Danish prime minister avoids prosecution for Iraq war

international | anti-war / imperialism | news report

Thursday April 12, 2007 14:48

by Coilín ÓhAiseadha

Plaintiffs did not have legal interest, High Court says

Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen cannot be prosecuted for the war in Iraq, the High Court of Denmark ruled on Wednesday 11 April. The court found that the plaintiffs were not entitled to prosecute, as they did not have "legal interest" in the matter. They will now appeal to the Supreme Court.

Working under the umbrella of a group called the “Danish Constitution Committee of 2003”, a group of 26 plaintiffs had attempted to prosecute the prime minister for leading Denmark into a war that they believe to be in breach of the Danish constitution. For one thing, the Danish campaign in Iraq has been taking place under the leadership of officers of the United States’ armed forces and therefore, in the view of the plaintiffs, involves cession of sovereignty.

But the court has not upheld their view.

The plaintiffs are no worse affected than others, the High Court has argued. As they are neither individually nor jointly more severely affected by the campaign in Iraq than any other Danish citizen, they are not entitled to prosecute.

Also, the court notes that the case was brought at a point in time when Danish involvement in Iraq had been extended by the Danish parliament. Thus, the case concerning the original parliamentary decision was no longer relevant, the court finds.

The prosecution had referred to parliamentary resolution B118 of 21 March 2003, when the Danish parliament passed a motion that Danish troops should participate in the multinational force that invaded Iraq. But since then the parliament has several times repeated its consent for the campaign, the first time being in resolution B165 of 15 May 2003. As the case was brought on the basis of the first resolution, the court has rejected it on the basis that it is no longer relevant.

With reference to the dead soldier, Bjarke Olsen Kirkmand, whose parents have demanded compensation in association with the case, the court has also rejected this claim. The soldier was competent when he entered into his contract with the army and he was dispatched to Iraq in accordance with a resolution in parliament. Thus, the prime minister is not the correct party to prosecute in matters of compensation, the court notes in its refusal to let the case proceed.

The Constitution Committee is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court.

save preference

Comments (2 of 2)

Spurious logic

by Coilín

Fri Apr 13, 2007 21:59

Assuming that my source is reliable, I am inclined to agree. Mind you, the illogicality may be institutional rather than individual.

(The Danish judicial system is an odd beast, and specifically a mongrel as regards certain circumstances where the legislative power has the authority to interfere at judicial level.)

I also find the court's reasoning regarding the extension of the mandate to occupy Iraq to be dodgy. After all, the decisions to extend the mandate all rest solidly on the initial decision to invade. It was the decision to invade that made the extensions possible.

Happily, the decision has now been made to withdraw the Danish troops from the British-occupied area of Basra, but of course this will not bring Bjarke Kirkmand back from the grave. Nor will it make it safe for Danish citizens to travel to Iraq any time soon. Nor will it restore Denmark's reputation as a democratic, peace-loving country that had made significant steps to abandon its role as a colonial power.

Best,
Coilín.

Spurious logic by the court.

by Tim

Fri Apr 13, 2007 09:59

"The plaintiffs are no worse affected than others, the High Court has argued. As they are neither individually nor jointly more severely affected by the campaign in Iraq than any other Danish citizen, they are not entitled to prosecute. "

That doesn't make sense. If the rest of Denmark is no worse affected, that doesn't mean that the rest of Denmark is not entitled to prosecute, just because they did not chose to do so.
Thousands of legal cases in Denmark and Worldwide are taken by individuals or small groups about govt decisions that affect many more citizens, if not the whole country.

Tranlasted from legalses speak into plain english, the Danish High Court is saying that the ordinary citizen is not allowed to hold the government accountable for anything seriously illegal even when the dogs on the street can see the crime that was committed.

Good luck in the supreme court.

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Voltaire Network

Danish prime minister avoids prosecution for Iraq war

Comments (2 of 2)