Read other letters about this article

• Thursday, January 8, 2009 10:17 AM

  -- Eric_G

  And isn't it also true that German civil law has some sort of universal jurisdiction? Could this be a potetial beginning for a case involving International Law?

  Yes, it's true. Sort of.

  In its Nov. 10, 2006 issue, Time Magazine's Adam Zagorin (link at sig) reported:

  “Just days after his resignation, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.”

  However, on 27 April 2007, the German federal prosecutor announced the government would not pursue charges against Cambone, Rumsfeld and 10 other U.S. officials, stating the accusations did not apply to German law, in part because there was insufficient evidence that the alleged acts occurred on German soil, nor did the accused live in Germany. This excuse runs contra to the very purpose of "universal jurisdiction" and really does not make a lot of sense.

  (See - http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/universal/univindex.htm )

  It is thought that the German about-face was due to threats made by the US that we would stop sharing intelligence information with Germany if Germany persisted in this line of prosecution. Clearly, there was substantial pressure applied by the Bush administration for Germany to forego prosecutions.

  —Jebbie Read Jebbie's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel