What they got instead was a circus. On trial for charges stemming from the mass slaughter of 150 Shi’ites in 1982, Hussein has at every opportunity assailed the legitimacy of the Iraqi Special Tribunal. Wearing a perpetually defiant smile, he has berated witnesses, fulminated against U.S. forces, and denounced Iraq’s democratic government over the timid admonitions of presiding Judge Rizgar Mohammed Amin. Finally, he became a no-show for his own trial. In his latest offense against courtroom civility, Hussein on Wednesday announced, through his counsel, that he was boycotting his own trial and accordingly failed to make himself present.

On Monday, in an outburst that has characterized much of the trial thus far, Hussein threatened Amin, vowing, “When the revolution of the heroic Iraq arrives, you will be held accountable.” Rather than standing up to this dictator’s relentless efforts to mock his courtroom, Amin lost control until the trial devolved into mayhem. Most recently, he permitted one of Hussein’s defense attorneys, Najeeb al-Nuemi, to deliver a tirade vilifying the court as an illegitimate tool of the U.S. occupation.

The latest in the succession of outrages that have plagued the trial comes from the United Nations. On Monday, the UN’s human rights representative in Iraq, John Case, delivered the agency’s verdict that the trial has failed to meet the its ethical standards. (This from the agency that oversaw the Oil-for-Food program.) “We believe that weakness in the system of administration of justice, in addition to the antecedents surrounding the establishment of this tribunal, will never be able to produce the kind of process that would be able to satisfy international standards,” announced Case. Nor was this the first time that the UN has thrust itself into the trial proceedings. Setting the stage for Case’s assessment, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in October of 2004 publicized his view that the Iraqi Special Tribunal would fail to meet “relevant international standards” and advised against any assistant role for the UN in a future trial.

The UN has consistently ignored that counsel. Thus, in mid-November, following the murders of two defense attorneys for Hussein, a UN special rapporteur called for an independent investigation to determine whether the Iraqi Interior Ministry had been involved in their shootings. No evidence for the charges was produced, but the “allegations” cited by the UN proved sufficient grounds for suspending the trial until November 28. That the agency has no official role in the trial has not kept it from disparaging its conduct.

The UN’s intercession in Hussein’s trial is about more than its professed commitment to an independent judiciary and due process rights: Iraqi legal statute contains a provision for the death penalty, which the UN staunchly opposes. Indeed, it was on the basis of its opposition to the possibility of a death sentence that the UN rejected a 2004 appeal by Iraqi government leaders to train 30 judges and prosecutors in preparation for Hussein’s trial.

To be sure, the UN’s carping from the sidelines pales in comparison to the courtroom theatrics staged by Hussein and his defense team. To the extent that the defense had an identifiable strategy, it was to show the maximum amount of disdain for the trial itself. It is a tactic that the latest addition to Hussein’s side, former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark, embraced with gusto. On Monday, Clark made a show of questioning the legitimacy of the court to try Hussein and his seven co-defendants—despite speaking not a word of Arabic—before leading the entire defense team in a walkout from the courtroom. That ostentatious exit prompted Hussein and his co-defendant half-brother, Barzan Ibrahim, to erupt, “Long live Iraq! Long live the Arab nation! Long live democracy!” Clark later returned, after a 90 minute recess, to announce that unless the trial was “absolutely fair, and as absolutely fair in fact, it will irreconcilably divide the people of Iraq.”

Hussein and his defense have been stirring social division since the trial began. With his relentless interruption of the testimony and regular explosions of contempt for the court, Hussein has sought at once to reclaim his status as the rightful ruler of Iraq and stoke Sunni anger at the U.S. occupation. He was at it again Monday, when he declared that he was above Iraqi law. “This is a law made by America and does not reflect Iraqi sovereignty,” said Hussein. During another outburst, Hussein insisted that he was resisting on behalf of the Iraqi people. “I'm not doing [this] for myself, I'm doing it for Iraq. I'm not defending myself. But I am defending you.” Hussein struck the same theme on Tuesday, condemning the trial as “Made in America” and raging against the “Zionists.”

Far more worrisome than Saddam’s flights of furor is that his self-serving appeals have found an eager audience among Iraq’s Sunni population. Iraqi intelligence this week uncovered a plot by a Sunni terrorist group calling itself the “1920 Revolution Brigades” to launch rockets into the court building during Monday’s session. Last week, Iraqi police arrested eight Sunni Arabs from Hussein’s hometown of Tikrit, a hotbed of pro-Hussein sentiment, for plotting to assassinate the leading investigative judge, Raed al-Juhi. A similar attack against senior judge Midhat al-Mahmoudi was foiled when a suicide bomber failed to penetrate security posted outside her home. Some populist Sunni politicians have also taken to echoing Hussein’s declamations against “occupiers and invaders.” This Tuesday, for instance, Iraqi Vice-President Ghazi al-Yawar, a Sunni Muslim, railed against all forms of “foreign intervention.”

Even among supporters of U.S. military efforts in Iraq, the trial has sowed discontent. Not a few Shi’ites and Kurds, alienated by the glacial pace of the trial, have begun wondering when justice will be served.

Judge Amin has done little to allay their concerns. Faced with Hussein’s calculated efforts to undermine his court’s authority and incite violence against the American presence in Iraq, Amin has responded feeble pleas for calm and civility. What is worse, he has continuously acquiesced to the defense’s efforts to turn the trial into a referendum on the validity of the tribunal.

Fortunately, the deposed dictator has provided Amin with the perfect opportunity to reassert control of the runway trial. Attempting to show that he was unintimidated by the prospect of an execution, Hussein recently proclaimed, “This game must not continue, if you want Saddam Hussein's neck, you can have it!” Satisfying that demand with celerity would do more than strip Sunni malcontents of a powerful symbol of resistance; it would restore the credibility of the rule of law and shore up the legitimacy of the democratically elected government that Hussein and his defense team have done so much to erode.