Who's Online

We have 215 guests online

Popular

3869 readings
THE HARPER GOVERNMENT AND ISIL: THE NEED TO REDEFINE WHAT CONSTITUTES SECURITY, THREATS AND TERRORISM PDF Print E-mail
Justice News
Posted by Joan Russow
Friday, 27 March 2015 08:59

By Joan Russow Global Compliance Research project

 

There is an inexorable link among security, threats and terrorism

The Harper government with the current motion to continue the intervention into Iraq and extend the mission into Syria is conflating security, threats and terrorism. The government believes, with the increased attack against ISIL,  that security can be achieved through militarism, threats against Canada will end, and  terrorism will be reduced. This conflation has contributed to the Harper government misconstruing both Article 51 of the UN Charter and Bill C 51

 

Kofi Annan, the former UN secretary general, said the US-led invasion of Iraq was a mistake and helped to create the Islamist State militant group. He also blamed regional powers for making the conflict worse. 

His comment builds on the statement made by    at the Nuremberg Trial

"In Nuremberg trials there was  a reference to  the “supreme international crime” - the crime of aggression. That  crime was defined clearly enough by Justice Robert Jackson, Chief of Counsel for the United States at Nuremberg. An “aggressor,” Jackson proposed to the Tribunal in his opening statement, is a state that is the first to commit such actions as “invasion of its armed forces, with or without a declaration of war, of the territory of another State 

If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.”

Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=345_1315751483#by7PvtecKDMYeSEE.99

If we adopt the principle of universality: if an action is right (or wrong) for others, it is right (or wrong) for us. Those who do not rise to the minimal moral level of applying to themselves the standards they apply to others—more stringent ones, in fact—plainly cannot be taken seriously when they speak of appropriateness of response; or of right and wrong, good and evil."[6] Chomsky  2002 TERROR AND JUAT RESPONSEZNet.

 

WHAT CONSTITUTES TRUE SECURITY

 

 True security is not militarized security, or collective security or "human security which has been used as various pretexts for war.

 

For years states have used various pretexts to justify the invasion of and aggression againstother states;For example, the pretext of “human security” was used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 1991, then “humanitarian intervention” was used to justify the invasion of Kosovo;   so-called  “self  Defense” (Art. 51of the UN Charter),  to justify the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, then  "Pre-emptive/ preventive" attack to justify the invasion of Iraq  in 2003, finally  it was “the responsibility to protect”  to justify the intervention in ’Haiti in 2004, and  the invasion of Libya in 2011. Even in 2013, after all the previous pretexts had been discredited, a new pretext was proposed, the “Will to Intervene” which had just been waiting to be used to justify an intervention into Mali in 2013. 

True security is Common Security; Common security through the adherence to the rule of international law

In 1982, Olaf Palme, in the Palme Commission Report on Disarmament and Security, report introduced the concept of common security which could be extended toembody the following objectives:

 

*        to achieve a state of peace, and disarmament; throughre allocation of military expenses and the delegitimization of war

·         to create a global structure that respects the rule of law and the International Court of Justice;

·     to enable socially equitable and environmentally sound employment, and ensure the right to development and social justice;

·        to promote and fully guarantee respect for human rights including labour rights, women’s rights civil and political rights, indigenous rights, social and cultural rights – right to food, right to housing, right to safe drinking water and sewage, right to education and right to universally accessible not for profit health care system;

·        to ensure the preservation and protection of the environment, the respect for the inherent worth of nature beyond human purpose, the reduction of the ecological footprint moving away from the current model of unsustainable and excessive overconsumption and from furthering the cult of war

 

WHAT CONSTITUTES  THREATS 

The Harper government is blowing out of proportion  the threats made by ISIL against Canada; these threats arose as a result of Canada’s military intervention against ISIL. Harper government, under bill C 51, is expanding the powers of CSIS to counter what the government perceives to be threats; their perception of threats could be in response to what citizens in Canada perceive to be threats to common security It is important to make a distinction between threats`` against the Harper government and its policies, actions and threats against Canada 

The following represents a list of threats  carried out bby governments and corporations that could be deemed to be threats against against true secuirity- common security-  in  Canada

 

The Common Security Threat (CST) list

The Common Security Threat list-- a list of actions by governments that are a "threat to public security" and that "put lives  danger" Here is an excerpt from the Common Security Threat (CST)  list.

