Skip to content or view screen version

Legal Clarification Required

Jim | 07.04.2003 19:05

Request for legal clarification.

Having read through the Nuremberg Principles, The Hague Treaties and various other UN documents, it seems pretty clear to me that this war is a breach of international laws on many counts.
The nuremberg Principles state however that:
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principles VI is a crime under international law.

What action is required to be non complicit?
Is protesting enough or is direct action required?
Can someone be prosecuted as a result of any action against warcrimes?

Jim

Comments

Hide the following 4 comments

legalities

07.04.2003 22:24

one of the snags is that none of these documents form part of English [or Scots] law. Hence prosecution in the UK would not be possible.

sceptic

What about the ICC

07.04.2003 23:02

Could not a case be brought before the ICC. Even getting the ICC to consider such a case would be such a huge blow Blair would have to go!

Paul

more legalities

07.04.2003 23:52

Even under the UN Charter etc., it is not illegal to fight a war. It is accepted legally that civilian casualities happen in war. The only question then is whether the war is "legal" [International law is a tricky area. Who legislates for it? Does the UN Charter give it the right to pass "laws"?]

And Bush/Blair might argue that Iraq was a threat to world peace. Could links be shown to al Quaeda? Were there "weapons of mass destruction"? How are "weapons of mass destruction" defined?

I appreciate that I shall probably get flamed for this, and be told that the US/UK are themselves using WMD. But there's no point in giving me your opinion if you want a legal opinion.

sceptic

legality, nuremberg

08.04.2003 10:48

I believe the Nuremberg principles only apply to soldiers, not civilians.

hjk