THE HANDSTAND

august 2005

bbc ignores
The World Tribunal on Iraq


John Pilger, Hans von Sponeck, Dahr Jamail and Others Respond to BBC Statement Regarding The World Tribunal on Iraq
MEDIA ALERT: BIASED, BLINKERED, CULPABLE

"Why say more? Observe this distinction:
between the fool who longs for his own advantage
and the sage who acts for the advantage of others."
(Shantideva, 8th century)



Media Lens recently issued a media alert about the lack of British media coverage given to the World Tribunal on Iraq, held in Istanbul last month. Our alert, The Mysterious Case of the Vanishing World Tribunal on Iraq, was sent out on July 6, 2005:

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/05/050706_the_mysterious_case.php.

We suggested that readers ask senior BBC managers and editors why the BBC, a publicly-funded broadcaster, is failing to cover the many reports of alleged US war crimes in Fallujah and elsewhere in Iraq. Why, in particular, did the main BBC news programmes ignore the Tribunal's damning findings against the invasion and occupation of Iraq? And when has the BBC ever reported Bush and Blair's culpability for war crimes?

These are troubling questions for well-rewarded media professionals to answer rationally, while preserving any semblance of self-respect. The cognitive dissonance demonstrated by senior BBC managers trying to believe that BBC 'impartiality' is upheld, even while actual media performance clearly promotes the agenda of destructive state power, is astounding to behold. One recalls the White Queen's boast in Lewis Carroll's 'Through the Looking Glass': "Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."


Alice in Wonderland: The "Evidence-Based Journalism" That Ignores Evidence!

Helen Boaden, the BBC news director, has now issued the following statement to the many people who wrote to her. We asked a number of knowledgeable commentators to respond (see below).

"Thank you for your email criticising the BBC for lack of coverage of the World Tribunal on Iraq. We have received numerous complaints on this subject in different parts of the BBC and - after careful consideration of the matter - the following is the BBC response, which I am sending on behalf of the BBC.

"The subjects under discussion at the Istanbul meeting are indeed important and many of the topics are matters which the BBC has examined persistently and regularly across our outlets. There are many conferences which the BBC does not cover and - given finite resources - we take the view that what is important is that a full range of issues is aired.

"Currently our top financial priority in relation to Iraq is to report on events from the country itself. The BBC is the only British broadcaster to have maintained a continuous presence in the country, including the maintenance of a permanent bureau in Baghdad. One example of how this investment has paid off is the whole day of reports we carried on BBC News 24, BBC World, Radio 5 Live and on the BBC News website on June 7th. On that day, we chronicled different aspects of life for the 27 million people who live in Iraq. There's a summary of what we did on the website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4603875.stm

"Turning to the agenda of the World Tribunal on Iraq, the BBC has examined events in Iraq from many angles, including the legal framework; the role of the UN; international relations; the conduct of coalition forces and the human rights violations at Abu Graib; the controversy over Guantanamo Bay. But unlike the WTI which takes the war in Iraq as unjust as its premise, the BBC must be open-minded and impartial in its approach.

"We are committed to evidence-based journalism. We have not been able to establish that the US used banned chemical weapons and committed other atrocities against civilians in Falluja last November. Inquiries on the ground at the time and subsequently indicate that their use is unlikely to have occurred.

"The BBC takes its commitment to impartial reporting with the utmost seriousness. Please rest assured that we strive for open-minded, responsible journalism.

"Yours sincerely
Helen Boaden, Director, BBC News" (Email forwarded by numerous Media Lens readers, July 13 onwards, 2005)

The award-winning journalist John Pilger, who has extensive experience of visiting and reporting on Iraq, told us:

"Helen Boaden's response is simply ridiculous. She says the BBC 'has not established' that the US has used banned weapons or committed atrocities. The US has admitted using napalm, a banned weapon, and the evidence of atrocities in Fallujah is overwhelming: too great to list here. Read, for example, the statements of doctors at Fallujah General Hospital and of other independent eye witnesses. The reason the BBC 'has not established' all this is because its reporters are embedded with the Americans and British and report the occupiers' news, about which there is nothing 'impartial'." (Email to Media Lens, July 14, 2005)

We also contacted the World Tribunal on Iraq [WTI] for their response. Communications coordinator Caroline Muscat told us WTI had invited the BBC World Service correspondent in Istanbul, Jonny Dymond, to attend the Tribunal's hearings. She helped to set up interviews and provide footage: "we did our best to meet his needs".

