points to few, if any, other alternatives. English poet George Herbert said centuries ago that “War makes thieves and peace hangs them.” When the history books are rewritten, they might want to amend that to read: “Big Oil Money makes thieves, and Occupying Armies hang them, (with help from their lackeys.) 

Never known for the originality or their common sense, the Neo-Con juggernaut behind the newly “democratic” Iraq did the only thing they could think of: they followed their poorly written and implausible script to the final reel. They led Saddam to the gallows.

Cue the laugh track.