accounting for genocide

8/10/2019 Accounting for Genocide

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accounting-for-genocide 1/32

Accounting forGenocide

Holding Britain‟s Leaders to account for the warswith Afghanistan and Iraq and 3.5 million

casualties.

Make Wars History



2

2

“But as elected Members of Parliament, we all know

that we will be judged not only on our intentions, but onthe results, the consequences of our decisions… Yes ofcourse there will be consequences if the Houseapproves the Government’s motion. Our forces willalmost certainly be involved in military action. Somemay be killed; so too, will innocent Iraqi civilians... Iurge the House to vote with the Government tonight.”

Jack Straw 18

th

March 2003

“War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are notconfined to the belligerent states alone, but affect thewhole world. To initiate a war of aggression therefore, isnot only an international crime, it is the supremeinternational crime differing only from other war crimes inthat it contains within itself the accumulated evil of thewhole.”

Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal 1946



3

3

Holding Britain‟s leaders to account for the wars with Afghanistan and Iraq and 3.5 million civilian casualties.

Aim

The results of Parliament‟s unlawful decisions to wage war with Iraq and Afghanistanare now abundantly clear and the time has arrived for all those responsible forwaging illegal wars of aggression to answer in court for their crimes.

The Crimes

In the six years since Parliament authorised the war with Iraq MPs have caused theviolent deaths of 1 million people, including 300,000 children; they have maimed andinjured 2.5 million and have driven 4 million into exile and destitution. None of thevictims had done anything to harm Britain or the USA, was given an opportunity toplead for their life in court or was shown any mercy before they were violentlymaimed, injured or killed in the worst massacres of modern times.

Parliament‟s choice to turn down the peaceful non-violent options and to chooseinstead to continue its‟ illegal use of modern high explosive weapons such as cruisemissiles, rockets, cluster bombs and depleted uranium munitions against villages,towns and cities in Afghanistan and Iraq has caused an average daily death toll of450 civilians of whom 150 are children.

The decision to use indiscriminate high explosive weaponry ensures that innocentmen, women and children suffer horrendously. The range of causes of deathoccurring throughout these wars includes decapitation, dismemberment,disembowelling, crushing, burning, bleeding to death, as well as the lingering painfuldeaths caused by cancer and the lack of medicines or treatment.

These massacres are the worst atrocities in UK or US history. Not only are theyillegal, breaching all of the laws of war, but they constitute the criminal offences ofgenocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes against peace. The warsand killings must be stopped now and the political, civil and military leadersresponsible for them must be arrested, prosecuted and tried for their crimes.



4

4

Who is responsible ?

In a democracy the supreme sovereign body responsible for governing the nation isits Parliament or Congress. In Britain, Europe‟s least democratic state, Parliamentshares responsibility for government with the monarch, and thus every member of

both Houses of Parliament together with the Queen are individually and collectivelyaccountable in law for the consequences of government decisions.

Britain‟s political, civil and military leaders must be made to answer for theconsequences of their unlawful decisions to wage war, and in particular for the 3.5million innocent people injured and killed as a direct consequence of their decision toattack the people of Afghanistan and Iraq. When Parliament made the unlawfuldecision to use armed force it ignored the binding terms of The International Treatyfor the Renunciation of War and the UN Charter which both require states to settle alldisputes peacefully. Britain cannot allow its political, civil and military leaders toignore and breach the binding terms of the world‟s most important treaties.

Each of our leaders could at any time during the last seven years have brought thesewars and the killings to an end. Instead, they chose to support this heinousGovernment policy, and as a result they condemned 300,000 children to a violentand painful death and 700,000 to a life of misery burdened with debilitating injuries,the loss of family and friends and the destruction of their country.

Rather than work assiduously to stop the crimes, halt the killings and obey, upholdand enforce the law, as is their public duty, the Queen and 1400 members of bothHouses of Parliament chose instead to support and endorse the policy of waging twoillegal wars of aggression. By condoning the use of armed force and indiscriminate

weapons of mass destruction against Afghanistan and Iraq knowing that innocentmen, women and children would be injured and killed, every sitting member of bothHouses of Parliament committed crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, warcrimes and crimes against peace under the domestic and international laws of war.

For seven years while the daily indiscriminate killing of civilians has continued apaceneither the Queen nor any Member of either House of Parliament has taken a singleeffective action to halt or reverse the orders to HM armed forces. This horrific abuseof their legally binding duties must be punished. Concerted international action mustbe taken now to arrest and prosecute Britain‟s political, civil and military leaders fortheir heinous abuses of the rule of law.

“In the opinion of the Tribunal, those who wage aggressive war are doing thatwhich is equally illegal, and of much greater moment than a breach of one ofthe rules of the Hague Convention… Crimes against international law arecommitted by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individualswho commit such crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced.”




5

5

Who is accountable in law for the actions of Parliament ?

“It is not what we say or feel that makes us what we are; it is what we do or failto do.”

Although thirty to forty MPs have regularly spoken out against the war and 149 MPsvoted against the war with Iraq in March 2003, actions for which they are to becommended, not one of them has resigned their seat, returned their salary, reportedthe war crimes and war criminals to police, refused to pay tax, informed the media ortheir constituents of the illegal nature of the wars, urged the armed forces to do theirlawful duty to disobey manifestly unlawful orders, or has encouraged the public to

join a lawful rebellion. This abject failure to act1 to prevent the worst crimes knownto law makes every sitting MP and Peer complicit in the crimes. In law, a person‟swords are not enough on their own to disprove a criminal offence; it is a person‟sdeeds or failures to act that count in court. By failing to act to prevent the killings,halt the wars or hold Government Ministers to account for their actions, sittingmembers of both Houses of Parliament

2 and the Queen as Head of State committed

the same crime that Germany‟s leaders committed when they condoned Adolf Hitler‟spolicies to attack and occupy 11 independent nation states during WWII.

MPs‟ and Peers‟ individual and collective responsibility

On accession to their positions in public life the Queen3 and every sitting member ofboth Houses of Parliament took an oath to govern according to law. By taking uppositions in public life and by accepting money from the public purse they confirmedtheir part in the decisions of Parliament and the government of Britain. Just as every

member of the Cabinet is individually and collectively responsible for the decisions ofCabinet and accountable for the consequences of those decisions, every member ofa board of directors is individually and collectively responsible for the decisions of theboard and is accountable for the consequences, and every employee of agovernment department is jointly responsible for the actions of their department andaccountable in law for the consequences, so too are members of Parliamentindividually and collectively responsible for the actions of Government andaccountable to a court for the consequences of their decisions.