Dymond confirmed to us that he attended the opening press conference, and was present on the first day of the 5-day proceedings (email from Jonny Dymond to Media Lens, July 14, 2005). This resulted in a news story on the BBC World Service lasting 24 seconds, and a longer report of about 90 seconds in length. These reports failed to mention the Tribunal's finding that the BBC, and other named, mainstream media, bears "special responsibility for promoting the lies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction".

Caroline Muscat told us: "The lack of coverage on BBC World Service is not due to any neglect our end."

But not a smidgen of even this limited coverage was broadcast on the major BBC news bulletins, such as the evening Six O'Clock and Ten O'Clock television news on BBC1. Muscat continued:

"In effect, Ms. Helen Boaden is saying that the Tribunal was not a priority story for the BBC because of judgments made at the BBC on this global initiative." She added that the Tribunal "was followed by millions of people around the world on alternative media sites, the live audio and video streaming provided by the WTI web site... The fact that Iraqi people risked their lives to travel to Istanbul and testify on the horrors they face on a daily basis was not a priority story because the BBC says that, 'Currently our top financial priority in relation to Iraq is to report on events from the country itself'.

"While we respect the BBC's commitment to evidence-based journalism, it is hard to ignore the fact that the evidence in this story is the Tribunal itself. The fact that a significant number of respected diplomats, academicians, reporters and human rights lawyers came together with international experts from various fields to bring to the world's attention the injustice occurring in Iraq, is in itself a story that merits reporting.

"The BBC has disregarded the experience and professionalism of all those who participated in this Tribunal. In fact, one of the reasons why this initiative took place is precisely because we felt, like millions of people around the world, that there was an imbalance and a lack of clarity and objectivity in the reporting of the so-called 'war on terror'. By failing to understand the significance of presenting this other side of the story of this war the BBC has in fact proved us right." (Email to Media Lens, July 14, 2005)

We contacted Dahr Jamail, a 'non-embedded' journalist who has bravely reported from Iraq for a total of 8 months to date. Jamail testified in Istanbul, detailing many atrocities inflicted upon Iraqis by US forces. This was his response:

"It is interesting that Helen Boaden uses the reason for not covering the WTI that the BBC uses 'evidence-based journalism,' then goes on to state that the BBC has, 'not been able to establish that the US used banned chemical weapons and committed other atrocities against civilians in Fallujah last November.'

"This is one of the main purposes for the WTI to have even occurred - to provide this information to the media and to inform the world of the atrocities being committed in Iraq." (Email to Media Lens, July 13, 2005)

Jamail pointed out that the Tribunal provided all the evidence the BBC needs, "from witnesses which included several Iraqis, of the US use of illegal weapons in Fallujah during November such as cluster bombs, uranium munitions, napalm and chemical weapons". Jamail also pointed to the "testimonies and photographs of the US military raiding hospitals and killing both doctors and civilians as what appears to now be their standard operating procedure for their military adventures in Iraq." He concluded:

"It is clear that if the BBC was truly 'committed to evidence-based journalism' as Ms. Boaden states, they would report what Iraqi doctors and civilians say as to what occurred in Fallujah in November."


Blind Faith: The BBC Ignores Its Own 'Impartiality' Mantra

Hans von Sponeck is a former UN Assistant Secretary-General who ran the humanitarian oil-for-food programme in Baghdad for 18 months. He resigned in 2000, appalled at the impact of UN sanctions on Iraq. He also responded to Boaden's email:

"The World Tribunal was anything but just 'another conference'. A sensitive and impartial BBC should have quickly discovered that the Istanbul event provided a rare glimpse into a world-wide public mind which stands for peace, justice, political honesty and accountability. The BBC chose to ignore its own advice that 'impartiality is to cover all sides'. To bypass a responsible international movement at a time when political opportunism and dishonesty are rampant, when international law is broken at will and human security is becoming a distant dream, is anything but coverage of all sides and the antithesis of open-minded journalism." (Hans von Sponeck, email to Media Lens, July 13, 2005)

