Discover the regions
of France
of France
France and Germany oppose death penalty for Saddam
Submitted by Kermit on July 1, 2004 - 1:07pm.
Interesting arcticle....I doubt that the Iraqi people are going to listen to Europe about this one:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&e=6&u=/ap/20040701/a...
PARIS - Baghdad's decision to re-establish the death penalty ahead of the war crimes trial of Saddam Hussein evoked a mixed reaction in Europe, recalling the split across the continent over the war that toppled the Iraqi leader.
Germany and France, two of the most vocal anti-war opponents, strongly stated their opposition without exception to the death penalty and called on Iraqi authorities to ensure Saddam a fair trial.
In Berlin, the government's top human rights official, Claudia Roth, criticized Baghdad's move to reinstate capital punishment, which was suspended during the U.S. occupation.
"To start out this way does not send a good signal," Roth told The Associated Press. "I think it would have been a signal of democratic strength had they not reinstated the death penalty in Iraq
France called on Iraqi justice officials to hold a trial that conforms to principles of international law, and the government reiterated its opposition to the execution of convicts.
The 25-member European Union intends to let Iraq know of its opposition to the death penalty, said Emma Udwin, external relations spokeswoman for the European Commission .
But while capital punishment is outlawed across the continent, attitudes hardened farther east among the newer EU members, where support for the war was strong.
Latvian Foreign Ministry spokesman Rets Plesums said that whatever happens to Saddam after his trial is a matter of concern for Iraq not the Baltic state.
"We are hoping that the new Iraqi courts will conduct the trial as fairly as possible, but I don't think our government will offer an opinion about what happens to Saddam Hussein," he said. "It's not our business."
Latvia, a recent newcomer also to NATO , ardently backed the U.S.-led invasion and contributed more than 100 soldiers to the coalition after fighting ended last year.
Poland, another supporter of the war, offered a similar view. Poland just decided to extend its troop deployment of 2,400 soldiers in Iraq until Dec. 31.
"Our reaction is obvious. This is a sovereign decision of an independent court and of the Iraqis themselves," said Boguslaw Majewski, spokesman for Poland's Foreign Ministry.
Roman Kuzniar, a political scientist at the Warsaw University, said the list of crimes committed by Saddam Hussein "would justify the death penalty."
Poland had capital punishment before ousting the Communist government in 1989, then eliminated it in order to join the EU.
Turkey, a Muslim nation with aspirations to join the EU one day, formally ended executions as part of its bid for membership. But many Turks still feel capital punishment is justified in some cases.
"The conscience of the people will not be satisfied if he doesn't face the death penalty," said Burhan Kuzu, a top lawmaker from Turkey's governing Justice and Development Party. "If they give the death penalty to him, this decision will not disturb me."
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&e=6&u=/ap/20040701/a...
PARIS - Baghdad's decision to re-establish the death penalty ahead of the war crimes trial of Saddam Hussein evoked a mixed reaction in Europe, recalling the split across the continent over the war that toppled the Iraqi leader.
Germany and France, two of the most vocal anti-war opponents, strongly stated their opposition without exception to the death penalty and called on Iraqi authorities to ensure Saddam a fair trial.
In Berlin, the government's top human rights official, Claudia Roth, criticized Baghdad's move to reinstate capital punishment, which was suspended during the U.S. occupation.
"To start out this way does not send a good signal," Roth told The Associated Press. "I think it would have been a signal of democratic strength had they not reinstated the death penalty in Iraq
France called on Iraqi justice officials to hold a trial that conforms to principles of international law, and the government reiterated its opposition to the execution of convicts.
The 25-member European Union intends to let Iraq know of its opposition to the death penalty, said Emma Udwin, external relations spokeswoman for the European Commission .
But while capital punishment is outlawed across the continent, attitudes hardened farther east among the newer EU members, where support for the war was strong.
Latvian Foreign Ministry spokesman Rets Plesums said that whatever happens to Saddam after his trial is a matter of concern for Iraq not the Baltic state.
"We are hoping that the new Iraqi courts will conduct the trial as fairly as possible, but I don't think our government will offer an opinion about what happens to Saddam Hussein," he said. "It's not our business."
Latvia, a recent newcomer also to NATO , ardently backed the U.S.-led invasion and contributed more than 100 soldiers to the coalition after fighting ended last year.
Poland, another supporter of the war, offered a similar view. Poland just decided to extend its troop deployment of 2,400 soldiers in Iraq until Dec. 31.
"Our reaction is obvious. This is a sovereign decision of an independent court and of the Iraqis themselves," said Boguslaw Majewski, spokesman for Poland's Foreign Ministry.
Roman Kuzniar, a political scientist at the Warsaw University, said the list of crimes committed by Saddam Hussein "would justify the death penalty."
Poland had capital punishment before ousting the Communist government in 1989, then eliminated it in order to join the EU.
Turkey, a Muslim nation with aspirations to join the EU one day, formally ended executions as part of its bid for membership. But many Turks still feel capital punishment is justified in some cases.
"The conscience of the people will not be satisfied if he doesn't face the death penalty," said Burhan Kuzu, a top lawmaker from Turkey's governing Justice and Development Party. "If they give the death penalty to him, this decision will not disturb me."
»
You fight for your ideal, for your freedom, it's ok but the one in front of you is doing the same, and you can't judge him.
Now, in the special case of Saddam Hussein, he has killed thousands of kurdes, men, women and children, and I wouldn't spend a second defending him, I won't cry when "iraky's government" will kill him. But I would prefered another way of destitution, and a fair trial by his own people.
Montjoly.
It is true that France did use the guillotine and killed many people with it. However, that was quite some time ago and people, countries and the world learn and move on to better behaviour. Just because many years ago a country had the death penalty does not mean it is valid or justifiable today.
In fact most countries have in historic times had the death penalty. However, we have become more civilised. We have discovered that there are alternatives and that as a civilised society killing somebody (or any reason) is not acceptable.
Some people raise religion and what the bible says about such things. Personally I consider that the wording used in the bible is not particularly relevant to the rights and wrongs of the death penalty. Whilst not religious myself, for many religion does play a major part in the debate from the perspective that the bible represents a moral code some people chose to live by. I probably adopt a similar moral code, though for different reasons. The reasoning behind one's moral code is personal ? what is important is peoples attitude to taking somebody else's life.
Certainly Europe is against the death penalty. There are constraints on extradition from European countries to the US that (for an extradited prisoner) require the US to give guarantees that the death penalty will not be used. Whilst not an issue that causes public protests, etc. many Europeans consider the US still has some way to "move forward" to join the rest of the world on such issues.
(In the above it is not my intent to denigrate the importance of religion).
Would you elucidate, please.
Montjoly.
But donerail requested I asked this : now what if Saddam drives an english car above 70mph in MT and gets pulled over by some dumb illiterate CT cop ? What's gonna happen in this very particular case ?
CRC
SalB - you expressed what I meant - you must follow the laws of the country (and time) you are in. You cannot obey the laws that will be made in the future and there is no requirement to obey the laws of other countries. Hence, in practice, Saddam has to obey the laws in effect at the time he commited the acts in question. Similarly, in practice, if found guilty he will be subject to the punishment of those crimes in effect at the time the crimes were comitted. One might think that inappropriate given what he is alleged to have done and his position at that time, but laws are laws and if we disregard them then legal justice is lost.
BTW, the speed limit in California is 70 mph and in other states it is actually higher, i.e., AZ is 80 and MT is unlimited (although they are trying to change this).
You're right, the example is a tad wobbly. If a UK citizen is driving in the US, he must follow US traffic laws. Somehow the example didn't read that way, however it was meant.
Donerail
Please! What is it with you people, just take Saddam out back and have him shot.
(you'd better be clear on this because donerail is rather sensitive on speed limit issues)
CRC
Unfortunately, re-establishing the death penalty is somewhat irrelevant to any punishment that any court might sentence Saddam to.
Changes in the law cannot be applied retrospectively, particularly to a time before the current government were in power. This would be a complete breach of justice. If somebody does something that is not against a law, you cannot arrest them, change the law to make what they did illegal, then find them guilty. Similarly, if the do something illegal, you cannot change the law to apply a different punishment ? this is effectively deciding to give whatever punishment you like and makes a mockery of law.
Laws that apply to actions and punishments for people found guilty can only be based on the laws in effect when the crime was committed. Whilst I have no sympathy for Saddam, I feel that if the Iraq government is to have credibility, they must behave in a just and fair manner.
Similarly, if somebody does something in a country that is not against any law in that country but is against the law in a different country, then you cannot take them to a different country and find them guilty. As a trivial example, the speed limit in the UK is 70 m.p.h, but in the US is 55 m.p.h. Somebody driving at 70 in the UK is doing nothing wrong. When they visit the US, they cannot be charged and found guilty of breaking the speed limit.
But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. -Isaiah 64:6
I know it sounds sick. That's because it is. How can you look at the world and say God made it this way. He didn't. We messed it up. Do you think animals and people killing animals is normal? Do you think God would create something distorted and with so much pain?
No, we messed it up and people became evil and some abnormal things had to happen. Like in the Old Testament they killed Animals for their sins to become straight with God. As a Christian I believe Jesus came and paid that penalty for me.