“ It was submitted [by the defendants] that international law is concerned withthe action of sovereign states, and provides no punishment for individuals; andfurther, that where the act in question is an act of state, those who carry it outare not personally responsible, but are protected by the doctrine of thesovereignty of the State. In the opinion of the Tribunal, both thesesubmissions must be rejected. That international law imposes duties andliabilities upon individuals as well as upon States has long been recognised…”

1 Which in law is treated as an act of omission 2 This excludes Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness who, although elected to Parliament, have always refused

to take the oath of loyalty to the Crown and have therefore been barred from taking their seats.3 The Coronation oath.



6

6

“ The very essence of the [London] Charter is that individuals have internationalduties which transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by theindividual State. He who violates the laws of war cannot obtain immunitywhile acting in pursuance of the authority of the State, if the State inauthorising action moves outside its competence under international law…”

“ That a soldier was ordered to kill or torture in violation of the international lawof war has never been recognised as a defence to such acts of brutality,though, as the Charter here provides, the order may be urged in mitigation ofthe punishment. The true test, which is found in varying degrees in thecriminal law of most nations, is not the existence of the order, but whethermoral choice w as in fact possible…”

Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal Judgement

Crime by association

“Whosoever shall aid, abet, counsel, or procure the commission of anyindictable offence, whether the same be an offence at common law or by virtueof any Act passed or to be passed, shall be liable to be tried, indicted and

punished as a principal offender.”The Accessories and Abettors Act 1861

If a representative disagrees with the decisions or actions of the Parliament orCongress of which they are a part, he or she must resign4 from their office or acceptthe consequences of the decision not to resign. In law, by making the moral choice

to stay in Parliament and accept reimbursement from the public purse for carrying outtheir public duties, MPs participate in the decisions of Parliament‟ and are liable forthe consequences of those decisions. Parliament is the supreme governing body inBritain, and as such sitting members are individually and jointly responsible andaccountable in law for the actions of the Government of the day. In this case everyMP and Peer has freely chosen to stay in Parliament and has chosen to accept theresponsibilities of office. In law, each MP and Peer is criminally liable for all the warcrimes committed by HM armed forces, and the forces of Britain‟s Coalition partners during their period of office. For example, every MP and Peer in Parliament at thetime of the United States‟ forces attack on Fallujah is individually and collectivelyresponsible for the injuries, deaths and crimes committed during that attack, and as

such can be prosecuted as an accessory to the crimes under the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861.

4 As did Robin Cook, John Denham, Elizabeth Wilmshurst and others when they resigned from their official

positions in 2003 in protest at the Government‟s decision to wage war with Iraq.



7

7

MPs and Peers committed genocide

It is quite clear from evidence in the public domain that the former and current PrimeMinister, the former and Current Attorney General, members of the Cabinet,Members of both Houses of Parliament, civil servants, military commanders, lawofficers, advisors, journalists and taxpayers have violated the domestic and

international laws of war and committed genocide against the people of Iraq and Afghanistan:

A summary of the facts

In early 2002 at a meeting in Washington the former Prime Minister of Great Britain[Tony Blair] in response to a request by the former President of the United States of

America [George W. Bush] decided to form a Coalition with the United States tomount a full scale armed invasion and occupation of the State of Iraq with theunlawful stated intentions of removing the regime of Saddam Hussein and destroyingIraq‟s Weapons of Mass Destruction5. Subsequently the Prime Minister andmembers of HM Government gave unlawful orders to HM armed forces to deploy tothe Middle East in readiness for the armed attack on Iraq. In a vote in Parliament onMarch 18th 2003 412 MPs voted in favour of war knowing that the armed attacks byCoalition forces using high-explosive weapons would result in the death and injury ofIraqi citizens. The invasion and occupation of Iraq by Coalition armed forces hascaused injury and death to 3,000,000 Iraqi citizens.

Multiple war crimes committed against the people of Iraq

We contend that by order of Parliament HM Armed Forces joined a Coalition ofStates and took part in the illegal armed invasion and occupation of Iraq in whichthey used indiscriminate high explosive weapons such as cruise missiles, rockets,cluster bombs, mortars and depleted uranium artillery shells in thousands of separateattacks against villages, towns and cities in Iraq killing tens of thousands of Iraqimen, women and children. By setting out to destroy and subsequently killingthousands of Iraqi citizens Ministers of State, Members of Parliament and otherscommitted crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, conductancillary to such crimes, a crime against peace, complicity in a crime against peace,murder, conspiracy to murder and incitement to murder which are criminal offencesunder sections 51 and 52 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001, Article 25 ofthe Rome Statute, Articles VI and VII of the Nuremburg Principles, the Offences

Against the Person Act 1861, the Criminal Law Act 1977, the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861, the Landmines Act 1988, the Chemical and Biological Weapons Acts the Geneva Conventions and other international and domestic statutes, as wellas constituting crimes in common law and customary international law.

5 Evidence of these crimes is contained in the Secret Downing St Memo of July 2002, the Secret Legal Advice

from the Attorney General to the Prime Minister of March 7th 2003 as well as Cabinet Office Papers and Cabinet

Minutes.



8

8

The domestic law against genocide

In England, Wales and Northern Ireland the domestic law against genocide iscontained in the International Criminal Court Act 2001

6,

It is an offence against the law of England and Wales for a person to commitgenocide, a crime against humanity or a war crime, or to engage in conductancillary to such an act. This applies to acts committed in England or Wales oroutside the UK by a UK national, resident or person subject to UK service

jurisdiction7 .

For the purpose of this Statute, “genocide” means any of the following actscommitted with intent to destroy, in whole or in part a national, ethnic, racial orreligious group, as such (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing seriousbodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the

group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in wholeor in part…”

The international law against genocide

The Genocide Convention which was signed in 1948 has been ratified by most majornations including Israel [1951] and the USA [1988]. In 1998 this was superseded bythe Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court which added crimes againsthumanity and war crimes to the universal offence of genocide and simultaneously setup a law enforcement authority in The Hague.

Rome Statute - Artic le 25 - Individ ual crim inal respons ibi l i ty

3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible andliable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that

person:

(a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another orthrough another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminallyresponsible;

(b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact

occurs or is attempted;

(c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets orotherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including

providing the means for its commission;

6 In Scotland the genocide legislation is contained in the International Criminal Court [Scotland] Act 2001. 7 This is a summary; for the full definition see Sections 50 – 80 the International Criminal Court Act 2001



9

9

(d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission ofsuch a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Suchcontribution shall be intentional and shall either:

(i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the

commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or

(ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit thecrime;

(e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others tocommit genocide;

(f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences itsexecution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occurbecause of circumstances independent of the person's intentions. However,

a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise preventsthe completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under thisStatute for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely andvoluntarily gave up the criminal purpose.

When has a crime of genocide taken place ?

