Trial of Saddam falters, but it's still a start

Clearly the Iraqis have a lot to learn about putting on a show trial.
The first day of the trial of Saddam Hussein was remarkable only for the arrogance demonstrated by Saddam.
He was defiant from the get-go, responding to a request for his name with a declaration that he would not answer to the "so-called court" and claiming to retain his "constitutional rights as the president."
After a few procedural matters, the trial was adjourned until Nov. 28 to give Saddam's lawyers time to examine the evidence against their client.
The charges in question
The evidence concerns the role of Saddam and seven members of his Baath Party in the killing of more than 140 Shiite villagers from Dujail, north of Baghdad in 1982. That seems a strange place to start in the prosecution of a brutal dictator who is believed to have killed hundreds of thousands of his countrymen, using everything from his bare hands to chemical weapons.
And it is unfortunate that it is taking as long as it is -- and it will take much longer still -- to bring Saddam to justice. As long as he is alive, some members of the insurgency fight on with the dream of returning him to power. And while it is clear that the insurgency is shifting more as time goes by from a pro-Saddam political movement to an Al-Qaida-inspired Islamic movement -- the sooner Saddam is history, the better.
But whatever the flaws in the prosecution of Saddam may be, it is vital that this be a trial conducted by Iraqis -- for an independent Iraq.
Dissent inevitable
There will be some grumbling by human rights groups, supporters of the International Criminal Court, the Bush administration and foes of the U.S.-led invasion about trial procedures along the way.
American viewers used to the slick production values honed by Court TV during the O.J. Simpson and Michael Jackson trials will be bored by the Baghdad version.
But reports out of Baghdad showed that Saddam's countrymen were captivated by the televised spectacle of a man they once feared hauled before a court of law.
In the long run, it is important for this court to give Saddam and his seven co-defendants a public trial. It is important for the world and the people of Iraq to see the evidence against him. Whatever he is convicted of, there should be no doubt that he was given a far greater degree of justice than he gave his victims.