 

1. All governments that have failed to sign, failed to ratify, or failed to enact the necessary legislation to ensure compliance with international Conventions, Covenants and Treaties.

2. All government that have failed to act on commitments made through UN Conference Action Plans, or that have failed to fulfill expectations created through General Assembly Resolutions.

3. All governments that refuse to respect the jurisdiction and the decisions of the International Court of Justice

4. All governments that have produced weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear, chemical, and biological, in defiance of the global commitment made at Stockholm to eliminate the production of weapons of mass destruction.

5 All governments that have proliferated nuclear arms by selling civil nuclear technology such as CANDU reactors to other states

6 All governments that are circulating and berthing nuclear powered or nuclear arms capable vessels or permitting the berthing of this vessels in urban harbours

7 All governments that mine and sell uranium for use in nuclear weapon systems

8. All governments that have planted land mines throughout the world

9  All governments that have permitted the sale of arms around the world

10 All governments that support a military organization like NATO that has a first strike policy in violation of the ruling of the International Court of Justice that the use or threat to use nuclear weapons was contrary to international humanitarian law.

11. All governments that permit the production of toxic, hazardous, atomic waste

12. All governments that do not prevent the transfer to other states of substances or activities that are harmful to human health and the environment

13. All governments that perceive of justice in terms of revenge through military intervention rather than respecting the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice

14. All governments that have set up military bases in other sovereign nations

15. All governments that have failed to reduce their military budget and transfer the savings into global social justice as undertaken through numerous UN Conference Action Plans and UN General Assembly Resolutions

16. All governments that have failed to ensure the human right to safe drinking water, the human right to unadulterated (non-genetically engineered pesticide-free food), the human right to safe accessible housing, the human right to be clothed, the human right to education, the human right to universally accessible not for profit publicly funded health care that stresses the importance of prevention of environmentally induced diseases, and poverty related illnesses. ( many of these rights have been protected through international human rights instruments)

17. All governments that have denied civil and political rights including the right to freedom of speech and the right of peaceful assembly, and fundamental labour rights

18. All governments that have approved genetically engineered foods and crops and have led to a deterioration of the food supply, and heritage seeds

19. All governments that have ignored the warnings of the Intergovernmental panel on Climate change and have failed to discharge obligations under the Framework Convention on Climate Change, and Kyoto Protocol. All states which continue to subsidize the fossil fuel industry/ pipelines, and all institutions and individuals that invest in the fossil fuel industries. 

20. All governments that have supported , and individuals that have participated in the proselytizing of religion and the undermining of other cultures

21. All governments and individuals that have discriminated against the following

grounds:

- race, tribe, or culture;

- colour, ethnicity, national ethnic or social origin, or language;

nationality, place of birth, or nature of residence (refugee or

immigrant, migrant worker);

- gender, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, or form

of family,

- disability or age;

- religion or conviction, political or other opinion, or - class, economic

position, or other status;

22.  All governments that have ignored the warnings of the Intergovernmental panel on Climate change and have failed to discharge obligations under the Framework Convention on Climate Change, and Kyoto Protocol

23.  All governments that have failed to revoke charters and licences of corporations that have violated human rights, including labour rights, that have contributed to war and violence, and that have led to the destruction of the environment.

24,  All industries that have supported the development of weapons of mass destruction, and all citizens and groups that have invested in companies that have developed weapons of mass destruction.

26 All governments that have been willing to accept corporate donations, and still delude the public into thinking that citizens live in a democracy.

27.  All governments that have promulgated globalization, deregulation and privatization through promoting trade agreements that undermine the rule of international public trust law

 

WHAT CONSTITUES “Terrorism”

The United  Nations has not yet agreed finally to a definition of terrorism because many powerful

Oppose any reference to state terrorism,

 

The UN has no internatonally-agreed definition of terrorism.

The definitional impasse has prevented the adoption of a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism. Even in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 the UN failed to adopt the Convention, and the deadlock continues to this day.

The reluctance has been the failure to define terrorism to exclude armed struggle for liberation and self-determination.

                                                                                                                                                                                            

In addition many states wish to include stat terrorism which would include most of the military intervention  listed above, as well as the many acts of states that violate Article 20 of the Covenant of Civil and Political Rights which states that propaganda for war is prohibited.  Propaganda for war could include the multiple statements by States calling for military intervention in other states, the establishing of military bases on foreign soil, war games etc.

