Rumsfeld Wanted for War Crimes
Center for Constitutional Rights Aims to File Suit
In a move hailed as "the first step toward accountability", the groups have banded together to represent the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay who have been unlawfully tortured and detained.
The organization, along with four Iraqi citizens, filed a war crimes complaint in Germany against Rumsfeld and 7 other US officials in October of 2004 for the treatment of prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq. The complaint was rejected in February 2005 by a German Prosecutor and that decision was later upheld by a German Court.
The new lawsuit comes on the heels of Rumsfeld's resignation, which many people felt was long overdue. Among the list of things he has been held accountable for is the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib, breaches of the Geneva Convention including torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. Beyond that, he is accused of in part engineering a "war of aggression" on Iraq and some feel he should be held responsible for extrajudicial executions of several people. He is accused of willfully and knowingly participating in these acts.
The Center for Constitutional Rights intends to again file suit in Germany, this time with a larger list of accusations than in 2004. German prosecutors are stating that they still will not pursue the matter, stating that there was no indication that US. Authorities and courts would not deal with the allegations listed in the complaint.
Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law has "universal jurisdiction", which allows for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that occur anywhere in the world.
Rumsfeld is not the only one listed in the suit, and the pending suit has more plaintiffs, including 11 Iraqis. The Center for Constitutional Rights maintains that the U.S. Authorities have failed to take any action to investigate or prosecute anyone in connection with the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.
For more information on the lawsuit, including named parties, please visit Time.com's article here.
Published by Liz Copeland
I'm a freelance writer, DMC mentor, and artisan-level embroiderer. I knit, crochet, sew, quilt, and spin my own yarn as well. I'm an instructor for embroidery and other fiber and textile related crafts. View profile
- The Failure of International Law: Why the Department of Justice Will Not Prosecute...In early April of 2009, the International Committee of Red Cross (ICRC) filed a report outlining the events that occurred in CIA run "black sites" such as the military camp in Guantanamo Bay. Will the Department of Ju...
- Al-Qaeda on Trial: Geneva Conventions and Federal Law on the Use of Military Tribu...Contains factual information regarding the Geneva Convention, U.S, Supreme Court Opinion and the legality of Military Tribunals.
- Gripping Video Hits NEt Comparing Iran's Holding of Prisoners Against Those of the USPlease watch the video and read what is said here. I value any comments that can be made.
- What Went Wrong: America's Army in Iraq Before the SurgeWhy didn't Iraqis welcome American troops with flowers? Why did it take so long to figure out what was wrong in Iraq? How could we have "Accomplished" the mission and avoided Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay? Original re...
- Conspiracies are Real: Historical ExamplesFrom Pearl Harbor to 9/11, government complicity is covered up and "public myths" are entered into the historical record.
- ACLU Publishes Book Documenting Accounts of Prisoner Abuse
- The Case of the French Torture Techniques in the Battle of Algiers
- Foreign Policy in the 2008 Presidential Election
- The Detention Facilities at Guantanamo Bay Do Conform with International Law
- The Road to Guantanamo
- Transformational Leadership Times 1.25: Obama: What to Do with Guantanamo Bay
- To Close Guantanamo Bay is the American Thing to Do
18 Comments
Post a CommentPaul.
I bet you're a closet Republican. I bet you're a Barry Goldwater conservative Republican. Let me see your Reaganomics. :-) Gimme some!
I just wanted to point out something I have noticed, specifically with regard to an earlier comment by Greg - Ya know how conservatives characterize liberals of "moral relativism"? Well, I find it amazing that so many conservatives will say, "Yeah, well I believe in the principles of the Geneva Conventions and torture is wrong, BUT, I don't think that "terrorists" should be covered." Yet, those on the left are the ones who have taken a moral stand on all aspects of the war on terrorism.
Bob Powell - You lost any credibility you might have had at "ragheads".
I am sorry Greg, I see your point! I assumed, which is my own falut, that Germany having universal jurisdiction is something decided on by certain countries, and since the US didn't come out and say that does not apply to us I assumed it was true. After some research I found that the US has not ratified the International Criminal Court, but that does not necessarily mean they can't be prosecuted from the ICC. The US in 2003 had a resolution, Resolution 1487, that exempted citizens of the US from the jurisdiction of the court. However, this is only effective for one year and can be renewed each year. The US WITHDREW its proposed renewal for this resolution in 2004 because of the abuse of prisoners in Iraq, so it seems that the ICC does have jurisdiction. The Security Council can send the case to ICC along with 3 other methods, so it is not a German Law!
Jonathon, my point is who gave the Germans universal jurisdiction? Themselves? Just because they say they have it doesn't make it so. Even if the UN says they have it doesn't make it so. Do we subject our citizens to their laws? Not in my opinion. So the argument goes, "we can't prosecute Americans for this in the U.S., so let's go to Germany?" That's ridiculous!! So, if I think you should be tried for crime X (hypothetical), I can file suit in Germany and they suddenly have jurisdiction over you because they say they have "universal jurisdiction." Come on already. Do you really believe that?
Greg, the reason the charges are being filed in Germany is because, as stated in the article, they have universal jurisdiction. Also, the reason the charges are not filed in the US is because the Military Commissions Act of 2006 protects them from being tried for any crimes in which he is being prosecuted for! I have already stressed the danger of the Military Commissions Act in my article and this helps support my case.
We all know that none of these guys will ever face any real court-sanctioned accountability. On the other hand, we can all watch with a sort of glee as they spend the next twenty or thirty years watching as history judges them to be the most corrupt, dangerous and criminally incompetent administration in American history. I predict that Bush's depression will end with his going on a weekend bender and wrapping his Mercedes around a tree. Let's just hope he doesn't take someone else with him. As for Rumsfeld, I don't see him as having even the guts to drink himself to suicide.
Oh yeah, and if he is such a "soldiers soldier, why have so many of the military leadership criticized him and called for his head?
Hey M, Rumsfeld is a piece of garbage who could care less about the troops. Which is why he sent them to Iraq as part of a neo-con, lean & mean military experiment, adn with no freakin' armor!! Then he had the nerve to blow off their concerns about the lack of armor!! In any case, calling him a "soldiers soldier" is one of the most offensive things I have ever heard.
Talking about war crimes in the same context as Rumsfeld is a war crime. What do peole want: a knee-jerk little lemming defense minister like Les Aspin or Dominique Devillipan?
Rumsfeld's great...a soldier's soldier, as a young marine once described him.