Iraq trial for Saddam

Britain today opened the way for Saddam Hussein to be tried in Iraq - and to be sentenced to death.

Tony Blair and Jack Straw left it in no doubt that the UK would raise no objection if the former president faced execution in his own country.

First Foreign Secretary Mr Straw said Britain had a long history of opposing the death penalty but acknowledged there were many countries around the world which did not share the policy.

Then, within minutes, Downing Street hardened its stance still further, ahead of a Commons statement from Mr Blair this afternoon.

The Prime Minister's official spokesman said that Britain opposed capital punishment but "were that to be the outcome, obviously that would be something that we would have to accept".

The comments allayed fears raised earlier by Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's senior representative in Iraq, that the issue would open a serious diplomatic rift between London and Washington.

Both Mr Straw and Mr Blair's spokesman went out of their way to point out that other countries on the United Nations security council apart from the US backed the death penalty in some cases.

The Foreign Secretary also told a Whitehall news conference that Britain was not "holding its breath" for revelations from Saddam about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction - or anything else.

Mr Straw said: "His history of mendacity is so intense and so long-lasting that he wouldn't understand the truth if he fell over it."

He said he was delighted when he heard the news of the tyrant's capture, and added that he did not "leap for joy" but instead got out of bed and made a cup of tea.

The Foreign Secretary dampened speculation that Saddam might be brought before the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

He said that body's statutes ruled that, where possible, war criminals should be tried in their own countries.

Asked what would be the appropriate punishment, he said: "The position of the British Government and Parliament on the death penalty is very clear - we have abolished the death penalty here and oppose its use in other countries.

"However, it is an obvious reality that the death penalty exists and is used by other countries, including two of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. In the end, the appropriate punishment is a matter for the sovereign governments and their courts."

Mr Straw revealed that he was woken to receive the news of Saddam's arrest - and had been dreaming about the European Union constitution negotiations which collapsed in Brussels on Saturday.

He said: "I was very pleased, not to say delighted, to have good news and for it to be on a non-EU subject. I didn't leap for joy. I got out of bed to make a cup of tea."

Earlier Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the Prime Minister's envoy to Iraq, had raised eyebrows by warning that Britain would have no part in any trial which could lead to an execution.

"The UK is against the death penalty," he said. "It is a party to a convention that opposes the death penalty so we would have no part of a tribunal or a process that had the death penalty as one of its penalties."

Saddam's capture brought congratulations from across the world - including those countries which had opposed the war.

There were no words directly from French President Jacques Chirac, but his spokeswoman said: "The President is delighted at the arrest of Saddam Hussein."

Germany's Chancellor Gerhard Schroder voiced his "great delight" at the news. The arrest brought a general welcome from leaders across the Middle East and from Russia.

Meanwhile, in Iraq the clamour for a public trial was growing.

Urged on by the Americans, the Iraqi Governing Council has created a special tribunal to try the dictator and his henchmen.

Late last night council member Ahmad Chalabi said Saddam will face "public trial", although the ultimate decision will lie with the White House.

Employing Iraqi judges, this new court could try him for genocide as well as crimes against humanity and war crimes.

A lengthy trial could expose crimes ranging from the gassing of the Kurds and the annihilation of the Marsh Arabs to the torture of British airmen taken prisoner in the first Gulf war and murder, abuse and terror inflicted on hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

Also covered by the tribunal's 38 articles are crimes such as the destruction of religious monuments, population transfers and the theft of billions of dollars from the national treasury. Every one of them could apply to Saddam.

But the trial would be controversial because at American urging, the United Nations would play no part in the proceedings.

The tribunal's rules have provision for international judges, but the UN has been given no role in the trial process, despite running the war crimes court now trying Slobodan Milosevic in The Hague.

This decision has already seen human rights groups question the court's legitimacy.

Human Rights Watch said the tribunal "lacks essential elements to ensure legitimate and credible trials", and Amnesty International said there should have been consultation among Iraqis first.

But the Iraqi Governing Council hopes the sheer horror of evidence in the courtroom would drown out criticism about the decision not to wait until Iraq has elected a government that could give the court its stamp of approval.