Who's Online

We have 976 guests online

Popular

2521 readings
Crown Jury/Fitzgerald Indictment of Libby: Need for International Indictment of US Administration PDF Print E-mail
Justice News
Friday, 28 October 2005 06:07
Crown Jury/Fitzgerald Indictment of Libby: Need for International Indictment of US Administration
At least 25 international indictments against the US administration must be addressed

PEJ News - Joan Russow - Global Compliance Research Project - It is not just an issue of US national security but an issue of international security. There is a responsibility to the international community to address the serious violation of international law resulting from the lead up, the invasion and occupation of Iraq. If the belated Fitzgerald investigation goes no further than indicting Libby, serious international precedents will have been condoned.

The irreversible environmental, health, psychological, social, human and economic consequences of war, support the contention that under no circumstances, or conditions is war legal or just. It is not just an issue of US national security but an issue of international security.
There is a responsibility to the international community to address the serious violation of international law resulting from the lead up, the invasion and occupation of Iraq. If the belated Fitzgerald investigation goes no further than indicting Libby, serious international precedents will have been condoned.

(1) PROVOKING CONFLICT THROUGH BOMBING IN SELF DECLARED NO FLY ZONES IN IRAQ

(2) ADVANCING NOT PROHIBITING PROPAGANDA FOR WAR

Article 20 General comment on its implementation

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law. (International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights)

(3) ADOPTING POLICY OF PRE-EMPTIVE/ PREVENTIVE STRIKE IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.

the War against terrorism and the Anti-terrorism act, perpetuating the disregard for the rule of international law, and for the international Court of Justice. Serious consequences such as spurious redefinition of what constitutes self-defence, condoned pre-emptive aggression with prohibitive weapon systems, insidious rendering and violation of the Convention against Torture, and Geneva Conventions; institutionalize racial profiling, preventive arrests, and dubious certificates. have all resulted. from the War Against Terrorism or the Anti-terrorism Acts.

(4) ADVANCING NOT PROHIBITING PROPAGANDA FOR WAR

Article 20 General comment on its implementation

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law. (International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights)

The US planned for years to attack Iraq and declaring that there exists state is on the axis of evil

(5) ENGAGING IN TECHNIQUES OF INTIMIDATION AND CHEQUE BOOK DIPLOMACY

US attempted, by intimidating or offering economic incentives in exchange for support for military intervention, to undermine the international resolve to prevent the scourge of war (the US continually cajoles, intimidates, and bribes other members of the United Nations)

DISEGARDING THE ROLE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

The fundamental purpose of the Charter of the United Nations is to prevent the scourge of war. Chapter VI of the Charter, provides the means to prevent war, including the application of article 27-the requirement for parties to a conflict to abstain from the vote, and the opportunity under article 37 to refer potential situations of conflict to the International Court of Justice


CHAPTER VI: PACIFIC SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES

Article 33

The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.


The US continually ignores this Chapter


(6) MISCONSTRUING THE PROVISION OF SELF DEFENCE


Chapter VII, Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.


US in the case of Afghanistan perceived justice through revenge and military intervention, redefined what constitutes "self defence" and used the pretext of self defence to justify military intervention [Afghanistan]


ENGAGING IN THE THREAT OR USE OF FORCE AGAINST THE SOVEREIGNTY...


Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflict (Protocol 1) 1977 by the Diplomatic conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in Armed Conflicts


preamble

the High contracting parties

proclaiming their earnest wish to see peace prevail among peoples.

recalling that every state has the duty, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations, to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the Unite Nations,


US continually ignores this obligation



(7) ENGAGING IN THREATS OF ASSASSINATION OF LEADERS OF OTHER STATES


US has engaged in long standing practice of removing leaders; targeted and assisted in the assassination of leaders of other sovereign states, who interfered with national interests.


(8) SETTING UP, PROPING UP, FINANCING AND SUPPLYING ARMS TO MILITARY DICTATORS THAT FURTHERED FOREIGN VESTED NATIONAL INTERESTS



There does not appear to be any obligations or commitment condemning the propping up and financing prop up dictators

The US has continued the long standing activity with impunity,. In the 1970s there was enacted a statute in the US against this practice; however this act was repealed by President George W. Bush


(9) MAINTAINING OF MILITARY BASES IN OTHER SOVEREIGN STATES


The US maintains over 750 military bases in sovereign states around the world



(10) ENGAGING IN NOT REFRAINING FROM THE THREAT TO USE FORCE


Every state has the duty, in conformity with the Charter of the UN, to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the (Geneva Convention)


Adopted on 8 June 1977 by the diplomatic conference on the reaffirmation and development of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts



(11) MISRPRESENTING SITUATION AND DISREGARDING THE RIGHT TO CORRECTION

The purpose of the Charter of the United Nations is to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind [humanity]


The Convention on the Right to correction; 1952

The contracting States,

-Desiring to implement the right of their peoples to be fully and reliably informed

-Desiring to improve understanding between their peoples through the free flow of information and opinion

-Desiring thereby to protect mankind [Humanity] from the scourge of war, to prevent the recurrence of aggression from any source, and to combat all propaganda which is ether designed or likely to provoke or encourage any threat to peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression


US demonstrated disdain for the international rule of law, and for the obligation to prevent the recurrence of aggression, and to ensure that people are fully and reliably informed.. States misconstrued prevention of recurrence of aggression by adopting a policy of pre-emptive/preventive aggression. Engaged in an illegal act of invading a sovereign state in violation of the UN Charter and international law and has committed the 'supreme' international crime of the war of aggression


(12) INCONSISTENT DEMAND FOR THE ELIMINATING AND DESTROYING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION


Eliminating weapons of mass destruction

Man [Humans] and their environment must be spared the effects of nuclear weapons and all other means of mass destruction. States must strive to reach prompt agreement in the relevant international organs on the elimination and complete destruction of such weapons (UNCHE, 1972, Principle 26)


US proceeded to exclude nuclear weapons from the category of weapons of mass destruction; ignored commitment and continued to produce and subsidize industries that produce weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear, chemical, and biological, in defiance of the global commitment made at Stockholm in 1972 to eliminate the production of weapons of mass destruction. The US has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons and is engaging in designing new weapons using some nuclear technology. The US would not permit the IAEA to inspect their weapons of mass destruction, and the US refuses to address the threat in the middle east of Israel?s weapons of mass destruction .


(13) ENGAGING IN THREATS TO DESTRUCTION AND DESTRUCTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT FROM WEAPON SYSTEMS



Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of International armed Conflict (Protocol 1) 1977 by the Diplomatic conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in Armed Conflicts


1 In any armed conflict, the right of the Parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited.

2. It is prohibited to employ weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering

3 It is prohibited to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment

(Section 1, Article 35 Basic rules: Methods and means of warfare Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of International armed Conflict (Protocol 1) 1977 by the Diplomatic conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in Armed Conflicts


Article 54 protection of objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population


article 56 5. protection of the natural environment

1. care shall be taken in warfare or protect the natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage. This protection includes a prohibition of the use of methods or means of warfare which are indeed or may be expected to cause such damage to the natural environment and thereby to prejudice the health or survival of the population


2. attacks against that the natural environment by way of reprisals are prohibited.

article 56 protection of works and installations containing dangerous forces Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of International armed Conflict (Protocol 1) 1977 by the Diplomatic conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in Armed Conflicts


1. works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses the works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent severe losses among the civilian population article 86 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of International armed Conflict (Protocol 1) 1977 by the Diplomatic conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in Armed Conflicts


Securing nature against degradation caused by warfare or other hostile activities Nature shall be secured against degradation caused by warfare or other hostile activities (Art. 5 UN Resolution, 37/7, World Charter of Nature, 1982)


Avoiding military activities damaging to nature

Military activities damaging to nature shall be avoided (Art. 22, UN Resolution, 37/7, World Charter of Nature, 1982)


US has disregarded obligations and commitments



(14) DISCHARGING OF RADIOACTIVE OR TOXIC WASTES INTO NATURAL SYSTEMS


Taking precautions to prevent discharge of radioactive or toxic wastes into natural systems Special precautions shall be taken to prevent discharge [into natural systems] of radioactive or toxic wastes. (Art. 12 b UN Resolution, 37/7, World Charter of Nature, 1982)


US through using weapons containing depleted uranium has disregarded this commitment.


