Ever heard of these?
Nuremberg Principles
Principle I
Principle I states, "Any person who commits an act which constitutes a
crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment."
Principle II
Principle II states, "The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law."
Principle III
Principle III states, "The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as
Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law."
Principle IV
Principle IV states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".
This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".
Previous to the time of the
Nuremberg Trials, this excuse was known in common parlance as "
Superior Orders". After the prominent, high profile event of the
Nuremberg Trials, that excuse is now referred to by many as "
Nuremberg Defense". In recent times, a third term, "
Lawful orders" has become common parlance for some people. All three terms are in use today, and they all have slightly different nuances of meaning, depending on the context in which they are used.
Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the
jurisprudence found in
certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection. It is also supported by
the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status which was issued by the Office of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which
conscientious objectors can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.
See also:
Nuremberg Defense,
Superior Orders, and
Lawful orders
Principle V
Principle V states, "Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law."
Principle VI
Principle VI states,
"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a)
Crimes against peacei) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a
war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).(b)
War crimes:Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of
slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of
prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.(c)
Crimes against humanity:Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."
Principle VII
Principle VII states, "Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.
I like IV which protect the conscientous objector (Manning) & VI....proof that Iraq and any agression against Iran is illegal an unexcusable crime against peace.