All I had to do was accept who I was and what he did for me.
You aren't going to either read or understand anything I say, so I'm not saying anything else on this topic. Pick on someone else and don't ask a question if you refuse to accept the answer.
You asked my personal opinion and I gave it. I'm not sure how you managed to turn it into this. How I derived that opinion is none of your business. Don't try to put words into my mouth and don't try to tell me what I "really" believe.
I quote you: "The Bible says that the heart (includes logic) of man is evil and nature is perverted and there is a way through an unnatural means we can be perfected." In my opinion that is a sick interpretation of the Bible.
You misunderstand. My question to you is; what is it that is causing it to be morally wrong? You said, "Moral law can be derived from common sense." In philosophy what you mean is that you think that through human logic you can look at nature and find morals. I don't know what else you could be saying because you either use logic and a religious source or you use logic and nature. Whatever it is, logic is never the source.
That was pretty close to what Rousseau believed. He believed that the savage man was superior to the sophisticated man. He believed that nature was perfect and that man was basically good, so man should be able to look at the world and use his logic to make morals.
Now, if you really believe that, you are what you call you call a secular humanist.
There is a clear contradiction between this theory and the Bible. The Bible says that the heart (includes logic) of man is evil and nature is perverted and there is a way through an unnatural means we can be perfected.
I forgot about the parade up the Champs.. I could of watched that on live webcam, too...just thought about it..oh well
lhommeamericain: do you really think the Iraqi people will decide Sadaam's fate? USA overthrows Sadaam, USA picks who can control Iraqi government, do you relaly think the USA will hand over Sadaam to an Iraq government that wouldn't take its orders from the USA?
CRC
BTW, there is a French Film Festival in Sacramento, CA this weekend.
If that doesn't answer your question, I don't know what will. Moral law can be derived from common sense.
You really don't read what people say. You pick out something and react to it. That is not a dialogue. If you stop and really read what donerail said in his last post, he answered your question.
Killing people does not make the world better. Common sense.
The Bible?
Nature?
Etc.
Donerail
Earlier you said that you had a moral objection to the death penalty. I asked you where this morality came from. In the Bible it seemed pretty clear to me that it was not only allowing the death penalty, but that God demands it.
Now, I get moral law from the Bible. If the "moral law" that you spoke of was not that from the Bible, could you explain where you got it from? Otherwise I have no way of relating or even understanding what you are talking about.
LBV,
You obviously didn't understand that I was being facetious. But then you said; "If i may" "need to follw". Now, I'm not sure if you were trying to be funny or if you are making more mistakes yourself again. If you are trying to be funny, could you please be a little more obvious. If you please, could we stay away from those type of childish remarks.
As you probably know, there are also local languages as well, still alive in Alsace (where even young people use it between one another), Corsica, and Bretagne.
CRC
In the US we can tell whether someone is from NY City, Boston, Chicago, the south or Texas pretty easily. Can you tell whether someone is from the Loire, Brittany, Alsace or Provence by listening to them?
Howdy mate, I don't try to fake nor pretend to have a specific accent so I rather try to pronounce words the best I can. I've had all kinds of english teachers trying to speak and teach with oxfordian or American accents in class, and we would always mock that. Since you probably had teachers like that too, you can probably relate
English-speaking people usually tell me that I rather sound American but with a French accent. I guess you're luckier if they can't tell about you
CRC
Amero-Franc: If i may quote you, "Iff ewe're goinng two com-plane aboute som-won elses rightting, luk att yer own ferst." I think YOU need to follw your own advice, don't you think? On what planet did you learn to write????
However, as you want to see some French, here you go:
Vous êtes un GROS CON!!!!!!
First of all, I don't have time to sit here and look over every single word I I write extreemly fast than sometimes I got back later to correct little mistakes. If you notice, I often make mistakes like "hte" "eth" and "teh" when trying to spell "the". I'm sorry if it offeneds you. The same rule appiles to my French.
Iff ewe're goinng two com-plane aboute som-won elses rightting, luk att yer own ferst.
So far you havn't used any French, so at least I've done a little better than you.
CRC
CRC
CRC
il est 3 heures du mat' ici ... un peu tard pour un Kir Royal
Have a kir royale on me for that last post
CRC
pour la dernière fois Donerail, on ne testera PAS la guillotine sur Amero-franc. Bien tenté tout de même
I personally don't know, I guess the heart beat is stoping much more faster than the electric chair...
mdr Donerail
Moi je ne sais pas, à mon avis les battements de coeur doivent cesser plus rapidement que la chaise electrique...
Post new comment