Tim Llewellyn, a former BBC Middle East correspondent, acknowledged "the immense difficulties on the ground" for reporters in Iraq, but told us that Boaden's points "about the deployment of depleted uranium and the atrocities in Fallujah and elsewhere are specious". He continued:

"There is plenty of reliable evidence that the invasion forces used depleted uranium and napalm-style materiel in Iraq (we the British certainly used the former in 1991) and the BBC's defence experts could do a lot more to put this into the public arena. The deployment of such ghastly weapons against civilian areas is surely +feeding+ the anger that results in attacks like those against Madrid and London. The inability or reluctance of the BBC properly to expose or even discuss intelligently the use of such weaponry as depleted uranium or napalm is shameful and even provocative for its viewers and listeners, especially given its propensity to allow its presenters and guests to go into finger-wagging fury over Iran's alleged quest for nuclear weapons." (Email to Media Lens, July 14, 2005)

Finally, Richard Keeble, Professor of Journalism at Lincoln University and author of 'Ethics for Journalists', sent us his response to the BBC statement:

"The mainstream media have been celebrating the 'revolution' that occurred over the coverage of the London bombs - with the prominent use of mobile phone images provided by members of the public and weblogs. This, it has been argued, represents a major 'democratisation' of the mainstream media. Yet significantly, the incorporation of data supplied by non-professional journalists has in no way impacted on the overall bias of the coverage. In other words, the most important revolution needed in the mainstream media is over news values. Their failure to report the Iraq War Tribunal shows how conventional news priorities still predominate. Mainstream journalism remains too closely tied to dominant economic, political and economic structures and interests. More and more people are realising this and turning to more authentic alternatives." (Email to Media Lens, July 13, 2005)

Mark Byford, the BBC's deputy director-general, claimed recently that the "BBC now begins with the presumption that the licence-payer is right. After all, the licence-payers are the public that fund and own the BBC in the UK." (Byford, 'Your flexible friend', The Guardian, June 11, 2005) He observed: "How an organisation responds when someone complains is an important determinant of how people feel about its openness and responsiveness."

True enough. Alas, judging by the reactions we see every day, many members of the public are deeply sceptical about the BBC's own claims of "openness" and "responsiveness".

They are increasingly wise to the appalling reality that the publicly-funded BBC is an accessory to war crimes and state terrorism perpetrated by the British government, in tandem with its US ally.


SUGGESTED ACTION

The goal of Media Lens is to promote rationality, compassion and respect for others. When writing emails to journalists, we strongly urge readers to maintain a polite, non-aggressive and non-abusive tone.

Write to Helen Boaden, director of BBC news,
Email: helenboaden.complaints@bbc.co.uk

And Mark Byford, deputy director-general
Email: mark.byford@bbc.co.uk

Ask why the BBC is failing to give prominent coverage to the substantial evidence of "coalition" war crimes in Fallujah and elsewhere in Iraq. Why does the BBC never question Tony Blair and other senior politicians about their culpability for these atrocities?

Please copy your emails to the following:

Roger Mosey, head of BBC television news
Email: roger.mosey@bbc.co.uk

Mark Thompson, BBC director general
Email: mark.thompson@bbc.co.uk

Michael Grade, BBC chairman
Email: michael.grade@bbc.co.uk


Please send copies of all emails to us at: editor@medialens.org
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

World Tribunal on Iraq

  Tribunal on Iraq

 Findings

  Monday 27 June 2005

The attack on Iraq is an attack on justice, on liberty, on our safety, on our future, on us all - The Jury of Conscience

    Istanbul, 27 June, 2005 - With a Jury of Conscience from 10 different countries hearing the testimonies of 54 members of the Panel of Advocates who came from across the world, including Iraq, the United States and the United Kingdom, this global civil initiative came to an end with a press conference at the Hotel Armada where the chair of the Jury of Conscience, Arundathi Roy, announced the Jury's conclusions.