Genocide, a particularly horrific type of mass murder, takes place whenever agovernment or ruling group develops and implements a policy to destroy members ofa national, ethnic, racial or religious group. In law, waging aggressive war and killing

people because of their nationality constitutes an act of genocide.

It is clear that genocide occurred in both Afghanistan and Iraq because the victimswere killed by Coalition forces for the sole reason that they were members of theIraqi and Afghan national groups. Prior to the attacks, the victims lived peacefully invillages, towns and cities doing nothing to warrant a fatal attack. To attack them onat least 100,000 separate occasions using modern sophisticated high-explosiveweapons is a deliberate act of genocide as well as crimes against humanity.

Under international law the ONLY people using armed force lawfully in Iraq and Afghanistan are the Iraqi and Afghan citizens fighting to defend their country from

invasion and occupation. Every other person associated in any way with theconflicts is acting unlawfully, and if the killings satisfy the other elements of the crime[specified below] then the perpetrator and their associates are guilty of genocide andcan be charged under the law of England and Wales with a crime of „genocide‟ or„conduct ancillary to genocide‟ under sections 51 and 52 of the International CriminalCourt Act 2001.



10

10

Describing the victims as „enemy‟, „terrorists‟, „insurgents‟, „rebels‟ „militants‟ or„infidels‟ is a propaganda ploy used by political leaders, journalists and the media tocover the fact that innocent people are being killed because of their nationality orbecause they own the rights to large quantities of oil. It makes no difference in courtto plead that the victim was an enemy combatant. If they were killed because oftheir nationality, race, religion or ethnicity then a crime of genocide has taken place.

What elements distinguish genocide from mass murder

The legislation specifies four elements of the crime8 that must be in place before acourt can convict a person for the crime of „genocide by killing‟. They are:-

1. The perpetrator killed [4] one or more persons.2. Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnic, racial or

religious group.3. The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national,

ethnic, racial or religious group, as such.4. The conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar

conduct directed against that group or was conduct that could itself effectsuch destruction.

Notes [4] The term killed is interchangeable with the term “caused death”

Evidence that the attacks on Iraq constitute genocide

For a factual and moving description of the crimes and the consequences of theillegal invasion and occupation of Iraq please read the speech given by Dr Omar Al-Kubaisy to the European Parliament on March 18

th 2009. [Appendix I]

(1) The perpetrator killed [caused the deaths of] one or more persons

Through the use of weapons such as cruise missiles, rockets, cluster bombs,mortars, machine guns, rifles, hand grenades and depleted uranium artillery shellsagainst targets in Iraq, Coalition armed forces under the orders of their political andmilitary commanders killed at least 100,000 Iraqi citizens. In addition, for every deathcaused by the direct actions of Coalition forces, a further 5 deaths were causedindirectly by factors linked to the invasion and occupation. These include such

factors as deaths from:-

unexploded cluster bombs and munitions exploding when they are touchedaccidentally by children playing or farmers tending their crops;

8 The definition of genocide by killing is defined in The International Criminal Court Act 2001 (Elements of Crimes)

Regulations introduced on the 4th May 2004 by Jack Straw the Foreign Affairs Minister.



11

11

cancers and associated illnesses caused by the clouds of radio active dustparticles, metals and destroyed Iraqi tanks resulting from depleted uraniummunitions used by Coalition forces and spread across large parts of Iraq;

infighting between Sunni, Shia and Kurdish groups caused by the illegaldismantling of the Iraqi army, police and law enforcement authorities;

untreated illnesses and injuries caused by the destruction of hospitals and

medical facilities, shortages of essential medicines, equipment and doctors; suicide bombers attacking opposition groups and Coalition forces;

retribution, murders and deaths in custody caused by Coalition forces andprivate security forces operating outside the law;

the destruction of essential water and power supplies causing pollution, water-born diseases and malnutrition causing further avoidable deaths;

Whatever the final number of proven deaths, they will exceed 100,000 and will meetthe first criterion – the perpetrators killed one or more persons.

(2) Such person or persons belonged to a particular national, ethnic, racial

or religious group.

The vast majority of the victims are civilian residents. The sole reason for targetingand killing these men, women and children is that they were Iraqis living in Iraq. IraqBody Count has gathered and kept detailed records and a tally of certificated deathsof Iraqi civilians caused by military or para-military action since the war began in2003. Although incomplete, these records are the best available and they identify byname, gender, location and date a total of 100,000 violent deaths caused by theCoalition invasion and occupation of Iraq. This should be enough to prove thesecond criterion, such persons belonged to a particular national group.

(3) The perpetrator intended to destroy, in whole or in part, that national,ethnic, racial or religious group, as such.

This is the criterion for genocide that is often considered the most difficult to prove.To obtain a conviction for genocide a court must be presented with evidence that theperpetrator intended to kill his or her victims and it wasn‟t accidental.

Establishing intent

A person‟s intent can be interpreted from an examination of their actions; by watchingwhat they do, rather than accepting what they say. By comparing and contrasting

their chosen course of action with other viable alternative options which they rejectedone can establish a person‟s „intent‟.



12

12

Proof of intent

The legal definition of intent is defined in the legislation as:-

(a) a person has intent (i) in relation to conduct, where he means to engage inthe conduct, and (ii) in relation to a consequence, where he means to cause the

consequence or is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events; and(b) “knowledge” means awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequencewill occur in the ordinary course of events.

That Britain‟s Ministers and MPs set out with the intention of destroying part of anational group can be established from six separate evidential sources:-

(a) the perpetrators‟ published oral and written statements,(b) the perpetrators‟ choice of conduct [course of action],(c) the perpetrators‟ repetition of conduct after consequences are known,(d) the perpetrators‟ rejection of all non-violent options and alternatives,

(e) the perpetrators‟ prior knowledge of the consequences of their decisions, (f) the perpetrators‟ prior knowledge of the law and crimes of war.

(a) Published statements

The former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, made numerous public assertions about thewar with Iraq that indicate his state of mind and his intentions; “it was the right thingto do”, “I had to make a hard decision”, “there will be casualties”. These and otherstatements made in TV and radio interviews as well as statements in Cabinet and inNo 10 made prior to and during the conflict confirm that he knew that his chosen

course of action (the use of armed force) would cause the death of Iraqis.

Perhaps the most telling statement is one that Blair made to members of the ArmedForces at the Basra airbase shortly before his resignation during his „farewell‟ tour ofIraq; as reported by Martin Amis in the Guardian of 2nd June 2007 and repeated byMartin Bell in his book The Truth That Sticks.

“So we are killing more of them than they kill us…… You’re getting back outthere after them. It’s brilliant actually.”

