As we go to press, two prisoners are awaiting their fates in very different circumstances. Ian Huntley, found guilty of the double murder of the Soham schoolgirls, seems destined for 50 years’ worth of DVDs and games of ping-pong in one of Her Majesty’s jails. Saddam Hussein, on the other other hand, faces a public hanging preceded by a brief formality of a trial, the verdict of which the American President has already announced.
It is easy to envy the Iraqis what will be a moment of national jubilation in a country unused to that emotion. Having watched the grinding wheels of British justice in action, watched murderers go free on technicalities and seen taxpayers’ money wasted on trials that end with the guilty man being incarcerated for less time than the ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it is all too tempting to wish for summary execution. Who, we catch ourselves asking, wants to give Saddam the chance to cook up a defence as preposterous as that of Ian Huntley? How many stomachs are more deserving of the cold army rations now disappearing down Saddam’s gullet?
It seems that among those seduced to some extent by this view is Tony Blair. He knows that if Western values really do prevail in Iraq, in 30 years’ time the likes of his wife will be doing a brisk trade in their human rights chambers. Yet in the meantime, he appears happy to allow summary justice to have its day. ‘Of course this country remains opposed to the death penalty,’ he said two days after Saddam’s capture. ‘But this is something that in the end has to be decided by the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people.

Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in