Danish prime minister avoids prosecution for Iraq war

international | anti-war / imperialism | news report

Thursday April 12, 2007 14:48

by Coilín ÓhAiseadha

Plaintiffs did not have legal interest, High Court says

Danish prime minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen cannot be prosecuted for the war in Iraq, the High Court of Denmark ruled on Wednesday 11 April. The court found that the plaintiffs were not entitled to prosecute, as they did not have "legal interest" in the matter. They will now appeal to the Supreme Court.

Working under the umbrella of a group called the “Danish Constitution Committee of 2003”, a group of 26 plaintiffs had attempted to prosecute the prime minister for leading Denmark into a war that they believe to be in breach of the Danish constitution. For one thing, the Danish campaign in Iraq has been taking place under the leadership of officers of the United States’ armed forces and therefore, in the view of the plaintiffs, involves cession of sovereignty.

But the court has not upheld their view.

The plaintiffs are no worse affected than others, the High Court has argued. As they are neither individually nor jointly more severely affected by the campaign in Iraq than any other Danish citizen, they are not entitled to prosecute.

Also, the court notes that the case was brought at a point in time when Danish involvement in Iraq had been extended by the Danish parliament. Thus, the case concerning the original parliamentary decision was no longer relevant, the court finds.

The prosecution had referred to parliamentary resolution B118 of 21 March 2003, when the Danish parliament passed a motion that Danish troops should participate in the multinational force that invaded Iraq. But since then the parliament has several times repeated its consent for the campaign, the first time being in resolution B165 of 15 May 2003. As the case was brought on the basis of the first resolution, the court has rejected it on the basis that it is no longer relevant.

With reference to the dead soldier, Bjarke Olsen Kirkmand, whose parents have demanded compensation in association with the case, the court has also rejected this claim. The soldier was competent when he entered into his contract with the army and he was dispatched to Iraq in accordance with a resolution in parliament. Thus, the prime minister is not the correct party to prosecute in matters of compensation, the court notes in its refusal to let the case proceed.

The Constitution Committee is expected to appeal to the Supreme Court.