Iran has a 'shockingly strong' war-crimes case against Trump over Soleimani's killing -- and it could

[left-of-center2012]

Source: Business Insider

Iran has a 'shockingly strong' war-crimes case against Trump over Soleimani's killing — and it could win

Iran will pursue war-crimes charges against President Donald Trump at the International Criminal Court in the Hague over the January 3 assassination of its top commander, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, outside Baghdad's international airport, according to Gholam Hossein Esmaeili, the spokesman for Iran's top judicial authorities.

"We intend to file lawsuits in the Islamic Republic, Iraq and The Hague Court [International Court of Justice] against the military and government of America and against Trump," Esmaeili said at a Tuesday press conference. "There is no doubt that the US military has done a terrorist act assassinating Guards Commander Lt. Gen. Soleimani and Second-in-Command of Iraq Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis ... and Trump has confessed doing the crime."

While the US is not a signatory to the international court — US presidents have long contended the venue could be used by America's enemies in cases like this to pressure its foreign policy — it still faces a public-relations burden if the case goes to trial.

Shortly after Soleimani's death, Agnes Callamard, UN Special Rapporteur on Extra-Judicial Executions, tweeted that the bar for lethal action by a nation claiming self-defense — as the Trump administration has repeatedly claimed — is extremely high and requires an imminent threat that the US has so far failed to identify. "The targeted killings of Qasem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al Muhandi most likely violate international law [including] human rights law," she wrote. "Lawful justifications for such killings are very narrowly defined and it is hard to imagine how any of these can apply to these killings."

Read more: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-iran-qassem-soleimani-war-crimes-lawsuit-could-win-2020-1

[Wellstone ruled]

1. So it begins.

[dewsgirl]

2. What happens if he is guilty?

[left-of-center2012]

3. "What happens if he is guilty?"

I suggest we hand him over to Iran.

[dewsgirl]

5. Of course he is guilty, oh how I wish. I tried to find an

answer, I found where they may be able to ban him from leaving the United States.

[Stonepounder]

16. Or he may need to not leave the USA.

Just because we are not signatories, most other countries are and he could be arrested by one of them if he entered their borders.

[dewsgirl]

18. Oh ok, all I could find was a bit about he couldn't travel

to other countries, I didn't know why.

[Polybius]

35. No country would have the balls to arrest him while he's President

After maybe.

[progressoid]

13. Nothing. n/t

[Kablooie]

14. While the Senate remains Republican, nothing.

They will ignore it.
Or perhaps the US will pull out of the Geneva convention agreements.

[Raster]

17. well, he won't be building a bedbug infested hotel in Tehran.

[Sgent]

39. He probably won't leave the US

however, his assets could be up for seizure in any signatory countries.

[Marthe48]

4. trump's amerika is a s**thole nation

and I think has lost the cachet that protected American politicians and military personnel from being persecuted for war crimes in the past.

trump's amerika is not to be mistaken for the former United States of America which was a leader in drafting conventions governing war and treatment of human beings. trump's amerika will not be mistaken for the former United States of America.

[NJCher]

6. at some point

even Moscow Mitch is going to realize he's not worth saving.

[Thekaspervote]

8. Boy I do hope you are right!!

[SergeStorms]

11. Moscow Mitch himself.....

is not worth saving. He's as complicit in this dumbfuckery as a person could possibly be.

[ancianita]

7. Since the U.S. is not a signatory to the I.C.C., I wonder how it will handle this.

[Marthe48]

9. I heard bush and cheney don't dare leave the U.S.

because several countries are interested in trying them for their war crimes. It has been a long time since I read that, so I don't have a link handy. On edit, I added links. One is from 2014, the other is 2011
My comment might be wishful thinking :/


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuala_Lumpur_War_Crimes_Commission

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2014/jul/17/facebook-posts/are-george-w-bush-dick-cheney-unable-visit-europe-/

[former9thward]

31. Bush has traveled to other countries

Cheney probably wouldn't because of his heart issues. No country has ever filed charges against any U.S. president or ex-president. Just internet speculation.

[EX500rider]

33. KualaLumpurWarCrimesCommission not recognised by the UN and its verdicts are only symbolic.

[Odoreida]

23. ... the I.C.C., I wonder how it will handle this.

I don't. The ICC will not do anything at all.

To nail a head of state for war crimes has the precondition of losing a war, in actual fact if not in law.

Nothing whatever will come of it, and it all makes Trump even more popular with his base.

[ancianita]

29. Right enough. Yet Bush and Cheney's never having officially losing a war doesn't preclude the

threat of their apprehension when traveling abroad, which has been published in media.

The same could happen to this feckless dictator.

[Pepsidog]

10. Didn't something like this happen to Bush?

[getagrip_already]

12. 18 U.S. Code 2441.War crimes

It appears to be a federal crime, which has the death penalty among its penalties.

However, it is unlikely any us court would apply it against a potus (just my guess) for acts taken while in office. It's also likely he could be pardoned for it, even if he hassn't been charged, by another potus. I doubt any potus wants to be worried about the death penalty being applied when a foreign court rules against you.

