Following Saddam Hussein's first appearance in court, Christen Pears looks at what the future might hold for the former Iraqi dictator.

HIS handcuffs and chains removed, Saddam Hussein was as defiant as ever when he made his first appearance in court. "I am Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq," he replied when asked to confirm his identity, before denouncing the proceedings as "theatre".

No-one expected the former dictator to go quietly, but is he right? Will it be possible for him to receive a fair trial? His legal team has already challenged the legitimacy of the court.

"Milosevic did that when he went on trial in the Netherlands. It's par for the course," says Dr David George, a lecturer in Middle Eastern politics at Newcastle University. "By saying he was president, Saddam's refusing to acknowledge their right to do what they're doing."

Trying a vanquished leader for war crimes is nothing new. After the Battle of Waterloo, the victors had to decide what to do with Napoleon. The Prussians advocated summary execution while Britain favoured trial in France. The Russians wanted the emperor deported and in the end, he was banished to St Helena, where he later died.

The political situation in the Middle East is even more complex - a new regime seeking to establish itself in the face of conflicting international pressure from both the West and the Arab nations, and all under the glare of the media spotlight.

There is more at stake than the settling of old scores. The trial of Saddam Hussein will be an important test for Iraq's interim government, an opportunity to show their commitment to justice and the rule of law, as well as a chance to draw a line under the past. They will seek, at all costs, to avoid accusations of meting out summary justice - something that could undermine their position.

Saddam and some of his former Baath party officials will be tried by a special court set up specifically for the purpose by the now defunct Iraqi Governing Council. It has been given jurisdiction to try crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, and judges and lawyers will have to undergo special training in international law.

The tribunal is not expected to hear its first cases until the end of 2004, and Saddam may have to wait even longer than that.

Dr George says: "The charges that were read out in court were very general. They will want to make them much more detailed, and that means a lot of work before more specific indictments can be made. The trial is going to be at least a year away.

"I think it's possible they may put someone a little lower down the deck of cards on trial first. Chemical Ali might be tried before Saddam, for gassing the Kurds."

Regardless of when it takes place, Saddam's trial raises the spectre of another international disagreement over Iraq: should the deposed dictator be put to death?

Under Coalition rule, the death penalty was suspended, but the new Iraqi government said the special tribunal that will hold Saddam's trial would be able to impose it. If Saddam is found guilty, he could be executed, a move that would be welcomed by many Iraqis.

"The majority of the people would like to see him strung up from the nearest lamp post or tree," says Dr George.

"Remember that 60 per cent of the population are Shia Muslims and they've no cause to love Saddam at all. He has carried out major atrocities against them. If you take into account the Kurds, there is very little support for him other than in a small area north of Baghdad where all the trouble is coming from."

President Bush, already known as a strong advocate of the death penalty from his days as Governor of Texas, also seems to be in favour of execution. In a television interview given a few days after Saddam was captured, he said: "He is a torturer, a murderer, they had rape rooms. This is a disgusting tyrant who deserves justice, the ultimate justice."

This view would once again put the United States at odds with Europe, which adamantly opposes capital punishment. Britain refuses to extradite suspects to countries where it could be enforced, and the 25-member European Union intends to let Iraq know of its opposition to the death penalty in all cases, even those involving allegations of genocide or crimes against humanity.

There are, however, signs that Europe, eager to be engaged in Iraq's reconstruction, would ultimately look the other way. The death penalty "would not in any way impede us from seeking to normalise our political relations with Iraq," said Emma Udwin, external relations spokeswoman for the European Commission.

With nothing to lose, Saddam is expected to make the most of his time in the public eye. Dr George says: "People are already calling it the trial of the century and there is talk that the whole thing will be televised. Saddam will certainly try to use it as a propaganda exercise. I don't think he has much chance of gaining support but he will certainly try to discredit those who put him on trial and make life difficult for them."