 

The UN General Assembly did, however , pass a resolution  related to the necessity, for states engaged in counter terrorism to   comply with international law

United Nations A/RES/69/127 General Assembly Distr.: General 18 December 2014 Sixty-ninth session Agenda item 107 14-66984 (E) *1466984* Please recycle

(A/69/506)] 69/127. Measures to eliminate international terrorism The General Assembly, Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

 

 

 Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 10 December 2014 [on the report of the Sixth Committee (A/69/506)] 69/127.

Excerpts;

 The PREAMBLE STATES

Affirming that States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism complies with all their obligations under international law and must adopt such measures in accordance with international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law,

 

 

Recalling Security Council resolution 1624 (2005) of 14 September 2005, and bearing in mind that States must ensure that any measure taken to combat terrorism complies with their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights, refugee and humanitarian law,

 

And under the operational clauses is the following:

5. Reiterates its call upon all States to adopt further measures in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the relevant provisions of international law, including international standards of human rights, to prevent terrorism and to strengthen international cooperation in combating terrorism and, to that end, to consider, in particular, the implementation of the measures set out in paragraphs 3 (a) to (f) of General Assembly resolution 51/210;

 

13. Reaffirms that international cooperation as well as actions by States to combat terrorism should be conducted in conformity with the principles of the Charter, international law and relevant international conventions;

Sixty-ninth session Agenda item 107 14-66984 (E) *1466984* Please recycle Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 10 December 2014 [on the report of the Sixth Committee (A/69/506)] 69/127. Measures to eliminate international terrorism The General Assembly, Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,

 

 

 

MISCONSTRUING ARTICLE 51- SELF DEFENCE OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

The preconditions for anticipatory self-defence are,  "necessity," "proportionality," and "immediacy.  In no way does the  Harper government invasion of Syria fulfill tose conditions. 

 

C-51 POTENTIALLY CONTRAVENES INTERNATION LAW AND PEREMPTORY NORMS

Bill C-51

``An Act to encourage and facilitate information sharing between Government of Canada institutions in order to protect Canada against activities that undermine the security of Canada

Whereas the people of Canada are entitled to live free from threats to their lives and their security;

Whereas activities that undermine the secu­rity of Canada are often carried out in a clandestine, deceptive or hostile manner, are increasingly global, complex and sophisticated, and often emerge and evolve rapidly;

Whereas there is no more fundamental role for a government than protecting its country and its people;

Whereas Canada is not to be used as a conduit for the carrying out of activities that threaten the security of another state;

Whereas protecting Canada and its people against activities that undermine the security of Canada often transcends the mandate and capability of any one Government of Canada institution;

Whereas Parliament recognizes that information needs to be shared — and disparate information needs to be collated — in order to enable the Government to protect Canada and its people against activities that undermine the security of Canada;

Whereas information in respect of activities that undermine the security of Canada is to be shared in a manner that is consistent with theCanadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the protection of privacy; `` AND ALL OTHER RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL LAW

 

 OTHER RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL LAW

Many of the protests that could be perceived as "threats" are those that are against the acrions and practices of the current governmentc but not against CANADA.

see. a long and evolving list of Harper governments transgressions

http://pejnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=10026:election-2015a-long-list-of-the-transgressions-of-the-harper-government&catid=75:cjustice-news&Itemid=218

 

 

Often protests in Canada are against the government for not compling with international obligations, commitments and peremptory norms

 

I  the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

And peremptory norms under article 53

2  international Court of Justice and its decisions. and  the International Criminal Court
3  the international Convention for the Elimination of all Forms 
of Discrimination Against Women and its protocols  

4  International Convention against all forms  of racial discrimination

5.  Convention on Biological Diversity and its protocols
6  Convention to combat Desertification
7  Convention on the rights of migrant Workers and their families
8.   Convention on the Rights of the Child 
9. International Covenant of Social economic, and Cultural Rights
10.  International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional Protocols 

11.  Convention Against Torture
12. Geneva protocols on prohibited weapons
13.   Convention for the Banning of Landmines,

14Non Proliferation treaty 

15  Arms Trade Treaty

16 Declaration on the rights of indigenous Peoples

17 ILO Conventions

 

 

Last Updated on Thursday, 09 April 2015 12:23
 

Latest News