US Lawyers Sue Rumsfeld In Karlsruhe Germany

Frankfurt A. M. · 29. November · The announcement at the Federal Prosecutor's Office in Karlsruhe, whose text of the Frankfurt round rundschau is present, is directed against Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the former secret service boss George Tenet, against general Ricardo Sanchez as well as sieved further functionaries of military and US government.

The center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) accuses to them in connection with the scandal around the US prison Abu Ghraib in Iraq war crime committed as well as against international law and UN Folterkonvention to have offended. The center represents also the interests of prisoners on the US base Guantánamo.

"the US authorities do not make recognizable institutes to pull the responsible persons for tortures in Abu Ghraib the account", justified US lawyer and CCR president Michael Ratner the resolution to refund in Germany announcement.

Despite "convincing reports" that tortures were abgesegnet directly or indirectly "by highest functionaries of the US government", are limited the military to treat the offences as act of individual Sadisten. International law is at one point, which the most powerful state of the world tries to lodge a complaint for itself special rights said Ratner of the FR . If these obvious offences against international law should not be punished, threaten "a relapse in the Middle Ages".

The US lawyers support themselves by the German people penal code, according to which war crimes, crimes can be pursued against the humanity and genocide, if no Germans are involved and the passing took place not here.

"the German right is world-wide prominent here", said Peter Weiss, Vize-Praesident of the CCR. because the US law with the clearing-up Abu Ghraibs fails and the international criminal court by Washington is not recognized, has one decided to use national criminal law.

"we are not a group of cranks", stressed the citizen of Berlin human right lawyer Wolfgang Kaleck. In the summer the highest Court of Justice of the USA decided upon the request of the CCR that the interned ones would have the right to complain against their detention before US courts. "I hope, the Federal Prosecutor's Office take our affair seriously and leave myself on an examination of circumstances", said Kaleck.

Accuses Of The War Crimes

On today's Tuesday the "center becomes for Constitutional Rights" complaint because of the Iraq war against the US Secretary of Defense, whom submits former CIA boss and other US high-level personnel with the Chief Federal Prosecutor in Karlsruhe. They are accused of by the human right organization of the violation of international law.

Charge against the US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, former CIA director George Tenet, the general Ricardo Sanchez and other members of the government and the armed forces of the United States from America because of war crimes and torture to the disadvantage of Iraqi internees in the prison Abu Ghraib/Irak 2003/2004.

On behalf of and in authority of my mandators I refund charge because of all being possible criminal offence existence, in particular because of war crimes against persons as well as because of dangerous bodily injury and offence against the UN Folterkonvention against the following US-American citizens

1. the Secretary of Defense of the United States of America, Donald H. Rumsfeld,
2. the former director of the cent ral Intelligence Agency (CIA), George Tenet,
3. the lieutenant general Ricardo S. Sanchez, Heidelberg, Germany,
4. the major general walter Wojdakowski,
5. the Brigadegeneralin Janis Karpinski,
6. the lieutenant colonel Jerry L Phillabaum,
7. Colonel Thomas Pappas,
8. the lieutenant colonel Stephen L Jordan,
9. the major general Geoffrey Miller,
10. the under-secretary of State for intelligence services in the US Ministry of Defense, Stephen Cambone,
as well as against all further in particular designated and not designated involved ones to that in the following described criminal offences.

A unpunished crime

A crime is committed. The authors become admit. A small part of them is punished. By its statements, by medium reports and by internal investigation reports it becomes clear that they at least partly acted on instruction of their superiors. But their superiors remain exempt from punishment. An absurd conception?

