Deposed dictator Saddam Hussein is unlikely to receive a fair trial under the tribunal created by the newly installed Iraqi government and the US-led occupying coalition, a leading human rights commentator told conference delegates.

Richard Dicker of the New York-based organisation Human Rights Watch, said there were serious concerns relating to due process in the forthcoming trial of Saddam.


He said statements extracted by US investigators were taken without Saddam having access to legal representation or advice and that therefore they should arguably be excluded from evidence.


Mr Dicker said his organisation was also concerned that the tribunal would be conducted exclusively by Iraqi judges. 'After 30 years of Baath Party rule, the independent judiciary has been totally destroyed,' he commented. 'People in Iraq recall trials that lasted a few days at most. Concepts such as forensic evidence virtually didn't exist under Baath Party-run trials.'


There are also concerns about the quality of legal advice available to Saddam. There were many capable expatriate Iraqi lawyers spread around the globe, said Mr Dicker. However, they have no experience of criminal trials.


It was of major concern that the US Department of Justice was providing the 'real muscle' in the organising and running of Saddam's trial, said Mr Dicker. He described the process as 'in danger of being compromised and delegitimised' in the eyes of the Iraqi population.


Mr Dicker said Human Rights Watch also objected to the Iraqi tribunal making the death penalty available as a sentence on conviction.


However, James Silkenat, the former chairman of the ABA's section of international law and practice, said that while he too opposed the death penalty, it was important that the choice was seen to be made by the Iraqi people.


Fausto Pocar, a judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia at The Hague, supported the concept of a local tribunal run by the Iraqis. International tribunals suffered from being located far from where the alleged crimes took place, he said, causing difficulty in accessing witnesses and evidence.


A group of more than 100 conference delegates - including a former ABA president - sent a petition to the White House, maintaining that Bush administration lawyers were in breach of the law and their professional obligations in allegedly preparing memos that justified the use of torture against terror suspects. Signing the petition were former ABA president, Boston-based lawyer John Curtain, and John Gibbons, a former federal appeals court judge.