Saddam To Sue Uk

Defiant · 13-05-2004, 14:59

Quote:

Saddam Hussein's lawyer is set to file a suit for war crimes against Britain at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, the news agency AFP said.
Veteran French lawyer Jacques Verges says the lawsuit is on behalf of "the families of prisoners of the coalition in which Britain participates".

"The reality of torture and systematic abuses of the dignity of Iraqi prisoners, sometimes followed by murders, both by US and British troops is no longer in question," the text of the complaint reads.

Mr Verges has been dubbed the "devil's advocate" after representing the Nazi war criminal Klaus Barbie and Carlos the Jackal in the past.

The 80-year-old lawyer has also represented former Yugoslav leader Slobodan Milosevic.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...135099,00.html

I think we all know why he's trying this on with Britain and not the US. Everyone knows were the softest country in the world now. I do think its funny that it just happens to be a French lawyer too

Ramrod · 13-05-2004, 15:11

Unreal......

Bifta · 13-05-2004, 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defiant

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...135099,00.html

I think we all know why he's trying this on with Britain and not the US. Everyone knows were the softest country in the world now. I do think its funny that it just happens to be a French lawyer too

How exactly are we the softest country in the world if we went to war against him?

downquark1 · 13-05-2004, 15:22

Didn't the USA get immunity from warcrimes?

zoombini · 13-05-2004, 15:24

ROFLMAO........
.
.
.
.
.
Gets wallet out to send in my share of his compensation....

**Chris** · 13-05-2004, 15:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by downquark1

Didn't the USA get immunity from warcrimes?

I don't think they have been granted anything, they just refuse to accept the authority of a permanent War Crimes court as they feared they would fall victim to politically-motivated prosecutions.

I wonder if there is another reason why they won't accept the authority of a war crimes court?

Defiant · 13-05-2004, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bifta

How exactly are we the softest country in the world if we went to war against him?

Our Army and do gooders are completely different

downquark1 · 13-05-2004, 15:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by towny

I don't think they have been granted anything, they just refuse to accept the authority of a permanent War Crimes court as they feared they would fall victim to politically-motivated prosecutions.

I wonder if there is another reason why they won't accept the authority of a war crimes court?

Would that explain why we are being sued and not the US? I would have thought the evidence against them would be stronger.

According to this they have or did have immunity: http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...974968,00.html

danielf · 13-05-2004, 15:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by towny

I don't think they have been granted anything, they just refuse to accept the authority of a permanent War Crimes court as they feared they would fall victim to politically-motivated prosecutions.

I wonder if there is another reason why they won't accept the authority of a war crimes court?

I've been looking for a link for this, but US soldiers are exempt (for now). I'll look further...

Edit:

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/new...6072988.htm?1c

Not the beeb, but it wasn't that easy to find a link

punky · 13-05-2004, 16:04

Americans are exempt from the ICC. http://news.scotsman.com/internation...?id=1088242002

So they can't be tried for war crimes, crimes against humanity, etc. Which is kind of funny considering the current president of the ICC is American. The theory behind it is actually that as America are the second most hated nation in the world (behind Israel), if they wern't exempt, they would get flooded with unfounded false accusations, just to cause them some grief. It would also lead to prioritising Americans beyond other. Noone would try and capture/convict, say, an itallian, when they could get an American. I suppose it is for the best. The trouble is, while in 2002 we wern't as universally hated (judging by our previous behavior in the Empire, that's saying something), now we stood behind the US in what it did, we are going to face the wrath for them. While unfounded accusations would summarily be dismissed, (like with Tim Collins), unfortunately, this costs time, money, manpower, as well as the human cost (marriage breakups, loss of respect etc). Also add to the fact, that everyone can rememeber who are accused, but not who are also aquitted, and it makes the situation even worse.

Defiant · 13-05-2004, 16:18

If a guy who killed thousands can get away with this then I say balls to it

13-05-2004, 16:20

The USA has actually passed a law that states that if there is an attempt to try one of its citizens in the Hague they have the authority to conduct a military invasion of The Netherlands in order to free the suspect.

http://www.iccnow.org/pressroom/cicc...ruCongress.pdf

Bifta · 13-05-2004, 16:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defiant

Our Army and do gooders are completely different

What has that got to do with anything?

Defiant · 13-05-2004, 16:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr wadd

The USA has actually passed a law that states that if there is an attempt to try one of its citizens in the Hague they have the authority to conduct a military invasion of The Netherlands in order to free the suspect.

http://www.iccnow.org/pressroom/cicc...ruCongress.pdf

I very much doubt there army would think about taking on other trained army's

**Chris** · 13-05-2004, 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by dr wadd

The USA has actually passed a law that states that if there is an attempt to try one of its citizens in the Hague they have the authority to conduct a military invasion of The Netherlands in order to free the suspect.

http://www.iccnow.org/pressroom/cicc...ruCongress.pdf