In April 2004 the world was shocked, when the first photographies emerged over the brutal and entwuerdigenden abusing of arrested one in the Iraqi prison Abu Ghraib by their US-American Bewacher and interrogators. The first reaction was a disbelieving astonishment over the fact that such barbarian practices in 21 beginning. Century to be used. Gradually the media determined and resulted in official investigations the extent and the background of the crimes. It became clear that

those euphemistisch as abuse ("abuse") designated acts in reality torture and other heavy injuries of the international international law of war represented,

those applied practices not discharge of the work of a hand of sadistischen single authors were full, rather the practices under US military were far spread and constantly both in Afghanistan and in Guantánamo and Iraq as well as in well-known and unknown detention centers in other countries used,

those was not only arranged either directly or indirectly spreading of these practices by highest functionaries of the US-American government, but through and wrong legal information unkorrekte along-caused by civilian and military lawyers in the service of the government were.

The plaintiffs
The US human right organization "center for Constitutional Rights" brings the action in Germany against US Secretaries of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and nine further guidance persons of the Iraq war.

Filters of lawyers and 13 coworkers are busy in the center, which exists its seat since 1966 and in New York has. Its goal is it to get both on national and international level the development going of international law and to represent the rights of those before court, which have otherwise hardly entrance to legal assistance.

1980 interspersed the organization under guidance of attorney Peter Weiss in the case of the torture victim Joel Filártiga against a Folterer from Paraguay that the "Alien Tort Claims act" can find also with civil proceedings in the USA application. Since that time violations of human rights, which were committed abroad by foreigners at foreigners, can be punished by US courts.

Since 2002 the center represents and his president, the attorney Michael Ratner, among other things Guantánamo Bay interned in the US prison. On initiative of the CCR the highest Court of Justice of the USA decided to proceed in June that the Guantánamo prisoners have the right, against their detention before courts EFF

InterNet: www.ccr ny.org

International law ignores

At the prehistory of the scandal and the incidents of Abu Ghraib can be studied, with which methods the war is led against the terrorism since 11 September 2001. The right to war (ius ad bellum) is again discussed and taken up with the Iraq war, without international-law delimitations, in particular by the Charter of the United Nations, played still another role. In addition humanitarian international law and other legal barriers are ignored increasing (...)

The world-wide ethical, theoretical and legal acknowledgment of the torture prohibition took many decades up, yet the torture is a practice still usual in dozens of states. The fight against the torture is abstract therefore both in each concrete case as well as mankind civilized of central importance for the future of a humanen and.

Against the torture to fight, meant, decided their publicising to advance toward and use themselves for the punishment of the direct Folterer and the supervisors of torture practices. In this sense also the available charge should be understood. In contrast to this a continuous impunity would set elsewhere of the wire-pullers and backers of the war crimes of Abu Ghraib and wrong indications. The many governments of the world to feel encouraged to continue their unfortunately only too wide-spread torture practices. Exactly this situation had the chief prosecutor of the Nuernberger processes before eyes, when it implemented in its opening final speech on 21 November 1945: "leaving it it me to make clear: even if this right is used for the first time here against the German aggressors, it belongs to this right if it is to make sense that it must condemn aggressions by every other nation, including those, which form the here straight court. We are only then able to eliminate tyranny and force and aggression by the respective ruling powers against their own people if we make all humans unterwerfbar equally for the right."

The "seriosity" of the charge
One of the most important lawyers of the last century expresses thus, for which it also goes with the available drop happening: the equality of all humans before the law, the basis of all right.

A charge in the Federal Republic of Germany because of at Iraqi citizens in Iraq of committed violations of human rights against the US Secretary of Defense and other struggle-high military and civilian superior may provoke questions.

The professional seriosity of the project will be doubted just like the seriousness of the request. In this project took part reality consciousness one will agree upon. This hardly surprises because the people criminal law had itself to set since its beginnings with these reservations apart. Still it appears more naturally to refund a charge because of unfaithfulness and fraud to indicate and seriously require as an acting or former sovereignty carrier, possibly still another foreign government, and also expect that prosecution authorities of the German Federal Republic take up determinations. However also the Chilean ex dictator Pinochet would have been arrested never 1998 in London, if human right organizations and the responsible state States of only the logic of the feasible one and realistic one had used up themselves (...)

