Appeal on assassinated Iraqi academics:
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
1. How many Iraqi academics have been killed and when?
2. Is this appeal targeted only to other academics?
3. What goals does this appeal aim to achieve?
4. Who are the academics that have been assassinated?
5. Were the assassinated academics Baathists?
6. What responsibility does the US, and other members of the Multi-National Force in Iraq, have?
7. You hold the US responsible for protecting Iraqi citizens, including academics. Are you
suggesting that US forces are assassinating Iraqi academics?
8. Who is assassinating Iraqi academics?
9. Is the government in Iraq investigating these assassinations?
10. What is the Salvador option?
11. Why is the appeal focused on academics when assassinations are widespread in Iraq?
12. Why is the petition addressed to the Special Rapporteur on Summary Executions?
13. How can the Special Rapporteur on Summary Executions pressure governments to act?
14. What instruments of international law are applicable in the case of assassinated Iraqi
academics?
15. Why not take this appeal to the International Criminal Court?
16. Does any other court have jurisdiction relative to assassinated Iraqi academics?
17. Has the Special Rapporteur on Summary Executions visited Iraq?
18. What other channels will be pursued?
19. What actions can I take as an individual in support of this appeal?
20. What is the BRussells
Tribunal doing in the background of this appeal?
21. What will happen to the signatory list of the petition?
__________________________________________
1. How many Iraqi academics have been killed and when?
The BRussells
Tribunal has compiled a
list that names over 130 Iraqi academics
murdered between 2003 and 2006. The
Iraqi Association of University Lecturers
say the number is over 300. The puppet government of Iraq has itself confirmed over 150 assassinations. Other
estimates place the number over 1000. This is in addition to the thousands forced to
flee Iraq in fear of their lives. That
so many are subject to
forced exile is testament to the violent
climate that faces Iraqi educators, intellectuals and academics.
Further to
assassinations, disappearances and forced exile, a
report published in 2005 by the
International Leadership Institute,
affiliated to the United Nations University, found that "Eighty-four
per cent of higher education institutes were burned, looted or destroyed," following the US
invasion in 2003.
For media
reports and background, click
here and scroll down.
2. Is this appeal targeted only to other academics?
This appeal
speaks to all those who understand that education is the foundation of
sovereignty and justice, and an important factor
promoting democracy and development in Iraq.
3. What goals does this appeal aim to achieve?
i)
Challenging — if possible, forestalling — the campaign of assassinations targeting academics in particular,
and more widely anti-occupation figures, in Iraq;
ii) Drawing
attention to an important aspect of the occupation and of imperialism: the
destruction of Iraq’s intellectual resources;
iii) Taking
specific action in support of Iraqi academics, educators and intellectuals, in:
a) Bringing
this matter to the attention of the
Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary and
Arbitrary Executions at the
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights (UNHCHR) in Geneva with the aim of providing justification for an urgent
fact-finding country visit to Iraq;
b) Engaging
in solidarity actions, including linking Iraqi academics inside and exiled with their non-Iraqi peers and
raising the issue of the attempted destruction of Iraq’s intellectual resources and heritage on campuses
worldwide;
c)
Challenging propaganda surrounding the so-called "political process" in the "new Iraq" by exposing one
exemplary aspect of the horror and lawlessness borne of US imperial politics.
4. Who are the academics that have been assassinated?
The pattern
of academics assassinated appears to substantiate claims that a campaign exists and is being conducted to
erase a key section of the secular
middle class in Iraq — a class that has largely resisted
the US occupation of Iraq and refused to be co-opted by the so-called "political
process" or Iraq’s US-installed
puppet government.
5. Were the assassinated academics Baathists?
They were
educators. Being a Baathist or not a Baathist is not criteria for the BRussells
Tribunal to defend Iraqi academics. In reality, the term "de-Baathification" is a war slogan used by the US
and its allies in a bid to
destroy the Iraqi national state — its
administrative apparatus,
public services,
properties,
archives,
registries of public and private ownership,
natural resources,
revenues and
reserves (leading Iraq to the brink of
economic collapse and
abject poverty) as well as its
economic foundations,
laws and
judicial system,
museums,
libraries,
army and police,
health and
education systems,
art,
print media,
radio and
television, etc.
This
destruction is not a consequence of war but rather a
studied plan prepared before the invasion. Strictly
speaking, and according to definition under international law, this destruction is
genocide.
The
liquidation of Iraqi academics has nothing to do with them being Baathist or not. It follows from the
imperial character of the invasion of
Iraq, and the attempt to render
null and void Iraqi sovereignty. The
real division in Iraq is between those
who go along with this project and
those who oppose it.
