CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Saturday, January 1, 2005

Case Western CrimProf Michael Scharf Trains Iraqi Tribunal Judges to Preside Over Saddam Hussein's Trial

Scharf Michael Scharf, Director of the Frederick K. Cox International Law Center at Case Western Law School is one of five international experts who trained the Iraqi Special Tribunal Judges who will preside over Saddam Hussein's trial.  The Washington Post featured Scharf's editorial, "Can This Guy Get a Fair Trial?" in which Scharf explains his transition from believing that Saddam could never get a fair trial to believing Saddam's trial will be fair after all.  Scharf bases his transition in part on the Iraqis' contribution to the Iraqi Special Tribunal (IST) statute; over U.S. objection the Iraqis insisted on including a provision enabling the IST to prosecute Hussein for the crime of aggression, which has not been prosecuted since the Nuremburg Trials in 1945. 

The Associated Press and several national TV and radio programs have featured Scharf's work.  For links to Washington Post's follow-up chat with Scharf and a tape of his appearance on NPR's Morning Edition, click here. [Mark Godsey]

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/crimprof_blog/2005/01/case_western_cr.html

CrimProfs | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00d834aa331369e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Case Western CrimProf Michael Scharf Trains Iraqi Tribunal Judges to Preside Over Saddam Hussein's Trial:

Comments

i have met Prof. Scharf in Cleveland and talking with him of this trial was great, it is brilliant!

Posted by: Carla Celena Henriquez | Feb 17, 2006 9:30:21 AM

I understand that you will show an opinion if you want to or not since it is your blog, but what I said in my previous comment deserves to be shown if we live in a democratic republic which all of you law professors seem to forget.

To justify something that is blatantly wrong with the idea of the goal or wanted outcome of something good as the reason can never be accepted if we are who we say we are.

Posted by: Marie | Nov 3, 2006 12:37:32 PM

I understand that you will show an opinion if you want to or not since it is your blog, but what I said in my previous comment deserves to be shown if we live in a democratic republic which all of you law professors seem to forget.

To justify something that is blatantly wrong with the idea of the goal or wanted outcome of something good as the reason can never be accepted if we are who we say we are.

Posted by: Marie | Nov 3, 2006 12:50:52 PM

Post a comment