This statement shows clearly that Tony Blair was intent on killing Iraqi citizens. It is

almost as if he was treating the war, the killings and the suffering of innocent men,women and children as if it was a political game. This has to be one of the mosthorrific statements ever made by a British Prime Minister, and the fact that it wasaccepted without comment or action by every Cabinet member, every member ofboth Houses of Parliament, the Bishops, the Queen, military commanders and themedia is an appalling indictment of the poor quality of leadership in Britain.

Further evidence that members of the Cabinet „intended‟ that their decision wouldresult in the deaths of innocent Iraqi civilians is contained in the speech by Jack



14

14

(c) the perpetrators’ repetition of conduct once consequences were known.

Even four years after the war started and after hundreds of thousands of totallyinnocent Iraqis had been killed and injured Tony Blair was urging the troops tocontinue the killing. If a person‟s actions lead to the death of an individual and theperpetrator then halts his or her activities on the grounds that the deaths were

accidental and unintentional the perpetrator goes some way to proving that the initialdeath or deaths were not „intended‟. If however the perpetrators, knowing perfectlywell that more innocent people will be killed, repeat the course of action and kill morepeople they demonstrate their „intent to kill‟. Because MPs and Peers were aware ofthe mortal consequences [deaths and injuries to men women and children] of theirdecision to wage war and because they have failed for six years to withdraw orreverse Parliament‟s orders, they have proved conclusively that they were acting withintent to kill; and as their „intent to kill‟ was focussed on Afghans and Iraqis this will betaken by a court and a jury as proof positive of „intent to commit genocide‟.

(d) the perpetrators rejection of non-violent options and alternatives

When a person is faced with a number of alternative courses of action and thendeliberately chooses to pursue the only option leading to death and destruction overthe numerous options leading to life, negotiation and assistance, their free choice ofthe sole course of action resulting in death proves their „intent to kill‟. If they hadchosen the path of peaceful negotiation their choice would have proved their „intentto negotiate‟ and their „intent to act peacefully‟. Just as with the bombings in London,Birmingham and Omagh, where the IRA attacked targets in Britain knowing thatBritish citizens would be killed and injured, so British Ministers of State and MPsordered armed attacks on villages, towns and cities in Iraq and Afghanistan usinghigh explosive lethal weapons in the certain knowledge that thousands of members

of the Iraqi and Afghan national groups would be killed and injured. This deliberatechoice by MPs of the sole course of action that would result in the deaths of innocentmembers of a national group, proves „intent to kill‟ and „intent to commit genocide‟.

(e) the perpetrators prior knowledge of the consequences of their decisions.

A person only chooses to use a cruise missile if they intend to kill people in thevicinity of the explosion; a person only chooses to use cluster bombs [anindiscriminate weapon containing up to 256 bomblets] if they intend to kill largenumbers of men, women and children within three kilometres of the target; if aperson chooses to use depleted uranium tipped artillery shells with a half life of four

thousand years knowing that it will cause birth defects, cancers, deformities andmiscarriages it demonstrates their intention to “cause serious bodily or mental harmto members of the group. Any person, who makes the deliberate choice to useweapons of this nature in the knowledge that such weapons by their nature anddesign will kill indiscriminately, intends to kill large numbers of people. If Ministersand other offenders had wanted to forcefully disarm or temporarily disable Iraqinationals they could have ordered the use of tear gas or tazers or other non fataloptions. Their choice of indiscriminate high explosive weapons demonstrates their„intent‟ to destroy part of the Iraqi national group; their „intent to commit genocide‟.



16

16

Irrelevance of official position as a Member of Parliament

The Rome Statute clearly states that the law against genocide applies to everyoneregardless of their official position or role in society.

Artic le 27 - Irrelevance of off ic ial capacity

1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction basedon official capacity. In particular, official capacity as a Head of State orGovernment, a member of a Government or parliament, an electedrepresentative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person fromcriminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute aground for reduction of sentence.

2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the officialcapacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not barthe Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person.

MPs committed crimes of genocide and conduct ancillary to genocide

We assert that by making public and private statements in support of the war withIraq, by voting in Parliament in favour of armed action, by condoning the actions ofthe Prime Minister, by paying tax, by taking part in debates, by agreeing toGovernment policies, by supporting and condoning orders to HM Armed Forces toconduct armed attacks against Iraq and by providing assistance with the invasionand occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan in the certain knowledge that men, womenand children would be killed, the Queen, members of HM Government, Members of

both Houses of Parliament, civil servants, armed forces commanders and others didaid, abet, counsel and procure the commission of genocide against the Iraqi and

Afghan people and as accessories to genocide are liable to be tried, indicted andpunished as principal offenders for crimes under sections 51 and 52 of theInternational Criminal Court Act 2001 and Article 25 of the Rome Statute of theInternational Criminal Court.

What will you do to end the killing?

The main reason why Britain continues to take a leading part in these unlawful warsand heinous crimes is that none of our leaders and no more than a dozen membersof the public have taken practical steps to disassociate themselves from the crimes.Under the laws of war, anyone who takes part as a principal or an accessory togenocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes commits a crime and is liable topunishment. However under Article 25.3(f) of the Rome Statute it is possible toavoid prosecution IF a person demonstrates to the court that he or she hasabandoned their support for the crime, given up the criminal purpose and is doing allthey can to prevent the completion of the crimes.



17

17

What you can do to end the killing.

1. Report war crimes to Police. Take this report to your local police informingthem that Britain‟s leaders, including your MP, are breaching the laws of warand ask them to carry out their duty in law to investigate the crimes, arrestlocal offenders and together with the Crown Prosecution Service prosecutethem for violations of the laws of war. The police, if they are willing to do whatthey are paid to do9, will establish whether or not your local MP is amongstthose who have taken action to end the killing, have renounced their supportfor the war and are doing all they can to end it.

2. Join the tax rebellion. As it is a criminal offence to aid, abet or assist an actof genocide, it is a crime to pay tax to a government that is killing peoplebecause of their nationality, ethnicity, race or religion. This means thatanyone who has paid tax to British, American or Coalition Governments sincethey commenced their attacks on the Afghan and Iraqi people is an accessoryto the crimes and is criminally liable as an accessory to genocide and crimesagainst humanity. If you wish to end your personal complicity in this crime youmust stop paying tax immediately, inform your local tax collector

10 and MP that

you are doing so and let them know that you will withhold all tax paymentsuntil the war crimes have ceased and the troops have been brought home.

3. Contact your MP. Give him or her a copy of this report and point out thatthey are violating the laws of war. Ask them what they have done in responseto our letter of March 20th to end the killings [see Appendix 2]. If they havedone nothing then ask them why not? If by the time you speak to them theyhave not tabled or signed an EDM

11 ending the war, ask them why they

haven‟t and if they cannot come up with a good reason tell them that you willreport them to the police for their violations of war law. You could also remindthem that they are working for you not for Gordon Brown, David Cameron,Nick Clegg or any political party, and unless they take every action in theirpower immediately to end the killing you will never vote for them or theirpolitical party again and you will do all in your power to ensure that theyanswer for their crimes in court.

Chris Coverdale - Make Wars History - March 2009

9 We currently have a major problem in Britain with all our Chief Constables and Crown Prosecutors repeatedly

refusing to carry out their public duties to arrest and prosecute Britain‟s leading war criminals. 10

Employees on PAYE must ask their employer to withhold individual and corporate tax payments.11

Early Day Motion.



18

18

Appendix I

The Honourable Ms. Luisa Morgantine,

Vice-President;

European Parliament

Members of the European ParliamentLadies and Gentlemen,

Allow me to thank you very much, as well as our colleagues who have given us thisopportunity to have the honour in meeting with you and speaking to you to convey to you aclear and honest picture of the health situation as well as the dire humanitarian situationexperienced by the afflicted people of Iraq. It is an excruciatingly tragic and unbearablesituation which cries out to all the liberals of the world and to all those interested in the livesof people in this vast universe, to get seriously and effectively involved, to proclaim the wordof truth and to standup and work to save mankind, to provide and preserve the minimum ofthe simplest and most basic rights for a happy and dignified life, freedom, secure habitat andprosperous employment in a state of mental and physical energy without suffering and pain,hardship and discrimination, especially when this person lives in a land and country like Iraq,to which God has given such great natural wealth of water, oil, precious metals, and a richsoil all of which guarantee achieving a decent living.

I come from Mesopotamia, (The Land Between The Two Rivers), very ancient and hasalways been called "the black land" because of its prosperity, its crowded population and itsabundance of good living conditions; because of its people's ancient civilization and itscontributions to human civilization: the first letter and alphabet, the pen, and law, thousandsof years ago, as you have read in ancient history.

Iraq, ladies and gentlemen, with its wealth and its generosity, attracted many peoples andethnicities over the ages, as a result of which the aforesaid elements have made up a mosaicof the people. It has been inhabited by peoples of numerous different nationalities, ethnicitiesand religions in security and peace, as well as in compatibility, harmony and stability in spiteof the fact that it has experienced numerous foreign waves of invasions, and large attemptedinvasions, desirous of its great wealth and its geopolitical strategic position over the ages.Iraq has come out of these experiences after fighting to the death and defending its land andterritory to emerge victorious, united and unified.

I, an experienced doctor and cardiac specialist, who is experienced in the treatment of heartdisease and who has served in his specialty in The State of Iraq for the past 4decades, stand in your presence and addresses you. I have lived with and through the ruleof several successive governments and political regimes which you know. I haven't anyparticular party or political fealty and affiliation. My people as well as my students and mycolleagues in Iraq bare witness to my service in the medical, health and military and civilianmedical services fields, professionally as well as academically. I specialized and trained inEuropean hospitals in England, Italy, Ireland, France and here in Belgium, specializing inheart disease during the critical periods of the long war and the chocking embargo. Itransferred the most up to date technical skills and research you had achieved in the cardiac



19

19

field in order to benefit Iraq's patients as well as its doctors at a time when Iraqis sufferedfrom the scourge of a technical, scientific and economic embargo which lasted for 13 years; Ialso witnessed the invasion of Iraq and when I also saw with my own two eyes, on the 9 th and 10th April, 2003, how the invading tanks invaded my cardiac center and burned, lootedand plundered the largest center for cardiac surgery in the center of Baghdad in plain sight ofthe entire world, for it to be left open for further plunder for many days to come under theinvader's auspices.

In this center we used to perform 8 open heart surgeries on Iraqi adults and children, daily.European doctors from England, Switzerland, France, Italy, Spain and Germany volunteeredtheir work there as a humanitarian contribution to the center. I recall a telephone call from acolleague from the South of France who had worked in the past with us in the Center, whenBaghdad and the area in which the center is situated was undergoing heavy aerialbombardment, during the invasion, begging me to leave the center with the rest of mycolleagues in order to escape because the center was a target, as he seemed to believefrom the direct satellite pictures. I remember when tears poured down my cheeks whilstwatching the Cardiac Center burn and I was screaming at the commanding officer of thegroup which supervised the operation from the top of a tank, saying to "me stop your tears,we will build you a greater, larger and more up to date Center”.

Gentlemen, Members of the European Parliament and Distinguished audience, when mycolleagues and medical students in Iraq knew that I was going to be present amongst you, Iwas asked by their Union which was lately formed and carries a membership of more than350 doctors, to carry forth their concerns and suffering as a result of the seriouslydeteriorated health situation in Iraq; their letter which arrived 2 days before my arrival, here,is in my possession. I left Iraq after continuing to work and restore parts of the Center withmy colleagues, up to 5th March, 2005, when I received a letter threatening to liquidate and killme in company with 10 other colleagues who are all cardiac specialists, should we not leaveIraq before this date. Its letters still follow me like ghosts and the style in which it was writtenstill fills me with horror and pain.

Gentlemen, before the invasion and despite the cruel embargo, there were 18 Faculties ofMedicine, six of which were established during the period of the embargo, six dentalcolleges, four pharmacological faculties, and tens of colleges, institutes and schools ofnursing, assistant doctors and aides, in Iraq. The first Faculty of Medicine in Baghdad, wasopened in 1927 whose first dean, for a very long time, was the English Doctor, Sanderson,the author of the golden memories of his decades long medical service in Iraq called "10,000Nights and a Night in Iraq".

In Iraq, we had more than 39,000 hospital beds in efficiently run teaching hospitals, as wellas city and town hospitals, as well as medical clinics and centers in the country. We hadmore than 34,000 registered doctors, 20% of whom were specialists and we used to

graduate more than 1,000 doctors annually. We also had 30 Post Graduate Studies ofMedical Specialization, granting the Iraqi Board to more than 250 doctors annually. Thesepersonnel carried out their duties and responsibilities with great efficiency towards the injuredand the disabled during a long war and during the period when Iraq was boycottedscientifically for a very long time.

The Founding Constitution of The Iraqi State in the 1920s granted the right to all Iraqis to freeeducation and state medical treatment and preventative medicine (national healthinsurance). These services were established throughout Iraq's countryside, villages andcities, throughout all its provinces.