The US
imperial project, based on
privatization and
ruin, indeed outright
looting and
confiscation, and in
direct violation of international law, has created the
objective and political conditions for the rise of puppet government-controlled
death squads and US-drafted mercenary
security contractors that kill and
terrorize Iraqi academics and others with
impunity. It is the biggest
heist in history, and it is backed with murderous
force.
6. What responsibility does the US, and other members of the Multi-National Force in Iraq,
have?
In remaining
belligerent occupants, the US and other
members of the
Multi-National Force in Iraq (MNF-I),
though illegally present in Iraq, are legally bound under international humanitarian law to
protect civilian life in Iraq, including
academics. As occupying powers in "effective control" of Iraq, these duties extend, under international law,
not only to all forces operating under MNF-I central command, but all representatives of the occupying powers,
including the puppet Iraqi government and its militias. They have systematically failed in this solemn and
binding obligation. This failure, when atrocities are as widespread as they are (including assassinations),
denotes impunity in the face of international human rights and humanitarian law obligations, and relevant
monitoring bodies.
7. You hold the US responsible for protecting Iraqi citizens, including academics. Are you
suggesting that US forces are assassinating Iraqi academics?
The BRussells
Tribunal charges that Iraq is being held hostage to a number of
death squads, many of which have
direct links with the
US-installed puppet government. There
exist
military and
paramilitary forces that have a stake in
ensuring that critical voices —
anti-occupation forces — are
silenced. The outgoing Maltese UN human
rights chief in Iraq is on record stating that the US is "aware"
of torture in Iraqi prisons. As an occupying power, any violations of the laws of war and international
humanitarian and human rights laws are
legally imputable to the United States
government. Contrary to the
wishful thinking of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld,
the United States government and its civilian officials and military personnel are fully and personally
responsible for violations committed by the puppet government of Iraq, including assassinations and the
existence and operation of death squads. This responsibility exists under international criminal law
regardless of the fact that the US invasion and occupation of Iraq was and is
illegal, and that everything that has
followed in Iraqi domestic politics — including
elections,
puppet government and
faux constitutions — is a furtherance of
this illegality and thereby null and void.
8. Who is assassinating Iraqi academics?
Extra-judicial assassination, by nature, is difficult to pin down. It is also dangerous to investigate or even
report. The existence of pro-puppet government
paramilitary death squads is an
established
fact. The strong suggestion from the
broad community of Iraqi academics is that these forces are conducting the majority of assassinations of
anti-occupation academics, educators and intellectuals. The existence of lawless US-outsourced private
security firms, peopled by
mercenaries, terrorists and murderers
only adds to the climate of criminal impunity. This is not an oversight; it is
conscious policy.
9. Is the government in Iraq investigating these assassinations?
That is a
question for them. The BRussells
Tribunal regards the puppet government in Iraq as thoroughly illegitimate and gross violators of human rights.
Under international law, occupying powers can not transfer the sovereignty of the Iraqi people to
representatives of occupying powers. To suggest that it is acceptable — or even desirable — that a client
regime that has no legality under international law conducts an investigation into these assassinations
affords that regime a level of recognition and legitimacy that the BRussells
Tribunal expressly denies it. It is also akin to charging the fox with overseeing the henhouse. Can a
government which supports unaccountable private militias, death squads and
secret prisons (all under the Interior
Ministry), torturing, disappearing and killing Iraqi civilians daily, be trusted to investigate the
assassination of anti-occupation academics and intellectuals? We believe the answer to that question is
self-evident. Given that the paramilitary forces that are responsible for the majority of these killings have
direct ties to the Iraqi government, the BRussells
Tribunal launches this campaign in full knowledge that no puppet government investigation will be forthcoming,
and that it would be in no way convincing if it was.
10. What is the Salvador option?
The phrase "Salvador
option" refers to the history of US-funded and supported paramilitary forces that assassinated,
kidnapped and terrorized countless thousands during the "dirty
wars" that established, during the 1970s and 1980s, US hegemony in Latin America. Leading
journalists
report — and
some have been killed investigating —
similar operations
underway in
Iraq, including
US/UK
state-sponsored terrorism,
incitement,
torture,
disappearances and
assassinations.
11. Why is the appeal focused on academics when assassinations are widespread in Iraq?
A key source
of national sovereignty is a given country’s intellectual capacity. Iraqi academics are not simply the
lifeblood of the educational system; they compose the intellectual class, which is the mind of Iraq, as well
as the practical scientific, technical and administrative base necessary to guide Iraq towards independence,
democracy and development.
The BRussells
Tribunal stands in opposition to all assassinations, but is particularly appalled at the campaign of
intimidation and murder targeting Iraqi academics — and the silence afforded to the issue in mainstream media
— because it represents the liquidation of the knowledge base that must be mobilized in order to resist US
imperial designs on Iraq.