As justified thus questions may be from laymen, so little considers them the rapid development of the people criminal law since the establishment of Yugoslavia and of the Rwanda meeting Court of Justice of the United Nations 1993 and 1995 as well as the admission of the work international criminal court into the Hague 2002. (...) from it do not only result the basic authentication of the international community and thus the international criminal court to pursue such criminal offences. Also this power to punish is entitled to the individual states. "international law crimes are not internal affairs".

To international law crimes therefore the world justice principle applies. Exactly for this reason with broad agreement of the Upper House of Parliament and the federal daily the people penal code in Germany was decided, which entered into force on 30 June 2002. The people penal code has itself the goal set to seize "specific injustice of the crimes against international law better than this after general criminal law at present possible is" and "regarding the komplementaritaet of the pursuit competence international criminal court free of doubts to be guaranteed that Germany always is able, into the competence of the IStGH falling crimes themselves to pursue".

The world justice principle

Therefore the world right principle becomes expressly for all crimes designated in it against international law fixed, "in Paragraf 1 of the people penal code, even if the act were committed abroad and to the inland exhibits no purchase".

The people penal code is to be regarded not least therefore as one to that world-wide first national legislation projects that the people criminal law regulates after the entry into force of the IStGH statute. The IStGH has among other things the goal of promoting and of contributing to its spreading "by the creation of a relevant set of rules humanitarian international law".

This arrangement of the people penal code was a relevant reason, why the Iraqi Anzeigenerstatter and their US-American attorneys as well as the center for Constitutional Rights, which refund following charge in Germany. The other one, more crucial reason for the indicator refunding is that criminal pursuit takes place concerning the criminal offences in the USA, committed in Abu Ghraib, obviously only in very reduced measure and is to take place (...)

The legal appreciation of these incidents results in clearly their qualification as war crime and torture in the sense of the people penal code as well as the appropriate international regulations. The accused ones of carried out either by active doing or by omitting war crime facts. They are to be punish-pursued after the yardsticks of the superior responsibility. The German power of punishment is justified and the Federal Prosecutor's Office must circumstances and the guilty ones determine, because no obstacles of the prosecution in Germany oppose.

The criminal offences against arrested persons in Abu Ghraib, described above, represent torture and war crime after German and international people criminal law. Therefore the sufficient suspicion exists 3, 9 VStGB for a punishability after § 8 I No.. With the prisoners it acts over according to humanitarian international law persons in the sense of the people penal code, who can be protected, (...)

Application of German criminal law
The competence of the German jurisdiction for the criminal pursuit of the war crimes committed in Abu Ghraib results from the people penal code. According to the article 1 the world right principle applies to the crimes specified there against international law, i.e. Germany is obligated according to the legality principle also then to the pursuit of the criminal offences, if the act - like here - were committed by foreigners against foreigners abroad. A domestic connecting factor is no longer necessary for the practice of the German criminal court barness.

The German power of punishment is justified therefore for the individual torture acts, already correct-proves because of the clear wording § 6 StGB and the dominant literature opinion in addition.

In summary it can be therefore held that despite the continuous criticism of a part of the American press as well as from people and citizen right organizations both in the torture incidents of Abu Ghraib and in the deaths no determinations against hoeherrangige officers, let alone against highest civilian and military superiors to take place. Thus the indicated persons become because of them to the load put the criminal offences neither in the scene state, Iraq, still in the USA, which origin state of the authors punish-pursues. The international criminal court became active in the cases of the war crimes in Abu Ghraib/Irak likewise not, and it is not foreseeable also that the Court of Justice becomes active.

Thus the world right principle applies; its goal of preventing the impunity from violations of human rights to is to be carried. Because, as is by right implemented in the law reason: Even if "the act does not require an inland purchase (exhibits)... however still no priority jurisdiction begun with determinations (it has), then the legality principle in connection with the world legal maxim that the German prosecution authorities undertake them possible the efforts of determination anyhow, over a later prosecution (it is in Germany or abroad) to prepare".

ENDS

© Scoop Media