Where's the fairness?

Can someone explain this to me? Because I still don't get it.

Apparently it's really important that Saddam gets a fair trial in Baghdad. But at the same time there's no question of him walking free, is there?

So exactly how can it be free if the judgement is already predetermined?

It reminds me of Przeworski's description of democracy: certain rule which all actors abide by with an uncertain outcome. Anything other than that can't be democratic. Surely the same can be applied to judicial proceedings?