The issue of
Iraqi academics who have been and are targeted or assassinated is also important to establishing the existence
of a policy of effective
genocide in Iraq. A case currently rests
before the
International Court of Justice relative
to Bosnia that evokes a
similar charge; that targeting a given
country’s educators for slaughter is an indicator and aspect of genocide.
12. Why is the petition addressed to the Special Rapporteur on Summary Executions?
The appeal
petition (click
here to sign) is addressed to the
Special Rapporteur on Summary Executions
at
UNHCHR in Geneva as he has a clear
mandate to raise the issue and press
Iraqi and occupying authorities to protect Iraqi academics, along with other civilians. His mandate is also
universal (i.e., it exists irrespective
of whatever international covenants or conventions a given state has signed, ratified or refused to sign).
There are
four things that the special rapporteur can do: i) Dialogue with governments; ii) Include this issue as a
byline in his annual report; iii) Authorize and conduct a separate investigation, leading to a separate report
from the annual, obligatory report; iv) Make a fact-finding country visit.
The first
body the special rapporteur reports to is
The Commission on Human Rights. Reports
also go to the UN General Assembly. The Commission on Human Rights discusses reports from the special
rapporteur during its annual sessions that usually meet in Geneva in March and April. Our aim is to push for
an urgent resolution to be proposed at the 62nd session of the Commission in March and April 2006 condemning
the existence of death squads in Iraq and obliging the United States, all occupying powers and the puppet
Iraqi government — legitimate or otherwise — to enforce all peremptory norms of humanitarian law relative to
the protection of civilian life.
Pursuant to
a fact-finding country visit (which would also lead to a separate report submitted to The Commission on Human
Rights), the special rapporteur would be obliged to meet with a wide range of officials and investigate
numerous aspects of extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary execution in Iraq. The fact-finding process and
report investigation would be instrumental in and of itself in bringing an end to all extrajudicial
assassinations.
13. How can the Special Rapporteur on Summary Executions pressure governments to act?
The
alternatives open to the special rapporteur are to: i) Issue "urgent appeals" to governments, encouraging
governments to take steps to protect the right to life (and other relevant civil and political rights) and
requesting of them that he be informed as and when such steps are taken; ii) Issue "letters of allegations"
which are sent to governments in the form of case summaries. Again, the special rapporteur would ask to be
informed of progress with respect to investigations conducted by concerned governments and penal or
disciplinary sanctions imposed on perpetrators, compensation provided to families of victims, and so on.
The special
rapporteur can ask for information from governments, request that they clarify the substance of allegations,
or report on allegations of impunity relative to relevant international standards (such as
The Four Geneva Conventions and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
among other instruments of international humanitarian and human rights law). The issue of impunity is flagged
up by the special rapporteur as one of two issues (the other being the death penalty) of "special concern."
14. What instruments of international law are applicable in the case of assassinated
academics?
Principal
relevant instruments include
The Fourth Geneva Convention (regarded
as a foundation of international humanitarian law), the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(Article 6 and also Articles 2, 4 and 26) and the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(Articles 3 and 2), wherein the right to life "shall be protected by law" and guaranteed without distinction
or discrimination.
The puppet
Iraqi government and the US and members of
Multi-National Force-Iraq are legally
subject to these conventions.
Further,
Article 4, paragraph 2, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
provides that exceptional circumstances such as internal political instability or any other public emergency
may not be invoked to justify any derogation from the right to life and security of the person. Principle 4 of
the
Principles on the Effective Prevention and
Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, adopted by the Economic and
Social Council in its resolution 1989/65 of 24 May 1989, sets forth "the obligation of governments to
guarantee effective protection through judicial or other means to individuals and groups who are in danger of
extra-legal, arbitrary or summary executions, including those who receive death threats."
Nowhere in
international law is assassination sanctioned. Under resolution 1996/74 of The Commission on Human Rights, the
Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions is requested to: "(b) respond
effectively to information that comes before him, in particular when an extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary
execution is imminent or threatened or when such an execution has occurred"; and "(e) pay special attention to
extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions where the victims are individuals who are carrying out peaceful
activities in defense of human rights and fundamental freedoms."
Education
has a special place in the universe of UN values because of the ways in which it contributes to understanding
and international peace and security. A threat to academics is therefore of principal concern to the UN, and
by extension to The Commission on Human Rights.
Also
applicable is the
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide, as well as the
Nuremberg Principles.
Under
Article 2 of the
Genocide Convention, genocide is defined
"acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group,"
including "killing members of the group," "causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group," and
"deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in
whole or in part." Article 3 defines as punishable not only actual genocide as defined, but "conspiracy to
commit genocide," "attempt to commit genocide," and "complicity in genocide." Article 8 provides that "Any
Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the
Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of
genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3."
Principle Vl
of the
Nuremberg Principles establishes as "war
crimes", "punishable as crimes under international law," murder and the plunder of public or private property.
