IAWM invites Legal Professionals to meeting 8th Nov.

national | anti-war / imperialism | news report

Thursday October 30, 2003 19:55

by IAWM - - Legal SubCommittee

info at irishantiwar dot org

P.O. Box 9260, Dublin 1.

Please spread the word to legal professionals who would be interested

It was resolved at the recent AGM of the IAWM

"to establish an expert legal committee (either independently organised or in affiliation) to advise the movement on legal strategies to advance its aims"

these broadly being to hold the Irish Government accountable to Law, to end Irish participation in wars abroad and reverse the increasing militarisation and repression at home.

We therefore invite all interested legal professionals to attend a meeting at The Teachers Club, 36 Parnell Sq. Dublin 1, at 2pm on Saturday 8th November 2003, to discuss and launch this initiative.

See below for full details of event.

N.B. this is an extraordinary meeting intended only for qualified legal professionals - following the discussion a full account of the proceedings will be published here.

From: Irish Anti-War Movement
To: Legal Professionals

Dear Sir/Madam,

as you may be aware, the Irish Anti-War Movement ( http://irishantiwar.org/ ) was established in 2001 as an umbrella organisation through which the general Irish opposition to the recent wars could be focused. It was instrumental in preparing for the Feb.15 2003 international day of protest against the impending barbarism, which saw the historic turnout of over 100,000 throng the streets of Dublin.

Despite the massive public dissent and many protests and actions at Shannon Airport and elsewhere, the current Government has continued with its illegal policy in the service of foreign belligerents. It is now admitted that approximately 150,000 US troops transited Shannon in the past year, accompanied by thousands of tonnes of heavy munitions of war, including internationally banned weapons, all completely unchecked by any Irish authority.

The fond myth of Ireland's 'neutrality' imploded ( see 'Horgan v Ireland' - transcripts at http://gluaiseacht.net/extpages/legal/ ) as the country became a 'stealth' participant in the recent aggressions against Afghanistan and Iraq, with Shannon Airport a significant US-military logistics hub for the assault in both cases.

In view of the above, and the overt intention of the Government to further pursue the warmonger's agenda, the Movement recognises the need to diversify tactics and re-intensify activity in order to increase effectiveness. Hence, it was resolved at the Annual General Meeting of the Irish Anti-War Movement, held on Saturday 28th Sept 2003 in Dublin,

"to establish an expert legal committee (either independently organised or in affiliation) to advise the movement on legal strategies to advance its aims"

these broadly being to hold the Irish Government accountable to Law, to end Irish participation in wars abroad and reverse the increasing militarisation and repression at home.

We are therefore pleased to invite you (or a nominated representative) to attend a meeting of legal professionals at The Teachers Club, 36 Parnell Sq. Dublin 1, at 2pm on Saturday 8th November 2003, to discuss and launch this initiative.

Please see programme below and reply ASAP to confirm attendance, as a larger hall may be necessary. Also, remember to arrive early as the doors will close at 14:00h on the dot. This invitation has been sent to all Irish barristers and solicitors with a public e-mail address - those inaccessible via e-mail are also warmly invited, and we ask you to inform them and pool transport to the event.

Yours sincerely, on behalf of the IAWM,

Robin Hennessy..(Tlf: 01-853.52.98)
Owen Rice.......(Tlf: 085-739.52.88)

Contact info@irishantiwar.org
Or......P.O. Box 9260, Dublin 1.

Programme of the Meeting

Commences @ 2pm sharp,

Duration Subject Presented by
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 min Introduction Robin Hennessy

20 min Review of Irish War and Law Tim Hourigan (Warplanespotter)
Historical background, recent intensification and current state of Ireland’s war participation - public reactions and responses of legal system from an activist’s perspective.

20 min Briefing on 'Horgan v Ireland' Joe Noonan (Solicitor)
A critical analysis of the landmark High Court case taken against the State in 2003 to injunct against the use of Shannon by foreign military forces. Who, how, wherefore, whereto?

20 min Alternative Visions of the Future Owen Rice (Indymedia/IAWM)
An exposition of the planned ‘Internal Security Colony’ balanced against the struggle for freedom, sovereignty, social justice and public accountability.

20 min International Law and ‘crimes’ of Conscience Brendan Nix (SC for Mary Kelly)
Summary of development of IL and its application in Irish Courts. Outlook for future use of Nuremberg Defence et al.

60 min Discussion of Points, Formation of Task-Teams Robin Hennessy
Bring suggestions – much work to do, volunteers rush forward and assign selves into task-specific workgroups.

