THE new judge in Saddam Hussein’s trial used his first day in court yesterday to try to stamp out the chaotic scenes of political grandstanding and petty squabbling that forced his predecessor to quit.

But in less than 30 minutes Judge Raouf Abdul Rahman was presiding over a half-empty court after the former dictator had stalked out after a shouting match, and Saddam’s cancer-stricken half-brother had been dragged off by security guards.

With Western human rights groups saying that the entire process was at risk, the latest courtroom drama ruined American hopes of a swift, smooth trial that could ease soaring sectarian tensions and stanch the Sunni-led insurgency.

It has instead been plagued by killings, delays and tirades from the defendants. Yesterday’s session was only the eighth since the trial opened on October 19, and many Iraqis now view the proceedings with contempt.

“It’s a farce,” said Mahmoud Ahmed, 24, a Sunni art student. “The judge wanted to prove that he was in charge but he failed completely. Right now, I want Saddam to return to power. Before, I didn’t like him, but seeing all this chaos about us, I want him back.”

The session started promisingly enough when the new chief judge — the third in as many weeks — cautioned that he would tolerate no more political speeches. Minutes later Barzan al-Tikriti, Saddam’s half-brother and former intelligence chief, called the tribunal “a daughter of a whore” and complained that he was being left to die of cancer.

Mr Rahman, a 64-year-old Kurd, ordered his bailiffs to drag Mr al-Tikriti from the room. A defence lawyer complained, prompting his swift expulsion too. The entire defence then staged a walkout.

At that point the deposed tyrant rose for his own showdown with Mr Rahman, a well-known disciplinarian from the Kurdish village of Halabja, which Saddam’s troops had attacked with chemical weapons in 1988. The 5,000 victims included relatives of the judge.

Saddam, his voice cracking with anger, rejected the court-appointed defence lawyers as evil, sparking a furious debate with the chief judge, who declared: “We will not allow you to cross the line with anyone.”

Saddam insisted that his 35-year rule, during which he is believed to have overseen the murder of 300,000 people, had given him a full understanding of the law. “Don’t force me! This is my right,” he barked, gathering his papers and a Koran. “Allow me to leave. I cannot tolerate remaining here, at least for this session, until things are resolved properly.”

The judge then took the initiative and ordered Saddam’s ejection. An indignant Saddam insisted it was he who was leaving in protest. “Don’t say ‘eject’,” he shouted, in a return to the fiery form that wore down the original chief judge, Rizgar Amin. “An Iraqi respects his elders. For 35 years I led you, and you say, ‘Eject him’?”

After Saddam had departed with two co-defendants, the judge ordered the trial to continue, although only four of the eight accused were still in court. Under Iraqi law, the defendant does not have to be present during his own trial.

Speaking behind curtains, two women and one man described the arrests of scores of men in 1982, after a failed assassination attempt on Saddam by Shia militants led to the killing of 143 Dujail villagers.

Times Recommends

• It’s only Brits who don’t appreciate me, says Blair
• Party’s over for Greek graspers
• White House tightens security for Xmas marathon