(15) DEPLOYING "NEW WEAPONS"

4. PRINCIPLE: PROVISIONS RELATED TO "NEW WEAPONS"


In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, or method of warfare, a high contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party ( Art 36 Protocol to the Geneva Convention)


Prohibitory rules

- dum-dum bullets (First Hague Peace conf)

-asphyxiating/poisonous /other gases (Geneva Protocol (1925)

-1972 Convention on biological &toxin weapons

-1993 Convention on chemical weapons

-1997 Ottawa Treaty: anti-personnel mines

-1980 Convention on conventional weapons with "excessively injurious indiscriminate effect

- protocol 1: non-detectable fragments (ban)

- prohibited mines, booby- traps (ban on use of mines designed to cause superfluous injury/ unnecessary suffering prohibited: regulating use of other devices

- protocol III incendiary weapons

- protocol IV blinding laser weapons


Prohibiting or restricting use of certain conventional weapons which may be deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects

Recalling with satisfaction the adoption, on 10 October 1980, of the

Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, together with the Protocol on Non-Detectable Fragments (Protocol I), the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II) and the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Protocol III) (United Nations Resolution, 38/71, 1993)


The US has disregarded the Geneva Protocol, and used weapons such as depleted uranium which would contravene the Protocol



(16) USING NOT PROHIBITING THE USE OF CERTAIN CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS


(i) Undertake to work actively towards ratification, if they have not already done so, of the 1981 Convention on Prohibitions or

Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects,

particularly the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II), with a view to

universal ratification by the year 2000;


The US has disregarded the Geneva Protocol, and used weapons such as depleted uranium which would contravene the Protocol


(17) CONTRIBUTING TO THE STARVATION OF CIVILIANS THROUGH INTENTIONALLY OR UNINTENTIONALLY ATTACKING OBJECTS INDISPENSABLE TO THE SURVIVAL OF CIVILIAN POPULATION


Starvation of civilians as a method of combat is prohibited. It is therefore prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless, for that purpose, objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, agricultural areas for the production of foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works. (Art. XIV Bern [Geneva] Protocol II of 1977 on the Protection of Victims of Non-international Armed Conflicts in force 1978)



The US has often even with so-called smart bombs destroyed key locations indispensable to the survival of the Civilian population., or has reclassified sites as being legitimate military targets.


(18) RELEASING FROM INFRASTRUCTION OF DANGEROUS FORCES [SUBSTANCES AND ACTIVITIES] THAT COULD IMPACT ON CIVILIANS


Undertaking to not make works or installations releasing dangerous forces [substances and activities] that could impact on civilians

Works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population. Other military objectives located at or in the vicinity of these works or installations shall not be made the object of attack if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces from the works or installations and consequent sever losses among the civilian population. (Art. LVI.1 Bern [Geneva] Protocol II of 1977 on the Protection of Victims of Non-international Armed Conflicts in Force 1978)


The US violated Geneva conventions on the treatment of civilians, and has violated both international human rights and humanitarian law during the occupations of both Iraq and Afghanistan


(19) VIOLATING OF THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE THROUGH CRUEL, INHUMANE OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT

2. NO EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER, WHETHER A STATE OF WAR OR A THREAT OF WAR, INTERNAL POLITICAL IN STABILITY OR ANY OTHER PUBLIC EMERGENCY, MAY BE INVOKED AS A JUSTIFICATION OF TORTURE.



Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984

entry into force 26 June 1987,


The States Parties to this Convention,


Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,


Recognizing that those rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person,


Considering the obligation of States under the Charter, in particular Article 55, to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms,


Having regard to article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,


Having regard also to the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1975,


Desiring to make more effective the struggle against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment throughout the world,

Have agreed as follows:

1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. (PART I , Article 1


2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

Article 2


1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.


2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.