     The Jury defined this war as one of the most unjust in history: 'The Bush and Blair administrations blatantly ignored the massive opposition to the war expressed by millions of people around the world. They embarked upon one of the most unjust, immoral, and cowardly wars in history. The Anglo-American occupation of Iraq of the last 27 months has led to the destruction and devastation of the Iraqi state and society. Law and order have broken down completely, resulting in a pervasive lack of human security; the physical infrastructure is in shambles; the health care delivery system is a mess; the education system has ceased to function; there is massive environmental and ecological devastation; and, the cultural and archeological heritage of the Iraqi people has been desecrated.'

     On the basis of the preceding findings and recalling the Charter of the United Nations and other legal documents, the jury has established the following charges against the Governments of the US and the UK:

--Planning, preparing, and waging the supreme crime of a war of aggression in contravention of

  the United Nations Charter and the Nuremberg Principles.

--Targeting the civilian population of Iraq and civilian infrastructure.

--Using disproportionate force and indiscriminate weapon systems.

--Failing to safeguard the lives of civilians during military activities and during the occupation period thereafter.

--Using deadly violence against peaceful protestors.

--Imposing punishments without charge or trial, including collective punishment.

--Subjecting Iraqi soldiers and civilians to torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment.

--Re-writing the laws of a country that has been illegally invaded and occupied.

--Willfully devastating the environment.

--Actively creating conditions under which the status of Iraqi women has seriously been degraded.

--Failing to protect humanity's rich archaeological and cultural heritage in Iraq.

--Obstructing the right to information, including the censoring of Iraqi media.

--Redefining torture in violation of international law, to allow use of torture and illegal detentions

    The Jury also established charges against the Security Council of United Nations for failing to stop war crimes and crimes against humanity among other failures, against the Governments of the Coalition of the Willing for collaborating in the invasion and occupation of Iraq, against the Governments of Other Countries for allowing the use of military bases and air space and providing other logistical support, against Private Corporations for profiting from the war, against the Major Corporate Media for disseminating deliberate falsehoods and failing to report atrocities.

    The Jury also provided a number of recommendations that include recognising the right of the Iraqi people to resist the illegal occupation of their country and to develop independent institutions, and affirming that the right to resist the occupation is the right to wage a struggle for self-determination, freedom, and independence as derived from the Charter of the United Nations, we the Jury of Conscience declare our solidarity with the people of Iraq and the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the coalition forces from Iraq.

    The Istanbul session of the WTI lasted three days and presented testimony on the illegality and criminal violations in the U.S. pretexts for and conduct of this war. The expert opinion, witness testimony, video and image evidence addressed the impact of war on civilians, the torture of prisoners, the unlawful imprisonment of Iraqis without charges or legal defence, the use of depleted uranium weapons, the effects of the war on Iraq's infrastructure, the destruction of Iraqi cultural institutions and the liability of the invaders in international law for failing to protect these treasures of humanity.

    The session in Istanbul was the culminating session of commissions of inquiry and hearings held around the world over the past two years. Sessions on different topics related to the war on Iraq were held in London, Mumbai, Copenhagen, Brussels, New York, Japan, Stockholm, South Korea, Rome, Frankfurt, Geneva, Lisbon and Spain.

    They have compiled a definitive historical record of evidence on the illegality of the invasion and occupation that will be recorded in a forthcoming book.

    Preliminary Declaration of the Jury of Conscience World Tribunal on Iraq

    Istanbul

    27th June 2005, Istanbul.

    In February 2003, weeks before war was declared onIraq, millions of people protested in the streets of the world. That call went unheeded. No international institution had the courage or conscience to stand up to the aggression of the US and UK governments. No one could stop them. It is two years later now. Iraq has been invaded, occupied, and devastated. The attack on Iraq is an attack on justice, on liberty, on our safety, on our future, on us all. We the people of conscience decided to stand up. We formed the World Tribunal on Iraq, to demand justice and a peaceful future.

    The legitimacy of the World Tribunal on Iraq is located in the collective conscience of humanity. This, the Istanbul session, was the culmination of a series of 20 hearings held in different cities of the world focusing on the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq.

