Facts matter, or How I Learned that Hussein's Being Tried Illegally
Finally, legal counsel for the President continue to dispute the legitimacy of the Iraqi Special Tribunal for the following reasons:
1. The tribunal is the result of an illegal invasion of Iraq which unequivocally violated international law, namely article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations. Attempts to justify this use of force as somehow justified by Iraq’s reaction to UN Security Council resolutions are inconsistent with statements of the majority of both the permanent members of the UNSC and the total membership of this body and are devoid of any legal basis. To satisfy basic principles of justice any court concerned with trials in Iraq that have resulted from the United States’ illegal use of force must be able and willing to try American’s who have committed crimes against peace, including American President George W. Bush.
2. The tribunal is illegal because it is constituted outside the ordinary Iraqi judicial and as the result of steps by the United States as the occupying power in Iraq to interfere with the existing judicial power in Iraq in a manner that renders it liable to violate international human rights and humanitarian law. An occupying power is forbidden from destroying the judicial of an occupied territory and replacing it with a judicial with allegiance to itself that will not prosecute its own soldiers who have violated international law. Nevertheless, the United States did just this in vetting all Iraqi judges for their political opinions and affiliations and removing
those judges who disagreed with the occupiers’ political opinion. This action contravenes general international law that provides that an occupation is not sovereignty and therefore prohibits the occupier from changing the institutions of government when the changes contribute to the violation of international law.
3. The extraordinary nature of the Iraqi Special Tribunal is evidenced by the fact that it would have been illegal even under the Iraqi Administrative Law of 8 March 2004, except for the special dispensation which is given in that law. Despite the dispensation, however, the Special Tribunal does not meet the minimum standards of international law required for a fair trial and is thus illegitimate.
4. The Iraqi Special Tribunal does not meet the requirement of being a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal. It is not competent because it has been established by an occupying power in violation of international law as an attempt to usurp the sovereignty of the Iraqi people. It is not independent because it his been established by the United States as the occupying power and not a sovereign Iraqi government and because it lacks the authority and will to trial United States citizens who have violated international law by illegally invading Iraq. It is not impartial because the judges remain anonymous and \"faceless judges\" have been held to be prima facie violation of the requirement of impartiality.
5. The Iraqi Special Tribunal also violates international law because it denies defendant’s basic fair trial and due process rights. Defendants have not been able to meet their lawyers in any meaningful way. Evidence of torture and mistreatment of defendants has not been investigated. Defendants have been denied facilities to prepare their defense. Defendants have not been charged. Defendants have been denied access to any of the alleged evidence against them. All of these failures constitute violations of defendants’ rights.
Only a tribunal created by international mandate and with truly impartial judges sitting can try a head of state who has been captured pursuant to an illegal invasion of his country. The Iraqi Special Tribunal is not such a tribunal and constitutes a serious violation of international law.
See: source.
So this puts a lot of perspective on why Saddam is always "throwing tantrums." I would be, too.
1. The tribunal is the result of an illegal invasion of Iraq which unequivocally violated international law, namely article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations. Attempts to justify this use of force as somehow justified by Iraq’s reaction to UN Security Council resolutions are inconsistent with statements of the majority of both the permanent members of the UNSC and the total membership of this body and are devoid of any legal basis. To satisfy basic principles of justice any court concerned with trials in Iraq that have resulted from the United States’ illegal use of force must be able and willing to try American’s who have committed crimes against peace, including American President George W. Bush.
2. The tribunal is illegal because it is constituted outside the ordinary Iraqi judicial and as the result of steps by the United States as the occupying power in Iraq to interfere with the existing judicial power in Iraq in a manner that renders it liable to violate international human rights and humanitarian law. An occupying power is forbidden from destroying the judicial of an occupied territory and replacing it with a judicial with allegiance to itself that will not prosecute its own soldiers who have violated international law. Nevertheless, the United States did just this in vetting all Iraqi judges for their political opinions and affiliations and removing
those judges who disagreed with the occupiers’ political opinion. This action contravenes general international law that provides that an occupation is not sovereignty and therefore prohibits the occupier from changing the institutions of government when the changes contribute to the violation of international law.
3. The extraordinary nature of the Iraqi Special Tribunal is evidenced by the fact that it would have been illegal even under the Iraqi Administrative Law of 8 March 2004, except for the special dispensation which is given in that law. Despite the dispensation, however, the Special Tribunal does not meet the minimum standards of international law required for a fair trial and is thus illegitimate.
4. The Iraqi Special Tribunal does not meet the requirement of being a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal. It is not competent because it has been established by an occupying power in violation of international law as an attempt to usurp the sovereignty of the Iraqi people. It is not independent because it his been established by the United States as the occupying power and not a sovereign Iraqi government and because it lacks the authority and will to trial United States citizens who have violated international law by illegally invading Iraq. It is not impartial because the judges remain anonymous and \"faceless judges\" have been held to be prima facie violation of the requirement of impartiality.
5. The Iraqi Special Tribunal also violates international law because it denies defendant’s basic fair trial and due process rights. Defendants have not been able to meet their lawyers in any meaningful way. Evidence of torture and mistreatment of defendants has not been investigated. Defendants have been denied facilities to prepare their defense. Defendants have not been charged. Defendants have been denied access to any of the alleged evidence against them. All of these failures constitute violations of defendants’ rights.
Only a tribunal created by international mandate and with truly impartial judges sitting can try a head of state who has been captured pursuant to an illegal invasion of his country. The Iraqi Special Tribunal is not such a tribunal and constitutes a serious violation of international law.
See: source.
So this puts a lot of perspective on why Saddam is always "throwing tantrums." I would be, too.