Bye Bye
His last 30 days:
An Iraqi appeals court on Tuesday upheld the death sentence against Saddam Hussein and ruled that the man whose brutal reign began in 1979 and ended with the American-led invasion in 2003 must go to the gallows within 30 days.It was the court of last resort for Mr. Hussein, who received his death sentence on Nov. 5 from the Iraqi High Tribunal, a court set up specifically to pass judgment on his years in power. No further appeals are possible, and his final legal recourse appears to be a clause in the Constitution stating that the Iraqi president must approve all death sentences.
That clause offers Mr. Hussein only the slenderest of hopes. Jalal Talabani, the Iraqi president, has said he is formally against the death penalty, but he has permitted the hangings of many Iraqis convicted of capital crimes. And the Constitution may be trumped by an article in the charter of the tribunal stating that its sentences may be commuted by no one, not even the president.
Although the title of this post might give one the impression that I think quite lightly about this, the opposite is true. I’m conflicted about it. If there is one person who deserves to die by hanging, it is Saddam. That being said, I oppose the death penalty in general. There are different reasons for this, one of them is that I find it quite troublesome when a government has the power to kill its own citizens. Another one is that it is quite… irrevocable once carried out. When a mistake has been made, a person can be released from prison… Not so with the death penalty. Lastly, I simply find it unethical and, perhaps, unnecessary. The death penalty seems to be more about revenge than about protecting society. At least – again – in general. Most societies don’t get any less safe when a person is locked up for the rest of his or her life, instead of being killed with permission from a judge (and the government).
Again, that is in general. There are exceptional cases. If Saddam wouldn’t be killed, I think that the risk would always exist that his followers will try to get him out, that he will be able to influence Iraq, even from prison, etc. However, then we still have the moral dilemma: is it ever ‘good’ or ‘right’ to kill someone, outside the battlefield c.q. self defense? Can doing so, ever, be defended when it’s not absolutely necessary?
I’m not sure.
Others on this
Generally I’m not much of a death penalty fan for the simple reason that there is always the possibility that an innocent person could be put to death mistakenly.I don’t think my fears apply in this particular case, however…
One of the definitions of justice is “conforming to truth, fact, or reason” and, as a psychiatrist, I like to think of psychological insight as a sort of divine justice that implaccably forces an individual to become aware of even the darkest parts of his or her soul.
A very interesting post.
Sister Toldjah, who mentions that the Human Rights Watch
opposes it on the grounds that the death penalty is always wrong especially in cases like Saddam’s where his trial allegedly wasn’t conducted “fairly� and AI opposes the DP because they believe the trial was not free of “political influence.�
She also wonders whether it will be – and should be – televised.
Personally, I had hoped to see Saddam dangling from a lamppost in Baghdad in April 2003. The only problem I see with a quick turnaround on stringing him up now is it cheats the Kurds of a verdict, and cheats Iraq and history of a formal airing of his crimes. Maybe they don’t need it. Iraq and history already know.
Marty Kaplan deals with the ‘televised’ question at the Huffington Post
So why did we Anglo-Americans stop turning hangings into circuses? More than anything else, it was probably embarrassment. Our societies were shamed into drawing a line between executions and entertainment. But when Saddam hangs, especially if there’s a live feed, will shame be enough to prevent media from attempting to assemble what could be Oscar-sized global audiences?
Lastly – of course – also read Joe’s post from yesterday on this:
Meanwhile, there is one danger in executing Saddam. Will he become a martyr to some in Iraq? Much of the answer to that will hinge on the future effectiveness of the present government — on whether the Saddam regime is perceived as a bad memory or as happier, more orderly times.
Read them all.
Share This
I am opposed the death penalty. He is already arrested. what can he do more? Instead of jailing him till death, why “Iraq” does prefer to kill him?
Lots of people think that he deserves to be killed, to a degree I agree, however “Iraq” can deal with this problem without killing Saddam Hussein.
Why do you write “Iraq”, instead of just Iraq, without the brackets? You seem to think that it’s not all Iraq. Well, it were Iraqi judges who decided this, twice, the prosecutors were.. Iraqis, his lawyers were Iraqis, etc.
Anyway, as you might have read, I have some difficulty with the death penalty myself.
I am not opposed to the death penalty. I don’t think we use it enough or properly in the US, though. As far as Saddam is concerned, I have no problem with this ruling except that he’s being hung. If it was a more humane form, such as injection, I’d support the courts on this 100%. Hanging is just so incredibly brutal and cruel. Saddam brought enough of cruelty into this world. We, as human beings, should be trying to minimize the negatives and bring some aspect of mercy into justice. Saddam can have no greater mercy than to die painlessly. Dying in a jail cell is hardly merciful.
morgan, unfortunately you’ve probably heard about the recent cases in the news that suggest death by lethal injection isn’t all that merciful.
Frankly, the “merciful” or “humane” argument has never held water for me. No matter what method we use, and no matter how many precautions we take, there are bound to be complications. There will never be an execution method that is “perfectly” humane. So it’s a very weak position to say that one favors the death penalty as long as it’s carried out humanely or painlessly.
Michael already mentioned most of the same reservations that lead me to oppose execution in all cases. One more worth mentioning: death lets him off easy. We can’t guarantee that he’ll face an eternity of torture in the afterlife (because we can’t guarantee an afterlife), so the worst punishment we can offer is to let him sulk in his cell for another 20-30 years, forgotten to the world. Death lets him off easy.
I oppose the death penalty for him. Many Iraqis, especially Sunnis, must now long for his reign, when the water, electricity and oil flowed and they had a reasonably peaceful life. To them, he will look increasingly martyr-like as the chaos continues. Indeed, for many Iraqis living today, the life under Saddam may have been the best they will see. Personally, I would like to see him whisked off to the Hague to be tried internationally as a war criminal by a non-Iraqi court that would not be tainted by the allegations that it was not a fair trial.
I oppose the death penalty, and I agree with Nick — I also see it as letting him off easy, in a way. Let him rot in a prison with his own conscience and whatever god he may have to reckon with in the end.
I oppose the death penalty, and I agree with Nick — I also see it as letting him off easy, in a way. Let him rot in a prison with his own conscience and whatever god he may have to reckon with in the end.
Yikes, double post. Sorry.
Why hang him?
The civilized world either doesn’t have a death penalty, or has specific and narrow criteria for imposing a death penalty. The specific and narrow criteria are usually “Will this person be able to escape and present a threat to society?”
Someone like Ted bundy, you pretty much had to kill. Not only was he recidivist, he was an escape artist. He *would* kill again; there was no question of it.
Saddam? He’s never getting out. If he got out, there’s nowhere safe he can go. Even if he turns out to be loved and worshipped as the ruler of a Golden Age by Iraq’s Sunnis, he couldn’t reach them to lead a Napoleanic restoration: he’d be killed before he made it 100 miles from the prison.
So why hang him?
To satisfy the Iraqis’ and the US Rightwing’s need for bloody revenge.
that has nothing to do with “justice.”
Kind of funny how you just have to rush justice sometimes to get it right.
30 days? That just seems silly.
Personally, I like the concept of moving appeals along in a timely manner. Conviction to coffin in six months would be fine with me. Give the Iraquis marks for efficiency. Obviously, I don’t have a problem with the death penalty. I don’t find it particularly attractive, but I think it is appropriate in cases like this.
As I’ve remarked elsewhere, I think mass murder, murder for hire, hiring a killer, kidknapping, and acts of terrorism are all reasonable grounds for the death penalty. I don’t see people who do these things as being easy to reform or likely to be made into contributing members of society. Nor do I want them out and about anywhere. So, no regrets if SD stretches hemp sooner rather than later.
I think you must be telepathic – but I also think that when the ‘event’ is televised he might as well hold a banner to confirm his martyrdom in many people’s eyes.