ironically, that's 4 days after the constitution of the New Iraq is to be voted on..
But what's so important about this? The fact that his defense attorneys are bitching.
A legal adviser to Saddam's family, Abdel-Haq Alani, said that starting the trial next month would "undercut the defense capability to review the case."He was reacting to an announcement by the chief government spokesman, Laith Kubba, that Saddam and seven former henchmen would be tried on Oct. 19 in the 1982 massacre of 143 Shiite Muslims in Dujail, a town north of Baghdad.
Kubba's announcement confirmed unofficial reports that the first trial of Saddam and key lieutenants would begin just days after the Oct. 15 national referendum on Iraq's constitution.
Trying Saddam so soon after the referendum could further enflame sectarian tensions among Saddam's fellow Sunni Arabs, many of whom oppose the draft charter.
If convicted, Saddam and the others could receive the death penalty.
Alani said the defense had received no official notice about the date, but complained that if Oct. 19 was the start, it would not leave enough time to prepare.
"How can one review thousands and thousands of pages in just a matter of a few days?" he told The Associated Press by telephone from London. "This court has been deliberating with the evidence for the past year, but it has been keeping it away from the defense, which is not fair."
What is my opinion on this?
Well as a former law student for 2 1/2 years, I agree with his defense--from a legal point of view. The defense should have time for discovery. They won't get that time. The trial starts in 1 month 1 week and 4 days, or 41 days, that is not enough time for discovery for a trial of this magnitude.
The Iraqi tribunal announced July 17 that it had filed charges against Saddam in the Dujail case. Iraqi law requires the court to announce the start date for a trial within 45 days of the filing of charges.Under Iraqi law, the defendants will stand before the judge while he reads the charges against them. Defense lawyers will be given the opportunity to respond and ask for a postponement.
If the judge believes a delay is justified, he can grant an extension, usually 15 days. Further extensions can be requested.
Ok, that's the good thing that came out of this.
I wonder what President Bush's response to this is...
Posted by lougagliardi at September 4, 2005 07:12 PM | TrackBack