Stardate 20030526.0715

(On Screen): It's traditionally said that after a war, lawyers move in to clean things up by bayoneting all the wounded. The Iraq war having now been finished in a lightning 3 week campaign, the claims of "war crimes" have been flying thick and fast.

A Belgian lawyer attempted to get Belgium to investigate Tommy Franks for war crimes. The Belgian government has referred the case to the US where, of course, nothing will happen.

On the other hand, we now have the first attempt to file charges for "crimes against humanity" with the International Criminal Court because of the war. As should surprise no one, the targets of these charges are not Baathist.

A Greek lawyers' group has accused Prime Minister Tony Blair and other British officials of "crimes against humanity" for their role in the Iraq war.

The claims were contained in a complaint the Athens Bar Association plans to file with the International Criminal Court.

The group said it was considering similar action against Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, who also backed the US-led campaign.

Nato-member Greece saw many anti-war protests. The governing Socialists openly backed the demonstrations, but permitted US forces to continue using a base on Crete.

The bar association listed Mr Blair, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and others for "crimes against humanity and war crimes" as well as violations of international law, human rights and a number of treaties.

The group felt an "ethical and juristic responsibility" to seek action from the new International Criminal Court, a statement said.

The association's document excluded the United States, which has challenged the court's jurisdiction over Americans.

The US has done a lot more than challenge said jurisdiction. Congress has passed a bill giving the President the power to use "any means necessary" (i.e. to use military force) to secure the release of any American being held by the ICC or being held by any national government on behalf of the ICC.

By any normal standards, Tony Blair hasn't committed anything even remotely like a "crime against humanity". Of course, when it comes to the ICC charter the term "crime against humanity" becomes distorted out of all recognition. The way that charter is written, there are items in it which permit readings which could be applied to almost any hostile act.

But even within broad interpretations of the ICC definitions, it's hard to see just what Jose Aznar might have done that could in any way be interpreted as a "crime against humanity".

The United States never came even close to actually ratifying the ICC, and the reason why was that it was viewed here (by leaders of both parties) as being a venue where disgruntled losers would harass and persecute Americans. Such concerns have been ridiculed, but are now shown to be entirely justified. The ICC has only been online for 2 months and already the fruitcakes are trying to use it to persecute their political enemies. The only reason that these lawyers are trying to indict Blair and not trying to indict Bush is that the UK ratified the treaty and we didn't. If we actually had ratified that monstrosity, there can be no doubt at all that every American official down to the official dog-catcher in Washington DC would have been accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity by now, just because they were American and were drawing breath.