An Irish judge's ruling today
may haunt Bushites tomorrow
Conor Joyce reports today the outcome of a little watched case in which retired Irish military man Edward Horgan went to court to stop U.S. warplanes using Shannon Airport as a transit point for its Iraq invasion operations.
American judges -- among the most abjectly political in the world, their protests to the contrary notwithstanding -- seldom allow citizens to raise root political issues inside the courtroom where they might be aired to the better understanding of an observing public. The recent case brought by relatives of servicemen and congressman that was not allowed to proceed in Boston federal court is a prime example.
But Irish Judge Nicholas Kearns did, and his ruling deserves to be publicized for the simple reason that Horgan is not the only party ready to challenge U.S. war endeavors in court. Horgan did not bring the U.S. war to its knees or anything like that, nor is it likely to become a landmark case in international law. But others may take heart from the courageousness of the Irish plaintiff and judge and perservere with their own causes, wherever they may bring them.
I offer the information just as Conor Joyce provided it in a listserv for media watchers:
From: "Conor Joyce"
Subject: Horgan V State Horgan awarded 50 per cent of own costs - State to pay its own costs.
In the High Court this morning, Judge Nicholas Kearns, ruling on costs in the case that retired army officer Edward Horgan had unsuccessfully taken against the Government over its decision to allow US forces to transit through Shannon airport and Irish airspace in recent months, awarded 50 per cent of Edward Horgan's costs to him and ruled that the Government is to pay its costs.
The grounds that Judge Kearns gave for his decision were that the case raised, and allowed to be clarified, issues of true public interest and that Edward Horgan had successfully identified a principle of international customary law, requiring neutral states to prohibit the transit throught their territory of large numbers of troops, and munitions, of one belligerent state en route to war with another state.
Statement by Edward Horgan following the hearing on costs:
This case has dealt with very profound issues. The Court has heard the arguments on both sides fully and with great attention and courtesy.
The 71 page judgement deserves careful study. No decision on an appeal will be made until that study is completed.
I am very pleased that the High Court accepted my submission that international law requires neutral states (including Ireland which follows a kind of qualified neutrality) to prohibit the transit of large numbers of troops through its territory en route to war. In light of that the Government cannot suggest that Ireland behaved as a neutral State in the war on Iraq. This finding by the Court is most serious and has significant impliations. Ireland, having assisted the attacking forces, must accept its share of responsibility for the cluster bombs and missiles dropped on the people of Iraq.
The case has exposed Government deeds and actions to public scrutiny. Of course I have not won. The Court has found that the Government is not Constitutionally bound to uphold international law in this context but that it - the Court - cannot intervene. I respect the Court's view but I fear that the balance of power may be shifting too far in favour of Government at the expense of the Court and ultimately at the expense of the citizens of Ireland. That worrries me greatly. One consequence, it seems to me, is that the Government may now be even more vulnerable to pressure from more powerful States to go along with them in times of crisis and to violate international law without any Constitutional restraint. International law reflects the standards of behaviour generally recognised as being necessary for civilised existence in a dangerous world. If those standards are undermined we are all the losers.
Edward Horgan Friday 2 May 2003
may haunt Bushites tomorrow
Conor Joyce reports today the outcome of a little watched case in which retired Irish military man Edward Horgan went to court to stop U.S. warplanes using Shannon Airport as a transit point for its Iraq invasion operations.
American judges -- among the most abjectly political in the world, their protests to the contrary notwithstanding -- seldom allow citizens to raise root political issues inside the courtroom where they might be aired to the better understanding of an observing public. The recent case brought by relatives of servicemen and congressman that was not allowed to proceed in Boston federal court is a prime example.
But Irish Judge Nicholas Kearns did, and his ruling deserves to be publicized for the simple reason that Horgan is not the only party ready to challenge U.S. war endeavors in court. Horgan did not bring the U.S. war to its knees or anything like that, nor is it likely to become a landmark case in international law. But others may take heart from the courageousness of the Irish plaintiff and judge and perservere with their own causes, wherever they may bring them.
I offer the information just as Conor Joyce provided it in a listserv for media watchers:
From: "Conor Joyce"
Subject: Horgan V State Horgan awarded 50 per cent of own costs - State to pay its own costs.
In the High Court this morning, Judge Nicholas Kearns, ruling on costs in the case that retired army officer Edward Horgan had unsuccessfully taken against the Government over its decision to allow US forces to transit through Shannon airport and Irish airspace in recent months, awarded 50 per cent of Edward Horgan's costs to him and ruled that the Government is to pay its costs.
The grounds that Judge Kearns gave for his decision were that the case raised, and allowed to be clarified, issues of true public interest and that Edward Horgan had successfully identified a principle of international customary law, requiring neutral states to prohibit the transit throught their territory of large numbers of troops, and munitions, of one belligerent state en route to war with another state.
Statement by Edward Horgan following the hearing on costs:
This case has dealt with very profound issues. The Court has heard the arguments on both sides fully and with great attention and courtesy.
The 71 page judgement deserves careful study. No decision on an appeal will be made until that study is completed.
I am very pleased that the High Court accepted my submission that international law requires neutral states (including Ireland which follows a kind of qualified neutrality) to prohibit the transit of large numbers of troops through its territory en route to war. In light of that the Government cannot suggest that Ireland behaved as a neutral State in the war on Iraq. This finding by the Court is most serious and has significant impliations. Ireland, having assisted the attacking forces, must accept its share of responsibility for the cluster bombs and missiles dropped on the people of Iraq.
The case has exposed Government deeds and actions to public scrutiny. Of course I have not won. The Court has found that the Government is not Constitutionally bound to uphold international law in this context but that it - the Court - cannot intervene. I respect the Court's view but I fear that the balance of power may be shifting too far in favour of Government at the expense of the Court and ultimately at the expense of the citizens of Ireland. That worrries me greatly. One consequence, it seems to me, is that the Government may now be even more vulnerable to pressure from more powerful States to go along with them in times of crisis and to violate international law without any Constitutional restraint. International law reflects the standards of behaviour generally recognised as being necessary for civilised existence in a dangerous world. If those standards are undermined we are all the losers.
Edward Horgan Friday 2 May 2003
<< Home