    We the Jury of Conscience, from 10 different countries, met in Istanbul. We heard 54 testimonies from a panel of advocates and witnesses who came from across the world, including from Iraq, the United States and the United Kingdom.

    The World Tribunal on Iraq met in Istanbul from 24-26th of June 2005. The principal objective of the WTI is to tell the truth about the Iraq war as clearly as possible, and to draw conclusions that underscore the accountability of those responsible and underline the significance of justice for the Iraqi people. Saddam Hussein's crimes against his people are not the focus of this Tribunal. We believe it is up to the Iraqi people to investigate these crimes in an independent and free trial.

    I. Overview

    1. The reasons given by the US and UKgovernments for the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq in March 2003 have proven to be false. The real motive was to control and dominate the Middle East. Establishing hegemony over the Middle East serves the goal of controlling the world's largest reserves of oil and strengthening the position of the US's strategic ally Israel.

    2. Blatant falsehoods about the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and a link between Al Qaeda terrorism and the Saddam Hussein régime were manufactured in order to create public support for a "preemptive" assault upon a sovereign independent nation.

    3. Iraq has been under siege for years. The imposition of severe inhuman economic sanctions at the end of the first Gulf war in 1991; the establishment of no-fly zones in the Northern and Southern parts of Iraq; and the concomitant bombing of the country were all aimed at degrading and weakening Iraq's human and material resources and capacities in order to facilitate its subsequent invasion and occupation. In this enterprise the US and British leaderships had the endorsement of a complicit UN Security Council.

    4. In pursuit of their agenda of empire, the Bush and Blair blatantly ignored the massive opposition to the war expressed by millions of people around the world. They embarked upon one of the most unjust, immoral, and cowardly wars in history.

    5. The Anglo-American occupation of Iraq of the last 27 months has led to the destruction and devastation of the Iraqi state and society. Law and order have broken down completely, resulting in a pervasive lack of human security; the physical infrastructure is in shambles; the health care delivery system is a mess; the education system has ceased to function; there is massive environmental and ecological devastation; and, the cultural and archeological heritage of the Iraqi people has been desecrated.

    6. The occupation has intentionally exacerbated ethnic and confessionnal divisions in Iraqi society, with the aim of undermining Iraq's identity and integrity as a nation. This is in keeping with the fam liar imperial policy of divide and rule.

    7. The imposition of the UN sanctions in 1991 caused untold suffering and thousands of deaths. The situation has worsened after the occupation. At least 100,000 civilians have been killed; 60,000 are being held in US custody in inhuman conditions, without charges; thousands have disappeared; and torture has become virtually routine.

    8. The privatization, deregulation, and liberalization of the Iraqi economy has transformed the country into a client economy that serves the Washington Consensus. The occupying forces have also accomplished their primary goal of acquired control over the nation's oil.

    9. Any law or institution created under the aegis of occupation is devoid of both legal and moral authority. The recently concluded election, the Constituent Assembly, the current government, and the drafting committee for the Constitution are therefore all illegitimate.

    10. There is widespread opposition to the occupation. Political, social, and civil resistance through peaceful means is subjected to repression by the occupying forces. It is the brutality of the occupation that has provoked a strong armed resistance and certain acts of desperation. By the principles embodied in the UN Charter and in international law, the popular national resistance to the occupation is legitimate and justified. It deserves the support of people everywhere who care for justice and freedom.

    II. Findings and Charges

    On the basis of the preceding findings and recalling the Charter of the United Nations and other legal documents quoted in the appendix, the jury has established the following charges.

    A. Against the Governments of the US and the UK.

    1. Planning, preparing, and waging the supreme crime of a war of aggression in contravention of the United Nations Charter and the Nuremberg Principles.

Evidence for this can be found in the leaked Downing Street Memo of 23rd July, 2002 in which it was revealed that: "military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were fixed around the policy." Intelligence was manufactured to willfully deceive the people of the US, the U, and their elected representatives.

    2. Targeting the civilian population of Iraq and civilian infrastructure, by intentionally directing attacks upon civilians and hospitals, medical centers, residential neighborhoods, electricity stations, and water purification facilities in violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"), Articles 7(1)(a), 8(2)(a)(i), and 8(2)(b)(i). The complete destruction of the city of Falluja in itself constitutes a glaring example of such crimes.