"Crimes against humanity" are taken to include murder and "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." "Crimes against peace" are defined as: "i) Planning, preparation,
initiation or waging 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 accomplishments of any of the acts
mentioned under (i)."
Principle
VII of the
Nuremberg Principles establishes that
"Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth
in Principles VI is a crime under international law."
Further, the
Hague IV Conventions on Laws and Customs
of War on Land, 1917, make explicit, in Article 56, that educational institutions are to be regarded as
private property, and thus must not be pillaged or destroyed, that occupying forces in war are bound to
protect such property and that proceedings should follow their intentional damage, seizure or destruction.
Article 55 reinforces this duty relative to all public buildings and capital. Further, an occupying power is
obliged, according to Articles 43 and 46, to protect life and take all steps in its power to reestablish and
ensure "public order and safety".
In addition,
The Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural
Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (ratified by the Republic of Iraq in 1967) creates a
clear obligation to protect museums, libraries and archives, and other sites of cultural property. Paragraph 1
of Article 4 notes: "The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect cultural property situated within their
own territory as well as within the territory of other High Contracting Parties by refraining from any use of
the property and its immediate surroundings or of the appliances in use for its protection for purposes which
are likely to expose it to destruction or damage in the event of armed conflict; and by refraining from any
act of hostility, directed against such property."
The
Hague IV Conventions and
Fourth Geneva Convention are peremptory
norms of international law: they cannot be violated by any state. Further to these instruments, the
1st Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions,
1977, makes clear, under Article 51, that "Attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of
reprisals are prohibited." Under Article 85, concerning "grave breaches" to the Protocol, "when committed
willfully, in violation of the relevant provisions of this Protocol, and causing death or serious injury to
body or health" include "Making the civilian population or individual civilians the object of attack." The
United States, both alone and on behalf of the puppet government of Iraq, is bound under international law to
uphold the provisions of this Protocol.
Additional information: Ratification / signatory
status relative to international human rights treaties —
Iraq and
The United States. For ratification /
signatory status relative to international human rights treaties of other members of Multi-National
Force-Iraq, click
here. Ratification / signatory status
relative to international humanitarian law —
Iraq and
The United States. For ratification /
signatory status relative to international humanitarian law of other members of Multi-National Force-Iraq,
click
here.
15. Why not take this appeal to the International Criminal Court?
The
International Criminal Court (ICC) is a
"court of last resort" for the investigation and prosecution of war crimes, genocide and crimes against
humanity. It does not replace domestic, national courts or remedies, which must be exhausted before any given
case can be referred to the ICC. More importantly, the ICC has no
jurisdiction in Iraq, given that Iraq is
not a
State Party to the
Rome Statute that established the ICC.
While the
puppet government of Iraq (sovereign, legitimate or otherwise) could decide to accept ICC jurisdiction over a
specific crime committed in Iraq, it is doubtful that it ever will. Nonetheless, State Parties are obliged to
bring their own nationals to the ICC if they themselves are unable or unwilling to hear cases of war crimes,
genocide or crimes against humanity in domestic courts.
In theory,
all members of the
Multi-National Force in Iraq who are
State Parties to the Rome Statute are obligated to surrender individuals to the ICC if credible cases are
brought against them and they themselves refuse to hear them in national courts.
There are
four methods for referral to the ICC: i) any State Party to the Rome Statute refers a situation to the ICC
Prosecutor; ii) the state in which the alleged crime was committed refers a situation to the ICC Prosecutor
(it need not be a State Party to do so); iii) The UN Security Council refers a situation to the ICC
Prosecutor; iv) the ICC Prosecutor initiates a case on his / her own authority.
The last
option is the one most applicable. In this instance the Prosecutor needs, in order to continue, the assent of
two judges of a three-judge panel. In the absence of a referral by a state or State Party, information on a
given situation can be submitted to the Prosecutor by an IGO or NGO. However, in this instance (where the
Prosecutor takes up a case on his own volition), the ICC can only exercise jurisdiction if the state or
territory on which the alleged crime was committed, or the state of which the person suspected is a national,
is a State Party to the Rome Statute.
Though the
US is not a State Party to the Rome Statute,
the following states who have — or had —
forces in Iraq (and are therefore liable to cases being prepared against them, if relevant facts emerge) are:
UK, Italy, Spain, Poland, Estonia, Albania, Georgia, Latvia, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Mongolia,
Slovakia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, Australia.
The BRussells
Tribunal is pressing for an investigation by the Special Rapporteur on Summary Executions precisely to bring
to light information that could be used in later legal proceedings, including cases brought to the ICC.
16. Does any other court have jurisdiction relative to assassinated Iraqi academics?
Yes. Insofar
as all forces that are factually occupying powers are legally imputable for any violations of human rights
instruments to which they are State Parties in territor