But maybe if they just put him in a us prison, maybe even a military prison, that would be ok.

a)Offense.—
Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.

(b)Circumstances.—
The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such war crime or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).

(c)Definition.—As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct—
(1)defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2)prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3)which constitutes a grave breach of common Article 3 (as defined in subsection (d)) when committed in the context of and in association with an armed conflict not of an international character; or
(4)of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.

[oldsoftie]

15. Sorry, the fucker was a terrorist. he was the head of a listed terrorist organization.

The Obama admin named him as responsible for attempting to kill the Saudi ambassador. Thats enough to get a bullet right there.

[JonLP24]

20. Who cares about the Saudi Ambassador?

I know he is not the same as Bandar Bush who was indirectly responsible for 9-11 but I consider the House of Saud to be more of a terrorist than Iran especially when it comes to spreading their wahabbi ideology.

[oldsoftie]

21. An Ambassador is an Ambassador. Similar to why the UN in NYC has reps from bad countries.

I'm no fan of S.A. either, but that was only one card out of a deck of 52 reasons to knock off Solieman. He wasnt an elected leader of Iran or politician.

[JonLP24]

22. I'm not interested in taking sides in the SA Iran rivalry

If I had to take a side I wouldn't take Saudi Arabia's.

A lot of countries will use diplomats or maybe even an ambassador as a spy because of the diplomatic immunity. I have no idea if that Saudi Ambassador was one but I suspected Bandar Bush because he was also the point man for Iran-Contra and he become head of the intelligence agencies of Saudi Arabia.

[usaf-vet]

19. Wow, he'd kill to get a Nobel Peace Prize. So he did but looks like he'll get indicted at the Hague

instead. How cool is that!

[Odoreida]

24. No peace prize of course, but he will not be indicted at the Hague ...

... unless he loses a war in a way that puts the USA under foreign occupation.

Otherwise it is just a highly amusing masturbation fantasy.

[usaf-vet]

25. Well it was worth the speculation.

Sounds like you might not get out enough. Try fishing, golf or distant swimming.

[C_U_L8R]

26. The Trumps will never be allowed to travel

Except maybe to Russia, the Philippines, or Saudi Arabia

[Skittles]

27. so say the people who shot down a civilian airliner

[dware]

28. +100.

There is that.

[PatrickforO]

30. Oh, well...definitely. I think we should turn him over.

A nice trial in Iran over violations of human rights laws.

[EX500rider]

36. Iran's human rights violations make the US look like Sunday School.

Iran's top diplomat says his country executes gay people because of 'moral principles'

https://www.businessinsider.com/irans-top-diplomat-javad-zarif-defends-execution-of-gay-people-2019-6

Iran is believed to execute the most people per capita:

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Iran.[2] Crimes punishable by death include murder; rape; child molestation; sodomy; drug trafficking; armed robbery; kidnapping; terrorism; burglary; pedophilia; homosexuality; incestuous relations; fornication; prohibited sexual relations; sexual misconduct; prostitution;[3][4] plotting to overthrow the Islamic regime; political dissidence; sabotage; arson; rebellion; apostasy; adultery; blasphemy; extortion; counterfeiting; smuggling; speculating; disrupting production; recidivist consumption of alcohol; producing or preparing food, drink, cosmetics, or sanitary items that lead to death when consumed or used; producing and publishing pornography; using pornographic materials to solicit sex; recidivist false accusation of capital sexual offenses causing execution of an innocent person; recidivist theft; certain military offenses (e. g., cowardice, assisting the enemy); "waging war against God"; "spreading corruption on Earth"; espionage; and treason.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Iran

[PatrickforO]

37. Yeah, that's fine, but it isn't governments that are affected by war crimes,

genocide or crimes against humanity.

It is people.

This bombing of this guy that is 'not a nice guy' was done unilaterally and probably killed some civilians.

The fact he might have done something at some indefinite time in the future is hardly an excuse to proactively kill him now, is it?

[EX500rider]

38. He had caused the death of enough Americans in the past to warrant a drone strike imo.

[christx30]

40. Plus he was in charge of the people that were putting down the pro-freedom

protesters last month. They killed over 1600 of their fellow citizens. I don't really care about Iran's crocodile tears over this dick. Let them complain to the UN.

[EX500rider]

41. Also responsible for 1,000's and 1,000's of Arab dead via his proxies with..

....Hezbollah, Yemen Shia rebels, Gaza Islamic terrorists and the mercenary army recruited for Syria etc.

[Aussie105]

32. Taking somebody out

with 'extreme prejudice' on the basis . . . . 'we had to get him before he got us' is going to need some very solid supporting evidence.

After all, it's not a very good legal defense to say you murdered your neighbour because he looked at you in a way that made you think he was going to kill you and your family. It's called the 'pre-emptive self defense' story, and it never goes down well.

[Kaleva]

34. So the worst Trump will face is a public relations burden?

"While the US is not a signatory to the international court — US presidents have long contended the venue could be used by America's enemies in cases like this to pressure its foreign policy — it still faces a public-relations burden if the case goes to trial."

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-iran-qassem-soleimani-war-crimes-lawsuit-could-win-2020-1