The US has attempted to use "public emergency" to justify torture


(20) VIOLATING THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE THROUGH CRUEL, INHUMANE OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT: CONDEMNING THE PRACTICE OF RENDITION


Article 3 General comment on its implementation


1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.


2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.


The US, to obtain information, has caused citizens to be sent to states where they are in danger of torture; this activity has been classified as "rendering" and has been carried out in contravention to the Convention on Torture.



(21) PROFITING OF WAR BY CORPORATIONS


The US has increased the participation of "Privatized Military firms", and well as transnational corporations benefiting from access to natural resources. etc.



(22) DISREGARDING OF DUTY TO PROTECT CULTURAL Property


Preserving natural heritage for future generations

?     Considering that parts of the cultural or natural heritage are of outstanding interest and therefore need to be preserved as part of the world heritage of mankind [humankind] as a whole (Convention for the Protection of the World cultural and Natural Heritage, preamble, 1972).

?     Considering that in view of the magnitude and gravity of the new dangers threatening them, it is incumbent on the international community as a whole to participate in the protection of the cultural and natural heritage of outstanding universal value... (Preamble, Convention for the Protection of the World cultural and Natural Heritage, 1972)


Undertaking not to damage directly or indirectly any world heritage site

Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to take any deliberate measures which might damage directly or indirectly the...natural heritage ...situated on the territory of other States Parties to this Convention. (Art. VI.3 Convention of the Protection of Cultural and Natural Heritage of 1972, in force 1975)


Undertaking not to damage directly or indirectly any world heritage site

Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to take any deliberate measures which might damage directly or indirectly the...natural heritage ...situated on the territory of other States Parties to this Convention. (Art. VI.3 Convention of the Protection of Cultural and Natural Heritage of 1972, in force 1975)


US-led invasion and occupation of Iraq has disregarded the convention



(23) FAILING TO RESTITUTE CULTURAL PROPERTY TO COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENT;


Being aware of the importance attached by the countries of origin to cultural property

Aware of the importance attached by the countries of origin to the return

of cultural property which is of fundamental spiritual and cultural value to

them, so that they may constitute collections representative of their cultural heritage (General Assembly Resolution, Return or Restitution of Cultural Property to the Countries of Origin, 1983)


Ensuring restitution of cultural property in case of illicit appropriation to a country of its cultural property to country of origin

Preparing of inventories of movable cultural property

Organization and the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in Case of Illicit Appropriation on the work they have accomplished, in particular

through the promotion of bilateral negotiations, for the return or restitution

of cultural property, the preparation of inventories of movable cultural

property, the development of infrastructures for the protection of movable cultural property, the reduction of illicit traffic in cultural property and the dissemination of information to the public (General Assembly Resolution, Return or Restitution of Cultural Property to the Countries of Origin, 1983)


Ensuring Restitution to a country of its objets d'art...

Reaffirms that the restitution to a country of its objets d'art monuments, museum pieces, archives, manuscripts, documents and any other cultural or artistic treasures contributes to the strengthening of international co-operation and to the preservation and flowering of universal cultural values through fruitful co-operation between developed and developing countries (General Assembly Resolution, Return or Restitution of Cultural Property to the Countries of Origin, 1983)


The US has ignored the obligation of restitution


(24) CONDONING TRGETTING OF ACTIVISTS


The FBI has included the following in their designation of terrorists:


"... category of domestic terrorists, left-wing groups, generally profess a revolutionary socialist doctrine and view themselves as protectors of the people against the "dehumanizing effects" of capitalism and imperialism. They aim to bring about change in the United States through revolution rather than through the established political process."


designating citizens engaged in lawful advocacy, protest and dissent as threats


(25) DENYING RESTITUTION AND FULL COMPENSATION


Affirming the right to restitution and giving full restitution and compensation

The right of all States, territories and peoples under foreign occupation, alien and colonial domination or apartheid to restitution and full compensation for the exploitation and depletion of, and damages to, the natural resources and all other resources of those States, territories and peoples (4 f, Declaration of a New International Economic Order, 1974)


US has ignored the commitment, and instead have permitted their corporations to benefit


(26) etc.
Last Updated on Friday, 28 October 2005 06:07
 

Latest News