萨达姆被判死罪 各方反应不一
伊拉克前总统萨达姆·侯赛因被判死罪后，美国白宫和伊朗欢迎有关裁决，欧洲联盟和联合国人权专员阿尔布尔则呼吁伊拉克当局不要执行死刑。
在穆斯林世界，只有数个国家对萨达姆被判死刑予以完全的认同，伊朗是其中一个国家。
伊朗外交部发言人说，死刑是萨达姆必须承担的最低惩罚。发言人还说，萨达姆被处死，不能够开脱西方国家在1980年代两伊战争期间支持萨达姆的责任。
伊朗和伊拉克的战争导致100万伊朗人死亡或变成残障。伊朗司法部去年向伊拉克发出萨达姆反人道罪的起诉书。
观察人士称，阿拉伯国家民众普遍的反美情绪，使他们对萨达姆的宣判未有很大反应。
美国、欧洲反应
美国白宫表示，这一天对伊拉克民众来说是好的一天。
欧洲联盟呼吁伊拉克团结，并期望伊拉克当局避免行使死刑。
联合国人权专员阿尔布尔女士表示，即使萨达姆上诉失败，也希望伊拉克当局不要对他执行死刑。
伊拉克国内反应
在萨达姆执政时期是政治犯和曾经流亡海外的现任伊拉克总理马利基表示，萨达姆罪有应得，他在萨达姆被判罪后发表全国电视讲话，称萨达姆时代"正式成为过去"。
马利基同时呼吁伊拉克各民族团结重建国家。
在伊拉克各地，萨达姆被判绞刑的消息导致抗议和庆祝两种不同反应。
在萨达姆执政时期长期受镇压的什叶派穆斯林不理会首都巴格达的戒严令，开车巡游街道及向天空鸣枪，在伊拉克其他地方的什叶派地区也有这样的情况。
萨达姆被判死罪的消息导致一些逊尼派组织抗议和闹事，有消息说逊尼派武装分子和警察发生冲突。
据悉，在萨达姆的家乡提克利特，至少两千人参加了抗议判决的游行示威。
萨达姆的律师团和国际人权组织人权观察则指责伊拉克政府不断干涉萨达姆一案的司法进程，使得审判失去公信力。
批评人士也指出在美国中期选举前萨达姆被判刑的时间巧合。
萨达姆和其他七名前伊拉克官员被控在1982年镇压什叶派村落杜贾尔时下令屠杀了148人。
伊拉克法庭以反人道罪判处萨达姆绞刑死罪，他的同父异母兄弟巴赞以及一名伊拉克前首席法官也被判死刑。
伊拉克前副总统拉马丹被判无期徒刑，另外三名被告被判监15年。
萨达姆所属的伊拉克复兴社会政党的一名党领袖则获判无罪。
萨达姆和被判罪的人都有权上诉。
- Re: 钀ㄨ揪濮嗚鍒ゆ缃� 鍚勬柟鍙嶅簲涓嶄竴(BBC)posted on 11/06/2006
以反人类罪判处绞刑，个人以为是个悲哀！
听说是因为屠杀193人而定的罪，作为杀人犯，他罪有应得；但是，如果因为为了
逮住一个杀人犯而要更多的人死亡的话，我想还得有个人要被判死刑……
伊拉克人民真够倒霉的了！ - Re: 钀ㄨ揪濮嗚鍒ゆ缃� 鍚勬柟鍙嶅簲涓嶄竴(BBC)posted on 11/07/2006
143人。 - posted on 11/08/2006
我觉得这件事很可怕.萨达姆被判死罪可以理解,
但是为什么要用绞刑呢?让人看到人类的黑暗.
法国人在反省大革命的残酷,
俄罗斯人在反省对沙皇全家处死的残忍,尤其是杀死
他的四个女儿,其中包括才七,八岁的小女孩Anastasia,
(有卡通片演这个小孩的故事.)俄罗斯民间传说这个小孩
没有死,因为某种原因逃脱了.其实也是找一个理由解脱,
掩饰一个民族的良心.
人类文明的今天,动物早已使用安乐死,
为什么还会发生以民主的名义,中世纪的方式执行的死刑?
民主的绞刑架与独裁的绞刑架究竟有何区别呢?
成千上万的伊拉克人都死了,包括儿童,孕妇......
收到这个邮件,也算出各方反应之一.转在下面.
From : Coalition for Peace Action
Sent : Tuesday, November 7, 2006 7:29 PM
Subject : Reflection on Sentencing of Saddam Hussein
Professor Richard Falk, on the recent sentencing of Saddam Hussein. Prof. Falk is Professor of International Law at Princeton University.
http://www.peacecoalition.org The Coalition for Peace Action (CFPA) is a grassroots citizens二 organization that brings together people of all ages, backgrounds, professions, and political persuasions to advocate for three goals: global abolition of nuclear weapons, a peace economy, and a halt to weapons trafficking at home and abroad.
