Just ... in time

"(Saddam Hussein) was given justice. The thousands of people he killed were not."\nGeorge W. Bush's comments echo the sentiments of many Americans -- that a tyrant and murderer was brought to "justice" on Dec. 30 as he dangled from the end of a rope for the world to see.\nBut I'm not sure that's justice. Vengeful retribution? Yes. Officially sanctioned murder? Yes. Barbarism? I think so.\nJustice? The jury's still out.\nMerriam-Webster defines justice as "the quality of being just, impartial or fair; the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action." Well, impartiality is already out the door based on the celebratory smugness with which many greeted the news of Saddam's death. And right action? Well, we killed a man in large part because he killed others. The eye-for-an-eye logic of the death penalty may seem "fair," but is it ethical and moral action -- or hypocritical?\nSo what makes the execution just? The fact that Saddam appeared in court before a judge and jury? Certainly that can't be the universal measure of what counts for justice. I don't remember many (white) Americans who thought justice was served when a jury acquitted O. J. Simpson, or many Republicans who thought Clinton was given justice when he remained in office after his impeachment trial.\nIs it just because it is retributive -- we gave him what he was due? And then is it always "just" to do "good" for our friends and harm our enemies? Not if we have the sense to understand that there are multiple perspectives to every issue and that justice and injustice are often two sides of the same coin. For example, we're happy to "repay" Afghanistan with bombs to bring them "justice" for harboring terrorists. But start suggesting we pay reparations to black Americans for slavery and many people see nothing just about it.\nOr consider this: There is a blurry line between the "justice" of two atomic bombs dropped on Japan and the "injustice" of two planes flown into the World Trade Center.\nIn my mind, the concept of justice ought to be linked to human liberation and freedom from oppression, but instead we often allow it to validate an oppressive status quo, to reproduce the very wrongdoing we try to correct, to rationalize the denial of humanity. The version of "justice" that authorizes Saddam's execution leads right back to injustice and ethical transgressions. I hear no justice in saying we're "better off" with Saddam dead. I see only the seeds of the same disregard for human life for which he was on trial.\nCan justice be a progressive and transformational tool that makes the world more humane? In time, I think so. But at a minimum that requires a radical belief that justice is never served through dehumanization, through devaluation of human life -- no matter how much we abhor one's actions.