20

20

The Educational system in Iraq is British in its method since its establishment, and Europeunderstands and knows the standards and efficiency of Iraqi doctors as well as the standardsof medical teaching and health care in Iraq; a large percentage of these doctors, today, isspread throughout Europe and Britain. The World Health Organization, UNESCO, UNICEF,THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF RED CROSS, and other world organizationsevaluated Iraq's achievements positively in vaccination programmes, family medical care,general health, child health, rehabilitation of the disabled, birth control and the decline inmortality of the under 5s and of the newly born since 1980, which put an end to the spread ofinfectious diseases and epidemics such as Cholera, Infantile Paralysis, Meningitis,Diphtheria and Whooping Cough, and Tuberculosis. In addition to this, Iraq was theforemost in the region in controlling HIV Aids and in fighting addiction and drug abuse as wellas establishing School Health Programmes and establishing Protective Child and MaternalCenters as well as establishing specialized centers for Fertility, Cancer, Cardiac andVascular, Orthopedic, Glandular, Radio Isotopes, Nerves, Ophthalmology, Paralysis,Rehabilitation and Prosthetics, Toxicity, Herbal Medicine, and even Acupuncture Treatment.

Iraqi women have contributed heavily to Iraq's medical journey and history, and in addition toall the aforementioned the great success of The Food Programme and the Dispensing ofMedicines for all chronic disease, as well as the widespread institution of local health clinicsand national health insurance. The beneficial use of the Oil For Food and MedicineProgramme led to mitigating the bad effects of the imposed embargo on Iraq on its medicalimports before the occupation.

The method of importing medicines and medical equipment and supplies since the '70s inthe last century was successful in importing safe, effective and solid medicines frominternational, multi national solid, well-known companies, so was the local manufacture ofmedicine, enjoying the same specifications as that of the imported, both of which succumbedto identical analyses and tests as well as to efficient central registry in order to safeguardsociety from its possible resultant catastrophic effects. The importation of medicines waslimited to the Organization for Medicinal Imports – The Ministry of Health, with scientificsupervision of a committee specially chosen for its efficiency.

Gentlemen, Members of the European Parliament and Distinguished Colleagues and Audience:

What did the invasion of Iraq after April 2003 do to the health and humanitarian situation inIraq, as we commemorate its repugnant and abominable anniversary?

To abbreviate my talk, and because of the constraints of time, leaflets in English will behanded out to you which will give you a clear picture in numbers which reflect the state of mycountry's health. These numbers are not a figment of the imagination, but numbersextracted from studies and follow up reports carried out by international professional and

humanitarian organizations, institutions and societies, referred to, opposite each fact andnumber mentioned.

As for the reality on the ground, CDs will be handed out to you which will, in pictures, reflectand document a little of the suffering of the Iraqi people from the terror of bombardment andbombing, the destruction of infrastructure, violence and terror, the killing which has targetedthe people and its doctors, its efficient professionals, and its scientists and academics as wellas the forced displacement of people inside and outside Iraq; the suffering of women as wellas the widows and the orphans and the spread of crime and sickness and epidemics; thespread of commercialization of bad medicines and addictive drugs; the internally displaced



21

21

refugee camps; their conditions as well as the condition of the detainees in the prisons of theoccupation as well as in those of the imposed authority. However, suffice it for me to statethat we are in a country that :

1 - 70% of its doctors have emigrated.

2 - It has lost more than 5,500 of its scientists and academics, killed, imprisoned, oremigrated.

3 - 70% of its hospitals have minimum standard performance, below the requiredstandards in the remnants of what is destroyed, raided, or stolen.

4 - 90% of medicines in pharmacies is neither analysed nor is it registered or is bador corrupt and contaminated; it is brought on to the black market across theborders by ghost companies and a country in which thousands of unlicensedpharmacies and drug depots exist, run by people who are not pharmacists.

5 - Its hospitals are used as centers for ethnic and sectarian physical liquidation and

terror by the militias.

6 - The Ministry of Health is part of a sectarian quota division system that specifiesthe identity of the minister and the directors general and is controlled by thetheocratic political parties as well as the religious and sectarian militias. It is aninstitution in which financial and administrative corruption prevails and accordingto the Transparency Committee, more than 2 Billion US Dollars have disappearedas a result of phony ghost contracts and bribery.

7 - There is no supervisory or monitoring role to be mentioned by the presentparliamentarians who are doctors, but on the contrary, their interference maycause a negative effect on the size and the nature of the financial and

administrative corruption.

8 - Widespread mental illness and drug addiction and the widespread growthof opium poppy plantations and opium for the first time since occupation.

9 - Alteration of basic medical purchase requirements and their replacement withinsignificant lists and invoices.

10 - The spread of epidemics and the loss of credibility of all statistics and the lack ofstatistics of cholera, Measles, Diphtheria and Whooping Cough, andToxoplasmosis and a worsening situation of Tuberculosis and HIV Aids.

11 - Unsafe imported foods.

12 - A rise of incidence in cancer and the nature of the registered cases recently and arise in cases of congenital malformation as due to the aggravated complicationsas a result of radioactive pollution and the burning down of trees. Pollution ofrivers, as a result of the collapse of the sewage system, particularly in the Middleand the South caused by the use of Depleted Uranium and White Phosphorousas well as Cluster Bombs, and the prevention by the occupation forces of



22

22

remedial measures and surveys to discover the polluted locations for sterilizationand cleansing.

13 - The proliferation of landmines in the sites of the old wars, as well as unexplodedordinance, especially in Basra and in the border areas.

14 - Loss of cooperation and harmony with the humanitarian and voluntaryorganizations, such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and others, aswell as financial corruption in the Iraqi Red Crescent Society, and the escapeoutside Iraq, of its President with US protection.

15 - Lack of medicines and supplies and, as well as minimal financial allocations,since they did not exceed 4% of the overall budget allocations in the best ofcases, and because of rampant corruption.

16 - Lack of safe potable water for more than 70% of the population and thecontinuing lack of electricity as well as the lack of proper sanitation.

17 - The highest rates of infant and newborn mortality in the world.

18 - In Iraq after the occupation:

o More than five million are displaced.

o More than 4 million are below poverty level.

o Approximately, 2 million widows.

o Five million orphans.

o Insufficient food for more than eight million.

o More than 400,000 have been detained and imprisoned.

o More than 28% of the population is unemployed.

Conclusion:

It is clear that human health and safety is being targeted as well as the Iraqi identity;

depersonalization, and interference in the process of education and upbringing in order toweaken and divide Iraq by depletion of its capabilities and its scientific resources which isbeing implemented by devising a political process and service institutions based on ethnicand sectarian quotas which are inconsistent with efficiency, integrity and reconstruction,transparency and construction.

Distinguished Members of the European Parliament: Occupation, invasion, murder,terrorism, intimidation, and threats would not put an end to the aggravated violence becauseof the worsening oppression of peoples and unjustified wars that do not create freedoms and



23

23

democracy. All that the occupation built is a political process which it alleges to belegitimate, has proved that it is a failure, for the Government of Iraq is classified as the mostfailed in the world, and the most financially and administratively corrupt.