THE SADDAM HUSSEIN DEATH SENTENCE
Richard Falk (Nov. 6, 2006)
The timing of the death sentence imposed on Saddam Hussein, so suspiciously convenient for Republican aspirations in the mid-term elections, will only deepen the sectarian tensions in Iraq, fanning further the flames of civil war. While President Bush predictably greeted the news as yet another ‘milestone’ in the effort of the Iraqi people ‘to replace the rule of the tyrant with the rule of law,’ a less partisan reaction would lament the timing as intensifying sectarian strife in Iraq that has by now become a civil war intertwined with a war of resistance.
The American stage-managing of this judicial process in Baghdad has been evident to close observers all along. It always seemed legally dubious to initiate a criminal trial against Saddam Hussein while the American occupation was encountering such strong resistance by Saddam loyalists, especially as the US-led invasion was widely regarded throughout the world as itself embodying the crime of aggressive war, a crime for which surviving Nazi leaders were charged and punished at Nuremberg after World War II. This reality constitutes a fundamental flaw in this whole judicial process. In effect, why Saddam Hussein? Or differently, why not George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld?
The cost of this political opportunism by the United States goes beyond the narrow circumstances of this trial. No one doubts that Saddam Hussein and the other defendants were substantively guilty of crimes against humanity when they killed 148 civilians in the town of Dujail back in 1982 after a failed assassination attempt; collective punishment is an international crime whatever the provocation. But the potential contribution to building a legal tradition of accountability applicable to political leaders has been undermined in this instance by the circumstances and auspices of this tribunal, and by the way the prosecution proceeded. Defense lawyers were not adequately protected, and three were killed; evidence presented to the tribunal was not made available to the defense in advance; the judge was switched midway through because he was alleged to be too permissive toward those accused; there were no international judges on the tribunal; and some of the evidence appeared to be fabricated. Justice is not done if the appearance of justice is not present. This is particularly true if there is deep political cleavage about whether those accused should be prosecuted in the first place.
Finally, the impact of this death sentence is morally and politically questionable. At this point, internationally, a death sentence is not considered to be an acceptable punishment; the International Criminal Court, and other international criminal tribunals, reject capital punishment as an option. Almost all political democracies in the world have done away with the death penalty, and so to impose it here, especially by way of hanging, can only be regarded as an expression of primitive vindictiveness, an act of vengeance far more than an expression of justice that brings discredit to the whole process.
Politically, as the sectarian demonstrations throughout Iraq have already demonstrated, the verdict at this point by an Iraqi tribunal acting under the authority of the American occupier intensifies the problematic situation in the country. It fans the flames of Sunni/Shi’ia strife, which possesses most of the characteristics of a civil war, and it reinforces the impression of an aggressive occupier imposing its historical narrative on a still deeply divided society. It also poses a dilemma. If the death sentence is carried out, it will ensure Saddam Hussein’s status as a Sunni martyr, and make even more unlikely an accommodation among Iraqis as an alternative to civil war. On the other hand if the sentence is not carried out, it will give further evidence that this is a political, not a legal, process, and sadly, encourage the most cynical views of these efforts to hold political leaders responsible for crimes of state. As well, it will sustain Saddam Hussein’s claim to be still the leader of the Iraqi people, a hero in captivity.
All in all, the outcome of this first trial against the Ba’athist regime of Saddam Hussein, should have been internationalized, or at the very least, waited until normalcy had been restored in Iraq. To convert this criminal process into a tool to vindicate the narrative of the Bush administration as to what was achieved in Iraq by the invasion and occupation was itself misguided even if the only audience was here in the United States. By now, even naïve America no longer listens when Washington claims that another milestone establishes progress in the war. As the milestones pile up, so do the bodies!
- posted on 11/08/2006
华 wrote:
我觉得这件事很可怕.萨达姆被判死罪可以理解,
但是为什么要用绞刑呢?让人看到人类的黑暗.
Talking about hanging....
Singapore still hangs their criminals. A year ago I followed a case. An young Australian citizen (Vietnamese origin) was found carrying illegal drugs while transit in Singapore airport. It was his first time, because he needed the money to save his twin brother from gangsters back home. He received the death by hanging penalty. He was sorry for his crime, and offered to provide information on drug lords for exchange of life. Australia tried to use diplomacy to save him, but Singapore would not yield. Even the dying Pope could not save his life. The man who was in charge of the hanging for several decades was getting old, and wanted to quit the job, but nobody could become the next hangman, so he had to pull the trigger again this time. And Singapore was supposed to be one of the most advanced society in the world. That's one of the many reasons I hate Singapore.
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation