If found guilty, he could face the gallows.
But since the start of his trial, deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein has shown indifference for his victims, aggression to his judges and not the slightest regret for his more than two decades in power.
With the trial now on hold for its latest two-week recess, Saddam has yet to reveal any hint of weakness in the face of the graphic and sometimes gruesome testimony from witnesses who stood just metres away from him.
In fact, he has labelled the succession of witnesses as ”agents” colluding with a tribunal he accuses of being a mere ”lackey” of the United States. On Wednesday he refused to appear in court in protest at its ”illegitimacy”.
The charges for which Saddam has been on trial — over the murder of 148 Shi’ite villagers from Dujail in 1982 — represent just a small fraction of the alleged crimes his opponents want the former president to answer.
These include a crackdown on Shiites in 1991, the gassing of Kurds from the village of Halabja in 1988, the Anfal campaign against the Kurds in the 1980s, the war against Iran and the occupation of Kuwait.
But Saddam, who has turned up to the proceedings neatly dressed in a suit with a white handkerchief in his top pocket, has appeared unruffled by the scale of the accusations laid against him.
His strategy from the day the trial opened on October 19 has been to reject the accusations brought against him, to look down at the court and — at all costs — to maintain a presidential air.
He addressed a witness who detailed how the Dujail villagers had been arrested en masse and tortured in a tone that was at once both paternal and menacing, asserting: ”It is not right that I have to confront one of my own children, me who served this country for 30 years.”
The toppled strongman then hissed to the witness that his allegations were ”laughable”.
He has also made much play of the fact the reprisals against the villagers ensued after an attack on his presidential convoy in the village.
”The affair is exaggerated. All heads of state who are victims of an attack have the right to have their assailants tried,” he sniffed in what appeared a bid to give the massacre legitimacy.
Another fact used by Saddam and his lawyers is that none of the witnesses auditioned this week have come up with any evidence directly linking Saddam to the massacre and have even skirted naming him explicitly.
Deciding attack is the best form of defence, Saddam has turned the questioning on its head and indignantly harangued the tribunal about why no-one has asked him if he was ever tortured in captivity.
He has also attempted to show his derision for the trial, telling presiding judge Rizkar Mohammed Amin to come up with ”less used and less tired” witnesses after one gave hesitant and at times confused testimony.
But the ”presidential” airs have rarely been far away. ”Do you think that Saddam Hussein has nothing else to do?” he asked the tribunal.
”He is still president of Iraq!”
He played down the importance of his own fate, stressing the destiny of Iraq was of far greater importance. ”The important thing is not Saddam Hussein, but Iraq and the Arab nation must have their heads high when faced with injustice.”
”I don’t fear execution. Saddam will leave and someone else will replace him. This has no importance,” he said.
After spending the first four sessions of the trial stuck in the dock with limited chance to speak, Saddam gave full vent to his disdain of a court he does not recognise.
”Go to hell!” he growled before leaving the courtroom on Tuesday evening. The next day he played the other card, refusing even to attend. – Sapa-AFP