Hussein Trial Continues After Tumultuous Start

Attorney Mark V. Vlasic was online Tuesday, Dec. 6, at 12:30 p.m. ET to discuss Saddam Hussein 's trial, which resumed this week with outbursts by the defendants and their lawyers' assertion that the trial is illegal.

Mark V. Vlasic , a Washington lawyer, served on the Slobodan Milosevic prosecution trial team at the U.N. War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague and has participated as an expert in international training courses for Iraqi judges, including those of the Iraqi High Tribunal that is trying Saddam Hussein.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Alexandria, Va.: Ramsey Clark defended Saddam by saying that when there has been an assassination attempt one needs to be tough.

Is "needing to be tough" a legal defense against mass murder charges?

Mark V. Vlasic: In my opinion "needing to be tough" is not a defense to crimes against humanity. There are rules for the use of force - one of which is that a person or government may only use the amount of force necessary and proportional to the threat at hand. When it comes to the killing of almost 150 people and the destruction of a village, I think it may be challenging for Saddam to prove that his actions were necessary and proportional response.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: About five years ago Belgium attempted to put the prime minister of Israel on trial for war crimes in a French and Flemish language proceeding in the Belgian legal system, and was even sending invitations to appear to the prime minister. Eventually the rest of the world told the Belgian government to cut it out, which it did.

How can the U.S. avoid the perception that, as in the case of Belgium, one government had an axe to grind against another one? Do these trials have a solid legal foundation, or is the U.S. just kind of making up the rules as it goes along?

Mark V. Vlasic: The Iraqi Tribunal includes provisions that allow for international observers and advisors. My understanding is that there are US government observers/advisors assisting the Tribunal, much as Mr. Clark is serving as an observer/advisor for the defense counsel.

I think the Tribunal would be better served if there were more countries stepping forward to provide observers and advisors. Sadly, aside from the US, the UK, and Australia, few countries have stepped forward to help the Iraqis re-establish the rule of law in Iraq. It is also very unfortunate that the United Nations has decided to watch from the sidelines rather than help the Iraqi Tribunal.

The Iraqi Tribunal is based upon a combination of Iraqi law and international law. The Iraqi Tribunal's Statute and Rules of Procedure and Evidence are based in large part on related documents from the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and Sierra Leone war crimes tribunal. Also, the elements of crimes are based on those used by the International Criminal Court.

_______________________

Tampa, Fla.: Should we assume Iraq follows civil law, and not common law? If so, could you point out some of the major differences between how a U.S. court would handle the trial and how the Iraqi court handles it?

Mark V. Vlasic: Iraq is a civil law society. Its legal system is similar to that of Egypt, which is similar to the system used in France. This does create some major differences when we compare it to the common law system we use in the United States. For example, rather than using a jury, the Iraqi Tribunal has a panel of judges. Also, while in the United States the focus would be on the prosecution and defense questioning the witnesses, in Iraq the witness are questioned by the judges.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: I'm looking for some perspective on Ramsey Clark's involvement in Saddam Hussein's defense. He was Johnson's Attorney General and since then, he has defended some pretty unsavory characters before Saddam. I understand that every accused needs a defense lawyer, but why a prominent American one? His doing this doesn't just make the Bush administration look bad--they don't need any help in that department, anyway--it makes the whole country look bad.

Mark V. Vlasic: You are correct, Mr. Clark has worked on a number of interesting cases. He also assisted Slobodan Milosevic in his trial at The Hague. It is important to remember that everyone charged with a crime is entitled to a defense - and no doubt Mr. Clark shares this view. From my experience at the UN War Crimes Tribunal, a better defense team makes for a better trial. I am hopeful that Mr. Clark will work with the Iraqi Tribunal to ensure that the Saddam trial is fair and just.

_______________________

Brooklyn, N.Y. Hi- Thanks for the chat. Why isn't Hussein being tried at the Hague? Also, why is he only being tried for crimes from 1982 and nothing later? Thanks.

Mark V. Vlasic: Saddam cannot be tried at the two major international criminal courts in The Hague because they do not have jurisdiction. The UN War Crimes Tribunal in the Hague is focused on the former Yugoslavia, while the new International Criminal Court can only exercise jurisdiction over crimes occurring after July 1, 2002. Thus, the Iraq Tribunal was created to focus on the major crimes during Saddam's rule.

_______________________

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.