    3. Using disproportionate force and indiscriminate weapon systems, such as cluster munitions, incendiary bombs, depleted uranium (DU), and chemical weapons. Detailed evidence was presented to the Tribunal by expert witnesses that leukemia had risen sharply in children under the age of five residing in those areas which had been targeted by DU weapons.

    4. Failing to safeguard the lives of civilians during military activities and during the occupation period thereafter, in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Articles 13 and 27, and the ICC Statute, Articles 7 (1)(a) and 8(2)(a)(i). This is evidenced, for example, by "shock and awe" bombing techniques and the conduct of occupying forces at checkpoints.

    5. Using deadly violence against peaceful protestors, beginning with, among others, the April 2003 killing of more than a dozen peaceful protestors in Falluja.

    6. Imposing punishments without charge or trial, including collective punishment, on the people of Iraq, in violation of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Geneva Conventions, and customary international law requiring due process. Repeated testimonies pointed to "snatch and grab" operations, disappearances, and assassinations.

    7. Subjecting Iraqi soldiers and civilians to torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment in violation of the Geneva Conventions, the ICCPR, other treaties and covenants, and customary international law. Degrading treatment includes subjecting Iraqi soldiers and civilians to acts of racial, ethnic, religious, and gender discrimination, as well as denying Iraqi soldiers Prisoner of War status as required by the Geneva Convention. Abundant testimony was provided of unlawful arrests and detentions, without due process of law. Well known and egregious examples occurred in Abu Ghraib prison as well as in Mosul, Camp Bucca, and Basra. The employment of mercenaries and private contractors to carry out torture has served to undermine accountability.

    8. Re-writing the laws of a country that has been illegally invaded and occupied, in violation of international covenants on the responsibilities of occupying powers, in order to amass illegal profits (through such measures as Order 39, signed by L. Paul Bremer III for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which allows foreign investors to buy and takeover Iraq's state-owned enterprises and to repatriate 100 percent of their profits and assets at any point) and to control Iraq's oil. Evidence listed a number of corporations that had profited from such transactions.

    9. Willfully devastating the environment, contaminating it by depleted uranium (DU) weapons, combined with the plumes from burning oil wells, as well as huge oil spills, and destroying agricultural lands. Deliberately disrupting the water and waste removal systems, in a manner verging on biological-chemical warfare. Failing to prevent the looting and dispersal of radioactive material from nuclear sites. Extensive documentation is available on air, water pollution, land degradation, and radiological pollution.

    10. Actively creating conditions under which the status of Iraqi women has seriously been degraded contrary, to the repeated claims of the leaders of the coalition forces. Women's freedom of movement has been severely limited, restricting their access to education, livelihood, and social engagement. Testimony was provided that sexual violence and sex trafficking have increased since the occupation of Iraq began.

    11. Failing to protect humanity's rich archaeological and cultural heritage in Iraq, by allowing the looting of museums and established historical sites and positioning military bases in culturally and archeologically sensitive locations. This took place despite prior warnings from UNESCO and Iraqi museum officials.

    12. Obstructing the right to information, including the censoring of Iraqi media, such as newspapers (e.g., al-Hawza, al-Mashriq, and al-Mustaqila) and radio stations (Baghdad Radio), targeting international journalists, imprisoning and killing academics, intellectuals and scientists.

    13. Redefining torture in violation of international law, to allow use of torture and illegal detentions, including holding more than 500 people at Guantánamo Bay without charging them or allowing them any access to legal protection, and using "extraordinary renditions" to send people to torture in other countries known to commit human rights abuses and torture prisoners.

    B. Against the Security Council of United Nations

    1. Failing to protect Iraq against a crime of aggression.

    2. Imposing harsh economic sanctions on Iraq, despite knowledge that sanctions were directly contributing to the massive loss of civilian lives and harming innocent civilians.

    3. Allowing the United States and United Kingdom to carry out illegal bombings in the no-fly zones, using false pretense of enforcing UN resolutions, and at no point allowing discussion in the Security Council of this violation, and thereby being complicit and responsible for loss of civilian life and destruction of Iraqi infrastructure.

