Sunday September 15, 2019
Nov-25-2011 01:04TweetFollow @OregonNews
Bush and Blair Found Guilty in War Crimes TribunalSalem-News.com
The commission cited a UN rule that Bush and Blair failed to observe when planning the destruction of Iraq.
(KUALA LAMPUR, Malaysia) - The former heads of both the United States of America and Great Britain, George W. Bush and Tony Blair, have been found guilty by a War Crimes Tribunal for their roles in spearheading the war in Iraq. This is a very serious development for the two world leaders who did not attend the proceedings in Kuala Lampur, Malaysia.
The Amicus Curiae Jason Kay Kit Leong raised a preliminary objection that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the case.
However, after listening to arguments by the Chief Prosecutor and the Amicus Curiae, the Tribunal ruled that it does have jurisdiction and the proceedings then continued. (Under Article 7 of Part I of the UN Charter, the Tribunal shall have jurisdiction not only in respect of crimes against peace, but also in respect of crimes against humanity, crime of genocide and war crimes.)
Views and Findings
Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission stated that the two accused, George W Bush and Anthony L. Blair, were charged by the Chief Prosecutor with having committed CRIMES AGAINST PEACE, "in that they have planned, prepared and invaded the sovereign state of Iraq on 19 March 2003 in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law. The Particulars of the Charge state, inter alia, that on 19 March 2003, the two accused launched a war against Iraq without the sanction of the United Nations and without just cause whatsoever."
Neither Bush nor Blair were present at the proceedings though they were duly served. They did not send attorneys or any form of representation. Because of this, pursuant to Article 15 of the Charter of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission & the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, an Amicus Curiae was appointed by the Tribunal to assist the Tribunal by presenting an unbiased assessment of the charge and evidence against the accused. The Amicus Curiae entered a plea of not guilty on behalf of both the accused.
Two of the seven judges, Judge Prof Niloufer Bhagwat and Judge Dato‟ Dr Zakaria Yatim later recused themselves, and the Tribunal proceeded to hear the case with a quorum of five.
International Law of War
With regard to the general premise, the commission cited a UN rule that Bush and Blair failed to observe when planning the destruction of Iraq.
International Law of War regulation 4.1 regards General Prohibition Against Force.
"The Charter of the United Nations contains a general prohibition against force as a means of resolving disputes. The Charter insists that war can only be a last resort and that the decision to unleash the horrors of war on innocent populations can only be taken according to the duly established law itself. The Security Council and the General Assembly have consistently affirmed this principle."
Facts Considered by War Crime Tribunal
The amicus curiae Jason Kay Kit Leon states that the prosecution has submitted two contradicting points on humanitarian catastrophe. The defence states, “The rule of natural justice requires the accused to know the charges against him clearly, to understand the nature of the charges against him, so that he has a chance to defend himself.‟ ‟Yet, the defence in objecting to the prosecution‟s submission of the Nicaragua case has made a moot point. Both of prosecution counsels‟ interpretations of the Nicaragua case would prohibit Bush and Blair‟s orders to wage aggressive war and invade Iraq.
The Nicaragua case, by the interpretation of prosecution lead counsel Gurdial Singh Nijar, prohibits the invasion of Iraq by Bush and Blair because that invasion was not in furtherance of “preventing an overwhelming humanitarian catastrophe for which Saddam could be held responsible.” No such catastrophe had been established in Iraq through well documented evidence. There were many other means – including a second Resolution at the United Nations – available to prevent the use of force. The measures taken by Bush and Blair‟s aggressive war against Iraq were disproportionate.
The Nicaragua case, by the interpretation of prosecution co-counsel Prof. Frances Boyle, places an absolute bar upon any intervention by force for humanitarian reasons.
- Edited by Tim King, Salem-News.com
For the full report from the Brussels Tribunal, visit this link: http://www.brussellstribunal.org/pdf/Extempore_Judgment_KL_War_Crimes_Tribunal.pdf
Articles for November 24, 2011 | Articles for November 25, 2011 | Articles for November 26, 2011