| Author | Message | | dangerousdna | | Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 7:45 am Post subject: Threat of war crime ruling on British forces |
| http://www.thepowerhour.com/iraq/brit-war-crimes.htm
And This Guy Wants To Start A war??
Sun 29 Dec 2002
Threat of war crime ruling on British forces
CHRIS STEPHEN IN THE HAGUE
LAWYERS have told the Ministry of Defence that British troops could be indicted for war crimes if we go to war with Iraq.
Even units used in a supporting role with United States troops could face indictments from the new International Criminal Court, now setting up shop in The Hague.
The US is not a member of the ICC, and is not covered by its law, but Britain, a founding member, will be in the spotlight should war erupt with Baghdad.
British troops are thought unlikely to commit atrocities themselves, with only elite units and strike aircraft expected to be in action in Iraq.
But lawyers have told the MoD that indictments could follow if our troops and airmen, or their commanders, are ruled to have assisted American forces in committing war crimes.
This could include something as simple as providing reconnaissance pictures that led to a US airstrike against civilians.
The ICC has no connection to the better-known United Nations war crimes court in The Hague, which is now trying Slobodan Milosevic, but it follows similar rules.
London could also fall foul of ICC law elsewhere - troops in Afghanistan and Bosnia are also liable to its law, as are units in Northern Ireland, where any resumption of fighting would leave Britain vulnerable to indictments in the event that use is made of torture or internment without trial.
"With the coming of this court, British forces are going to go into battle under unprecedented scrutiny," says Karin von Hipple, a senior research fellow at the Centre for War Studies at London's King's College. "This court is new and untried, but it would be unwise to underestimate its powers."
The closest Britain has come to war crimes charges was following the Kosovo war, when Yugoslavia complained to UN war crimes prosecutors about bombing raids that struck a train full of civilians, and a strike on a Belgrade TV station.
But the UN officials ruled both railways and communication centres as legitimate strategic targets.
War crimes investigators are also lenient when it comes to near-misses: It is assumed that in a war, "collateral damage" is inevitable. But the ICC is likely to take a harder line concerning deliberate bombing of civilian areas, or assassinations.
The ICC, like the UN court, can prosecute not just war crimes but also crimes against humanity - a long list of offences against civilians, ranging from torture and imprisonment, to deportation and murder.
Washington is also worried. Although not a member, Americans could be indicted over their country's involvement in the guerrilla war in Columbia, which is an ICC member.
Human rights groups are also tracking American funds being channelled to opposition forces in another member country, Venezuela.
Many think Venezuela's generals are poised to order a coup to topple the controversial president, Hugo Chavez. While a coup is not itself a war crime, the bloodshed that may follow - from either side - could see ICC investigators jump in with indictments. For the moment though, the court has its own problems. It has a budget of about £20m - less than a third of that given to the UN war crimes court.
It has also become the centre of a rift between the US, which wants to close it down, and the EU, which is the ICC's key supporter.
Even if war crimes are committed in Iraq, it will be a long time before indictments are taken. Court officials have failed to attract a single applicant for the post of chief prosecutor, meaning there will not be one when elections of judges are held in New York in February.
Chris Stephen is Hague bureau chief for the Institute for War and Peace Reporting
This article:
http://www.scotlandonsunday.com/international.cfm?id=1440892002 | |  | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