Thus, I urge you to work on expelling the occupation out of Iraq as soon as possible and toallow the Iraqi people and international will to achieve genuine national reconciliation

between the patriotic forces and the components of the mosaic of our people and its factionsso that it is an Iraqi solution with regional and international support and so that it is not aforced solution as a result of force, invasion and threats.

International law obliges the occupying power to pay equitable compensation for all thedamage committed after the occupation while the country was under its patronage. We alsohope that all those involved in all the political administrations formed during theoccupation, be made accountable and tried for their planning for, and execution of theinvasion of Iraq, without any justification. Your stance with the will and aspirations of the ill-fated Iraqi People is required and is basic for what it expresses in its message of justice andsupport for all the oppressed peoples, in opposition to and a cessation of all lethal wars andall occupation and imperialistic projects in the world, for they will only contribute to further

violence, tension and political and economic instability which threaten the world today, withchoking crises as well threatening the heart of humanity and the achievements of thepeoples of the world.

Finally, please accept from our people and ourselves, words of the deepest gratitude, ofthanks and of praise as I also ask of The Brussels Tribunal for helping in granting me thisopportunity.

Dr. Omar Al –Kubaisy

Brussels, Belgium.

March 18th

, 2009.



24

24

Appendix II Make Wars History

Every MP

The House of Commons,London SW1A 0AA20

th March 2009

“To initiate a war of aggression therefore, is not only an international crime, it is thesupreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it containswithin itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”


It is six years since Parliament, the British Government and the Queen took Britaininto the illegal war with Iraq. When will you take action to end the violations of warlaw, the war crimes and the unlawful killings in Iraq and Afghanistan?

As one of the 1500 people ultimately responsible for governing Britain and forrenewing the illegal orders to Britain‟s forces to attack the Iraqi and Afghan people,you are personally criminally liable in law for the violations of war law and war crimescommitted by Coalition forces during your term as an MP. By condoning andfinancing the orders to HM Armed Forces to wage war and use weapons of massdestruction such as cruise missiles, rockets, cluster bombs and depleted uraniummunitions against civilian targets you have taken part in the mass killing of 1 million

people, including 300,000 children, you have maimed and injured 2.5 million anddriven 4 million into exile and destitution. None of your victims had done anything toharm Britain, was given an opportunity to plead for their life in court or was shownmercy before Parliament caused their violent, cruel deaths.

I assume that you know that waging a war of aggression against an independentnation state is the most serious crime known to mankind and that it is the same crimefor which Germany‟s leaders were convicted and hanged at Nuremburg in 1946. Iam certain that you know that the wilful killing of a child is a crime of murder, and thatkilling 300,000 Iraqi children is genocide and a crime against humanity; so why areyou continuing to command our armed forces to commit these horrendous crimes?

When you took your seat in Parliament you swore on oath to govern according tolaw; so when will you abide by that oath and bring an end to these heinous violationsof the domestic and international laws of war?

I have enclosed with this letter a copy of Articles 25 and 27 of the Rome Statute ofthe International Criminal Court. This is the international law, ratified by Britain in2001, that prohibits genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and conductancillary to such crimes. I suggest that you read it very carefully because, as you willsee in Article 27, it applies to you and to every British citizen without exception.



25

25

I must point out that the legislation does provide you with an opportunity to avoid acriminal prosecution. Article 25.3(f) of the Rome Statute makes it clear that, if aperson completely and voluntarily gives up the criminal purpose, abandons theeffort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the completion of the crime, he orshe will not be liable for punishment under the Statute for the attempt to commit thecrime. This does NOT mean that you are not criminally liable for other war crimes,

but rather that you might avoid prosecution if you can demonstrate that you madeevery possible effort to prevent further offences of genocide, crimes againsthumanity and war crimes from taking place.

To give yourself a chance of avoiding prosecution for war crimes you must ensurethat the killing stops immediately. At the very least you need to:-

(1) Write to the Privy Council and the Queen demanding that they reverse allunlawful active service orders and command the immediate withdrawal ofall UK Armed Forces from Iraq and Afghanistan.

(2) Sign and vote for an EDM halting payments to the MOD. [By stopping the

funds that pay for the crimes you will stop the killing within hours](3) Inform the Chancellor of the Exchequer that paying tax which is then used

to facilitate war crimes is an offence of „accessory to the crimes‟ [RomeStatute Article 25.3(c)] and therefore you will withhold tax and instructyour constituents to withhold their taxes until the crimes have ceased.

(4) Set up / attend a briefing meeting on the laws of war, the law officers‟false legal advice, the war crimes committed by British citizens and thepersonal responsibilities of MPs for war law enforcement.

(5) Report war crimes committed by British citizens to your local ChiefConstable and ask him or her to initiate a criminal investigation.

For sixty years law officers have deceived Parliament, the armed forces and thepublic over the laws of war and as a result Britain has waged five illegal wars since1998 killing and injuring over three million people. The massacre of Iraqi men,women and children, for which you share responsibility, is not only a crime ofgenocide but it is the worst atrocity in British history. That so many lives have beenlost because corrupt law officers deceived the nation over the laws of war is anappalling state of affairs that Parliament must correct before another life is lost.

You have a moral and legal duty to your constituents, the nation and the world toobey, uphold and enforce war law. If anything in this letter is unclear, if you needto find out more about the laws governing the use of armed force or if you need to

know more about your own criminal liabilities then please arrange for arepresentative of your political party to contact us to arrange a meeting.

Chris Coverdale



26

26

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

Article 25 - Individual criminal responsibility

1. The Court shall have jurisdiction over natural persons pursuant to this Statute.

2. A person who commits a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court shall be individually responsible and

liable for punishment in accordance with this Statute.

3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a

crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person:

(a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person,

regardless of whether that other person is criminally responsible;

(b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted;

(c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or otherwise assists in

its commission or its attempted commission, including providing the means for its commission;

(d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission of such a crime by a

group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such contribution shall be intentional and shall either:

(i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal purpose of the group,

where such activity or purpose involves the commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of

the Court; or

(ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the crime;

(e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to commit genocide;

(f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its execution by means of a

substantial step, but the crime does not occur because of circumstances independent of the person'sintentions. However, a person who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the

completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute for the attempt to commit

that crime if that person completely and voluntarily gave up the criminal purpose.

4. No provision in this Statute relating to individual criminal responsibility shall affect the responsibility of

States under international law.

Article 27 - Irrelevance of official capacity

1. This Statute shall apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In

particular, official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an

elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility

under this Statute, nor shall it, in and of itself, constitute a ground for reduction of sentence.

2. Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether

under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person.



28

28

“The charges in the indictment that the defendants planned and waged aggressivewars are charges of the utmost gravity. War is essentially an evil thing. Itsconsequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the wholeworld. To initiate a war of aggression therefore, is not only an international crime, it isthe supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it containswithin itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

The Nuremburg Principles – The Universal Laws of War

These seven international war laws, derived from the Nuremburg and Tokyo War CrimesTribunals, were adopted as universal statute war law by the United Nations General

Assembly in 1950.

I. Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law isresponsible therefor and liable to punishment.

II. The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes acrime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from

responsibility.

III. The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime underinternational law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does notrelieve him from responsibility.

IV. The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or a superior doesnot relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice wasin fact possible to him.

V. Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trialon the facts and law.

VI. The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

(a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war ofaggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements orassurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for theaccomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

(b) War crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are notlimited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other

purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation

not justified by military necessity.(c) Crimes against hum anity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation

and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crimeagainst peace or any war crime.

VII . Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crimeagainst humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.



29

29

Armed attacks on another State are always illegal

When a nation state [including the USA and UK] signs and ratifies the UN Charter it makes abinding agreement never to threaten or attack another member State and to settle alldisputes peacefully.

2.3 All members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such amanner that international peace, security and justice are not endangered.

2.4 All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use offorce against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in anyother manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

The UN Security Council cannot authorise the use of armed force.

The UN Security Council is a peacekeeping body and it may never use armed force. Theclaim that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was authorised by UN Security Council

resolutions was a lie.

41. The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armedforce are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon itsmembers to apply such measures…

The only legitimate use of armed force is self defence.

All pre-emptive attacks were outlawed 150 years ago as a result of Britain‟s underhand pre-emptive attack on an American vessel “The Caroline” at Niagara . The only time when theuse of armed force is legal is self-defence. If a nation is attacked it may legitimately usearmed force to defend itself, but it may do so only until the UN Security Council implements

measures to resolve the conflict17.

Willful killing is always a crime

In times of war or peace it is never lawful, legal or right to kill another human being. Thewilful killing of enemy combatants is always a crime and is never lawful. The UK HumanRights Act specifies:

“Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No-one shall be deprived of his lifeintentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of acrime for which this penalty is provided in law.”

It is never legal and always a crime for a serviceman to wilfully kill an enemy. Whenever aperson dies as a result of an act of aggression all those responsible for giving, transmitting orexecuting the orders that brought about the death commit a crime and become criminallyliable in law.

17 UN Charter Chapter VII Article 51



30

30

Killing a person because of their nationality is genocide.

Pursuing a policy of killing people because of their nationality, race, religion or ethnicity is acrime of genocide under the Genocide Convention18, the Rome Statute and the InternationalCriminal Court Act.

For the purpose of this Statute, “genocide” means any of the following acts committedwith intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group,as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harmto members of the group; (c)Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of lifecalculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part…

The widely held assumption that it is lawful to kill an enemy during times of war is incorrect.It is always a crime to kill or cause the death of a person even if they are described as „theenemy‟. In law every resident of every State which took part in the invasion and occupationof Iraq and who aided or abetted the killing of Iraqi citizens is criminally liable for the crimesof genocide, conduct ancillary to genocide, accessory to genocide or conspiracy to commitgenocide.

This Statute [Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court] shall apply equally toall persons without any distinction based on official capacity. In particular, officialcapacity as Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or Parliament,an elected representative or a government official shall in no case exempt a personfrom criminal responsibility under this Statute, nor shall it in and of itself, constitute aground for reduction of sentence.

Aiding or abetting warfare or the use of armed force is a crime

Whenever a government embarks on an illegal war taxpayers become criminally liable forcomplicity in the crimes of their government and subject to the sanctions of domestic andinternational law. Actions such as paying tax, voting, speaking or writing in favor of war arecriminal offences. Individual citizens may argue that they did not intend to commit a crime,but as the meaning of intent is defined in the legislation they will find it hard to argue that theywere not aware that anyone might be killed.

“ Whosoever shall aid, abet, counsel, or procure the commission of any indictableoffence, whether the same be an offence at common law or by virtue of any Act

passed or to be passed, shall be liable to be tried, indicted and punished as a principal offender 19.”

Every citizen has a legal duty to disobey illegal orders

“ If a person who is bound to obey a duly constituted superior receives from thesuperior an order to do some act or make some omission which is manifestly illegal,he is under a legal duty to refuse to carry out the order and if he does carry it out hewill be criminally responsible for what he does in doing so.”

18 In the USA The Genocide Convention Implementation Act 1988 [known as The Proxmire Act] applies

19 The Accessories and Abettors Act 1861



31

31

Article 24 Chapter VI of the Manual of Military Law applies to every British citizen andtaxpayer as well as to servicemen and women. This means that if a government embarkson an illegal war everyone is duty bound to refuse all government orders associated with thewar. Soldiers must refuse active service orders, armament suppliers must refuse to supplyweapons and taxpayers must withhold taxes. Anyone who co-operates with a governmentthat wages a war of aggression is complicit in a crime against peace and is criminally liableas an accessory to war crimes. As the judges at Nuremburg explained when convictingGermany‟s leaders for breaches of the laws of war:

“ The very essence of the [London] Charter is that individuals have international dutieswhich transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by the individual State.He who violates the laws of war cannot obtain immunity while acting in pursuance ofthe authority of the State, if the State in authorising action moves outside itscompetence under international law…”

Leaders are responsible for the war crimes of their subordinates.

The International Criminal Court Act makes it clear that no matter who launches the rockets,fires the cruise missiles, drops cluster bombs or deploys depleted uranium shells,

responsibility for the resulting deaths, injuries and destruction lies with the political, civil ormilitary leaders who ordered the attack.

65. A military commander, or a person effectively acting as a military commander, isresponsible for offences committed by forces under his effective command and controlor his effective aut hority and control… A person responsible under this section for anoffence is regarded as aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of theoffence.

Breaching war law renders citizens liable to prosecution as war criminals.

Everyone has a responsibility to humankind to abide by the laws of war and the rules agreed

in the UN Charter. These duties include, refusing to obey manifestly unlawful orders,arresting and prosecuting anyone planning or participating in a war of aggression andwithholding taxes from Governments that violate war law. War is always illegal and if anycitizen breaks any of these laws they commit a war crime and become individually criminallyresponsible and liable for punishment throughout the world.

Chris Coverdale The Campaign to Make Wars History Feb 2009



32

“As a citizen I regard it not only as a right butas a moral duty to help shape the destiny ofmy country, to uncover and oppose manifestevils. What I aimed to do was to rouse mystudents to an ethical understanding of thegrave evils of our present political life; a

return to definite ethical principles, to the ruleof law, to mutual trust between man andman. This is not illegal rather it is the re-establishment of legality.”

Professor Huber, Munich University 1943

Shortly before he was condemned to death with five of his students

for spreading sedition

From Humanising Hell by George Delf

accounting for genocide

Documents