Blair accused of genocide in Iraq
This is not about the rights or wrongs. This is about the chance of something happening in the Hague and the possible ramifications of this accusation to Blair in Britain.
So unlikely that Blair is going to end up in a dock in the Hague but this can’t be good considering the pressure that is currently building up in the UK over the reasons for the war.
Thoughts?
Just to add a pinch of clarity;
Put simply, as the UK has signed up for the ICC, the case (if it comes to that) will be heard in the UK. As Blair went to Parliament prior to invasion and won that vote, he had a mandate from Parliament in relation to Iraq and, therefore, acted legally under UK law in relation to the invasion itself.
And thus, this becomes a key passage:
"She said allegations include three categories of offences:
(a) - crimes against humanity,
(b) - war crimes, and
© - genocide. "
and btw, this is the newly constituted ICC, not the War Crimes Tribunal - but you all knew that, didn’t ya.
L_C if you could clarify this for me I’d appreciate it. How does genocide get in the mix?
. . . with a salad-sized extrapolation, a bottle of mind-altering ouzo with the truth and a Mousaka sized slab of that so-crazy Mediterranean humour.
<Another beer, please Stavros>
It’s frivolous, it’s nakedly motivated by political motives, I just wonder if they’ve actually read the treaty on what constitutes genocide.
As you may or may not know I am a big supporter of the ICC and this case will be a test of the accusation that it would just be used for political vendettas, if it does not throw out this case then I would consider it to of failed that test.
I think this could be a good test for unwinnable and/or silly ICC cases being thrown out of court before they get to trial. Take note, USians.
Blair might have broken international law, but as L_C says, he didn’t break the law of his country, and is therefore immune from prosecution.
And genocide? I don’t think so.
Assuming that the UK does not prosecute but the ICC opts to prosecute, who would arrest Blair?
Gordon Brown 
What is the “War Crimes Tribunal”?
As jjimm and L_C have said I don’t think this is going anywhere. I also agree with MC Master of Ceremonies that it is politically motivated.
Thinking about it, it may even work out in Blair’s favour as Campbell et al can used it’s silliness to further spin the issue away from the actual point of going to war under false pretenses.
I can just see Brown knocking at No. 10 with a warrant 
It’s in a search engine near you:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2988300.stm
Funny guy. 
In all seriousness though, who would arrest him? I mean it seems useless to have a trial and not bring the defendant to court, but t do that you’d need a police body that response to the courts authority right? Is there on in the UK that does/would?
I previewed, I swear.:smack:
No, London_Calling that’s the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia set-up under UNSC resolution 808 for the prosecution of war crimes in the former Yugoslavia only.
Grey - Nope, no idea. I’d guess they’d need to invent a procedure.
MC Master of Ceremonies - Yep it is. I just thought that’s the one some folks might get confused with the ICC.
This is a better link:
Well the idea of a court that claims the right to try a person without the ability to actually bring a person to trial sounds ridiculous. I have not been paying much attention to the ICC so perhaps this has already been covered. MC Master of Ceremonies any insight on that?
The scary part is that I can imagine some conservative commentators in the United States seizing on this as “proof” that the ICC is evil and that George W. Bush was right for opting out.
“Could you imagine this international conspiracy, with members belonging to such wonderful countries like Libya and China, dragging our brave soldiers into their kangaroo court to stand trial like common criminals?”
:rolleyes:
I wouldn’t yet dismiss their allegations, as the charges against Blair have not yet been thrown out.
That’s what I thought but I am still confused as that tribunal was set up ex profeso for Yougoslavia and has no jurisdiction over what has happened in Iraq.
That’s what I thought but I am still confused as that tribunal was set up ex profeso for Yougoslavia and has no jurisdiction over what has happened in Iraq.