JURIST Contributing Editor David Crane of Syracuse University College of Law, former Chief Prosecutor for the UN Special Court for Sierra Leone, says that the execution of Saddam Hussein for crimes against humanity brought to a close a watershed year for international justice characterized by only tempered success…

A trapdoor in Baghdad swung open on December 30, 2006, dropping to his death the convicted and condemned war criminal Saddam Hussein. In some sense, with this execution, the end of mankind’s bloodiest century ended. During the 20th century, it is estimated that 215 million human beings perished, 135 million at the hands of their own governments. The likes of Hussein were a scourge upon that century. Importantly, this sad and tragic chapter in history was closed not by force but by the law. The trial of Hussein for the Dujal massacre was rough justice, but justice nonetheless. Is this a harbinger for the 21st century? Will the standard be that the law will bring down tyrants or will it be something else? The record is mixed, the way uncertain indeed, yet the year 2006 augers well for the future of the rule of law. How so?

Slobodan Milosevic died in custody, under indictment and on trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity. With his death, ended the long and drawn out agony of a trial that showed the world the monster that he was. This trial exposed the strengths and weaknesses of international criminal law. From this years-long trial will come lessons learned that will assist the advancement of the practice. The world faced down the butcher of the Balkans, the first head of state to be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Charles Taylor, the first head of state in Africa indicted for war crimes, was handed over by an African head of state to an African based international tribunal via an African country for war crimes and crimes against humanity. As his helicopter touched down at the tribunal’s compound in Sierra Leone, a country he personally destroyed, thousands of Sierra Leoneans cheered in the hills surrounding the compound. As he entered the court room several days later to be arraigned on those war crimes and crimes against humanity, Africans came to know that their lives mattered and that cynical African leaders could no longer take for granted their power. The beast of impunity was leashed in West Africa, and perhaps, over time, the continent.

Augusto Pinochet died a disgraced outlaw in his own country that he kept in utter terror for decades. Chileans sent a powerful signal to their government and to all of South America that the old ways of absolute power are no longer acceptable. His passing reflects the end of centralized power in a dictatorial regime, bolstering the concept of good governance in Chile and within Latin America.

Saddam Hussein was tried, convicted, and executed by an American-backed Iraqi court set up to prosecute his regime for the deaths of his own people. Though the process followed Iraqi criminal law, the specter of justice delivered so swiftly by the Iraqis will always be an asterisk next to this court from an international point of view. As he was led to the gallows, the manner of his execution also showed the indignity by which he died as political partisans shouted insults. In some sense that execution was a final reflection of the sloppy mix of law and politics that floated around that Iraqi court. History will tell whether justice was done. All in all, the law prevailed.

Yet there are wrinkles related to international criminal justice in 2006:

Darfur is the festering and fetid wound that exposes the cynical politics that surrounds international criminal justice. With the limited successes at the end of the last century and the beginning of the 21st century, Darfur reminds us that the path of justice is rocky, strewn with practical and political obstacles that highlight the reality of how politics plays out along with justice at the international level.

In the former Yugoslavia, Messrs. Karadzic and Miladic continue to hide behind the protection of the Serbs, in some way hiding in plain sight. Their continued freedom will keep the tragedy of the Balkans an open chapter in a sad book of agony and horror. Without their handover for trial at The Hague, that tribunal’s work will be incomplete. Closure and reconciliation continues to be fleeting for the victims.

The world’s superpower, the United States, has stepped away from its responsibility of conducting its military operations in accordance with international standards and this administration is openly attacking the international criminal law regime set up by the Rome Statute. Without the moral leadership of the United States the global effort to face down impunity and international terror will continue to struggle. Only through the rule of law can this so-called ideological struggle against these terrorists be successful.

International justice is as much a political act as it is a legal process. The legal act can only take place after the political one is complete, which can be awkward and unsure to say the least. Darfur is just such an example, as well as Charles Taylor’s sanctioned exile for three years. However, the international community is putting together a political framework which may allow the condition for justice to take place for the victims in Darfur; and the international community finally moved efficiently in March of 2006 to hand over Charles Taylor to the Special Court for Sierra Leone as the political atmosphere cleared for that to happen. He awaits trial in this spring, the first African head of state ever to be indicted for violating international humanitarian law.

Despite this, mankind, in general, recognizes that impunity must be faced down wherever it rears its ugly head, of that I am now convinced. Nothing that civilization has done related to atrocity has been precise, yet today we tend not to look the other way, but to act. Historians will look at the beginning years of this century, particularly 2006, with mixed feelings on how the international community dealt with atrocity. All in all, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, it will either be the beginning of a new dawn for international humanitarian law or a more bleak future. Only time will tell. Regardless, 2006 will be looked on as a watershed year in the evolution of justice at the international level.

David M. Crane is a professor at Syracuse University College of Law, and former founding Chief Prosecutor for the UN Special Court for Sierra Leone (2002-2005).

——–