30 min Tea + Cake + Coffee Old Mother Hubbard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

save preference

Comments (6 of 6)

Excellent initiative!

by Eoin Dubsky

Fri Oct 31, 2003 00:16

Well done to everyone involved. This looks like a great initiative, and timely too. The IAWM is really picking up the pace again!!

A very good idea.

by David

Fri Oct 31, 2003 13:09

I'm pleasantly surprised.

Why do you need a legal committee?

by Why?

Fri Oct 31, 2003 13:52

I understand that the IAWM and any activist group need lawyers and barristers when it comes to the Courts being used against them. But why a need for a legal subcommittee?

The fact is that there is NO BASIS to say that the Irish Government broke the constitution by giving the US the support it did in the Iraqi War. That is a fact, I'm sick of people reading stuff into the constitution without even reading the document!

I'm also sick of people thinking that Bin Collection is covered in the Constitution! There is NO RIGHT set out in the Constitution to have your bins collected. There was in law, but they changed the law (which was Constitutional).

The People that evoke the Constitution are really looking for the easy way out, they dont want to take on the state directly- instead try to take an easier road down the courts.

In reply to "Why?" re Constitution

Fri Oct 31, 2003 15:16

You complain about people who assume the constitution says this or that without reading it properly first. But you seem to be making the same mistake here, reading into the IAWM's press release some references to the Irish Constitution. There are none.

Before Kearns J's scandalous ruling in 'Horgan v Ireland' that the clearest safeguards in our Constitution against foreign policy lawlessness are just "aspirational", I would have directed your attention to Article 29.1,29.2,29.3. ...What the heck, here it is anyways:

Article 29 (International Relations)

1. Ireland affirms its devotion to the ideal of peace and friendly co-operation amongst nations founded on international
justice and morality.

2. Ireland affirms its adherence to the principle of the pacific settlement of international disputes by international
arbitration or judicial determination.

3. Ireland accepts the generally recognised principles of international law as its rule of conduct in its relations with
other States.

Still, the Constition isn't the only way to skin a cat (huh?)... There are a number of statutory instruments which seem to have been violated. See my most recent affidavit for what I mean (http://slack.redbrick.dcu.ie/aff.doc).

well done Eoin.

by iosaf :-)

Fri Oct 31, 2003 15:41

Maith an Buaichaill.
http://slack.redbrick.dcu.ie/aff.doc

The constitution.

by Tim

Fri Oct 31, 2003 20:04

WHY? wrote:
"The fact is that there is NO BASIS to say that the Irish Government broke the constitution by giving the US the support it did in the Iraqi War."

That's NOT a fact. If there was NO BASIS then the court would not have even HEARD the case.

Where have you been "Why?" ?
Some us us have read the constitution.
Article 28.3.1
War shall not be declared and the State shall not participate in any war save with the assent of Dail Eireann.

The Government lied about the 'long standing arrangements' on the use of Shannon, refused to fully disclose the documents, and even passed a dail motion that was the reverse of reality.
Now, in his judgement in the High Court,you read it, the rather unusual pronouncement was that it was best left up to the government, rather than the courts to define 'participation'.
The Dail should have resolved the issue.
They could have, if the government had the guts to present a motion that we should participate in the war, then those opposed to our involvement could vote "NO"
But the FF/PD government, by presenting a dishonest motion that they were NOT participating but would continue to do all the practical things that meant we DID, stifled the debate and covered themselves in shame.

I would have to question the logic (if not the motives) of the ruling that the Government should define 'participation' when they are the defendants in a case.
Is it not analagous to leaving it up to the accused in a rape case to define what would constitute rape?
Accused: "no my lord, that was merely, heavy petting"
Judge: "oh, well then I find you innocent"

The judge stated: (on the idea of the court being better suited than the Dáil for deciding what constitutes 'participation' in a war.)
"The court cannot without proof of quite exceptional circumstances, accept this contention."

How high is the bar for these "exceptional circumstances"? Have we not seen some truly exceptional circumstances already?
I'd REALLY like to know what would constitute exceptional circumstances.

WHY? also wrote:
The People that evoke the Constitution are really looking for the easy way out, they dont want to take on the state directly- instead try to take an easier road down the courts.

"take on the state directly"? What do you mean by that? and how is it "easier" to take it to court?
Ed Horgan risked losing his house in his court case, that's hardly easy.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

Human Rights in Ireland

Lockdown Skeptics

Voltaire Network

IAWM invites Legal Professionals to meeting 8th Nov.

Comments (6 of 6)