    4. Allowing the United States to dominate the United Nations and hold itself above any accountability by other member nations.

    5. Failure to stop war crimes and crimes against humanity by the United States and its coalition partners in Iraq.

    6. Failure to hold the United States and its coalition partners accountable for violations of international law during the occupation, and giving official recognition to the occupation, thereby legitimizing an illegal invasion and becoming a collaborator in an illegal occupation.

    C. Against the Governments of the Coalition of the Willing

Collaborating in the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

    D. Against the Governments of Other Countries

Allowing the use of military bases and air space, and providing other logistical support, for the invasion and occupation.

    E. Against Private Corporations

Profiting from the war with complicity in the crimes described above, of invasion and occupation.

    F. Against the Major Corporate Media

    1. Disseminating the deliberate falsehoods spread by the governments of the US and the UK and failing to adequately investigate this misinformation. This even in the face of abundant evidence to the contrary. Among the corporate media houses that bear special responsibility for promoting the lies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, we name the New York Times, in particular their reporter Judith Miller, whose main source was on the payroll of the CIA. We also name Fox News, CNN and the BBC.

    2. Failing to report the atrocities being committed against Iraqi people by the occupying forces.

    III. Recommendations

    Recognising the right of the Iraqi people to resist the illegal occupation of their country and to develop independent institutions, and affirming that the right to resist the occupation is the right to wage a struggle for self-determination, freedom, and independence as derived from the Charter of the United Nations, we the Jury of Conscience declare our solidarity with the people of Iraq.

    We recommend:

    1. The immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the coalition forces from Iraq;

    2. That coalition governments make war reparations and pay compensation to Iraq for the humanitarian, economic, ecological, and cultural devastation they have caused by their illegal invasion and occupation;

    3. That all laws, contracts, treaties, and institutions established under occupation which the Iraqi people deem inimical to their interests, should be considered null and void;

    4. That the Guantanamo Bay prison and all other offshore US military prisons be closed immediately; that the names of the prisoners be disclosed, that they receive POW status, and receive due process;

    5. That there be an exhaustive investigation of those responsible for crimes of aggression and crimes against humanity in Iraq, beginning with George W. Bush, President of the United States of America; Tony Blair, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; and other government officials from the coalition of the willing;

    6. That we initiate a process of accountability to hold those morally and personally responsible for their participation in this illegal war, such as journalists who deliberately lied, corporate media outlets that promoted racial, ethnic and religious hatred, and CEOs of multinational corporations that profited from this war;

    7. That people throughout the world launch actions against US and UK corporations that directly profit from this war. Examples of such corporations include Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle, CACI Inc., Titan Corporation, Kellog, Brown and Root (subsidiary of Halliburton), DynCorp, Boeing, ExxonMobil, Texaco, British Petroleum. The following companies have sued Iraq and received "reparation awards": Toys R Us, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Shell, Nestlé, Pepsi, Phillip Morris, Sheraton, Mobil. Such actions may take the form of direct actions such as shutting down their offices, consumer boycotts, and pressure on shareholders to divest.

    8. That soldiers exercise conscience and refuse to enlist and participate in an illegal war. Also that countries provide conscientious objectors political asylum.

    9. That the international campaign for dismantling all US military bases abroad be reinforced.

    10. That people around the world resist and reject any effort by any of their governments to provide material, logistical, or moral support to the occupation of Iraq.

    We, the Jury of Conscience, hope that the specificity of these recommendations will lay the groundwork required for a world where the international institutions will be shaped and reshaped by the will of people and not fear and self-interest, where journalists and intellectuals will not remain mute, where the will of the people of the world will be central, and human security will prevail over state security and corporate profits.

    Appendix: List of Legal Documents

    The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

    The Convention on the Political Rights of Women (1952)

    The Declaration of the Rights of the Child (1959)

    The Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1963)

    The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)

    The Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979)

    The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984)

    The Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989)

    The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998)

    The European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950)

    The American Convention on Human Rights (1969)

    The Code of Conduct for the Armed Forces of the United States of America (1963)