In response to perceived actions of the Western Forces (principally US and UK) in Iraq, some have found strong parallels in past matters which have been referred to international criminal tribunals.

Whether or not there would be any case to answer, and whatever the hypothesised outcome of such a case might be, the political reality is that this is unlikely to happen since few countries have both the political will and strength to sponsor and support any such enquiry. Accordingly a series of hearings is taking place under the title of the "World Tribunal on Iraq" with the purposes of:

• Hearing evidence in respect of any claim that the launch of the war in Iraq was a criminal act.
• Hearing evidence in respect of any alleged international criminal conduct during and as a part of the war in Iraq.
• Investigation of the doctrines espoused in the war (by all sides) and the economic connections which some allege are not disconnected from the decision to wage the war in Iraq.
• To reach a decision based on evidence and expert testimony in respect of these issues and the war in Iraq.

Background to issues

The War in Iraq left many people dead or injured, and some sources have identified significant War crimes or Crimes against humanity in its conduct, as well as mainstream media coverage of breaches of the geneva Convention such as at Abu Ghraib, and the use of depleted uranium which has left cancer running at extremely high levels amongst civilians. According to UN estimates, a further million people died during the trade embargo, due to malnutrition or lack of medical supplies, from sanctions targeting domestic water systems (History of Iraq). Many hundreds of thousands of these were children (whose deaths were documented by US military and are available on US military declassified websites). In addition, few commentators believe that under 100-200,000 civilians died as a result of other acts during the 2003 war.

Although other crimes are investigated, such tribunals require a lot of political will and strength to set up and few commentators appear to believe that a formal tribunal such as the Nuremberg Trials or the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia will be established. In addition the US has refused to ratify the International Criminal Court established for the purpose of investigation international crime. In the light of perceived growing tendencies to ignore international law, this tribunal was formed to investigate the concerns of other groups and onlookers into Iraq.

Tribunal legitimacy and scope

Legal basis and structure

(Taken from tribunal website)

Being confronted with the paradox that we want to end impunity but we do not have the enforcement power to do so, we have to follow a middle way between mere political protest and academic symposiums without any judicial ambition on the one hand, and on the other hand, procedural trials of which the outcome is known beforehand. This paradox implies:

1. That we are just citizens and therefore have no right to judge in a strict judicial way, and
2. That we have at the same time the duty as citizens to oppose criminal and war policies, which should be our starting point and our strength.

By approaching the Iraq case from as many angles as possible (international law, geopolitical and economical analysis, we strengthen our common objective. In this way the hearings will mutually enforce each other and all the findings will be brought together in the final session in Istanbul.

In order to be as inclusive as possible, we will support and recognize endeavours to resist impunity. The project will endorse and support the efforts to bring national authorities and warmakers to national courts (like the complaints filed in various state courts under the doctrine of Universal Jurisdiction ) and to international courts (like the International Criminal Court in the Hague).

Fundamental aims of Tribunal

• To establish the facts about what happened in Iraq and to inform the public.
• To continue and strengthen the mobilisation of the peace movement and the global anti-war protest. Anti-war and peace movements, which carried out the mass movements against the attack on Iraq have in principle adopted the idea of indicting the aggressors and of setting up a campaign to support the Tribunal process.
• The tribunal is to be considered a continuing process. The investigation of what happened in Iraq is of prime importance to restore truth and preserve collective memory against the constant rewriting of history. We are challenging the silence of international institutions and seeking to put them under pressure to fulfil their obligations under international law. In judging the recent past our aim is to prevent illegal wars in the future.
• To formulate recommendations on international law and expand notions of justice and ethical-political awareness. It can contribute to providing alternatives to 'victors' justice' and give a voice to the victims of war.
• To be part of a broader movement to stop the establishment of an imperial world order with a "permanent state of exception", which undergoes constant wars as one of its main tools.

Specific issues

Depleted Uranium

Main article: Depleted uranium

In 1996 and 1997, the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva, passed a resolution to ban the use of depleted uranium weapons. The Subcommission adopted resolutions which include depleted uranium weaponry amongst "weapons of mass and indiscriminate destruction, ... incompatible with international humanitarian or human rights law." (Secretary General's Report, 24 June 1997, E/CN. 4/Sub.2/1997/27)

According to the UN, DU breaches several grounds concerning inhumane weapons: it is not limited in time or space to the legal field of battle, or to military targets; it continues to act after the war; it is "inhumane" by virtue of its ability to cause prolongued death by cancer and other serious health issues, it causes harm to future civilians and passers by (including unborn children and those breathing the air or drinking water); and it has an "unduly negative" and long term effect on the natural environment and food chain.

According to a further report (August 2002) by the UN subcommission, laws which are breached by the use of depeted uranium ("DU") shells include: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the Charter of the United Nations; the Genocide Convention; the Convention Against Torture; the four Geneva Conventions of 1949; the Conventional Weapons Convention of 1980; and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. All of these laws are designed to spare civilians from unwarranted suffering in armed conflicts.

The Pentagon says that 320 metric tons of DU were left on the battlefield after the first Gulf war, although Russian military experts say 1000 metric tons is a more accurate figure. A UK Atomic Energy Authority report said that a further 500,000 people would die before the end of this century, due to radioactive debris left in the desert. The U.S. Army acknowledges the hazards in a training manual, requiring anyone who comes within 25 meters of any DU-contaminated equipment or terrain to wear respiratory and skin protection, and states that "contamination will make food and water unsafe for consumption."

The use of DU is also believed to have led to birth defects in the children of Allied veterans and is believed to be the cause of the 'worrying number of anophthalmos cases -- babies born without eyes' in Iraq. Only one in 50 million births should be anophthalmic, yet one Baghdad hospital had eight cases in just two years. Seven of the fathers had been exposed to American DU anti-tank rounds in 1991.

In Iraq in 1989 there were 11 birth defects per 100,000 births; in 2001 there were 116 per 100,000 births. A sixfold increase in child leukaemia since 1992 has been attributed to the presence of depleted uranium in the missiles used by the Allied forces in the first Gulf War. (Lancet Medical Journal, Feb.98). Birth defects and cancers in Iraq mirror those expected from radiation poisoning and uranium exposure.

Basis for war

The war on iraq was baised on the hunt for weapons of mass destruction. however there were no weapons of mass destructions found and the us goverment offically abandoned it's search on January 31 2005. Some political protesters suggest the the American oil reserves were running low and They went to war to gain unlimited access to the oil wells (since 60% of the worlds oil is found in iraq) other people believe that Saddam Hussain was harbouring and aiding terrorism. but the baisis of the war remains under political debate

Issues related to unilateralism vs international community

Potential issues related to human rights, war crime or genocide

This section is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by Official website