"Collateral Damage" Civil Resistance Action Against the War on Iraq, Legal Defense

	Statement - July 29, 2003			US Constitution - Article VI
	Statement - July 21, 2003			UN Charter - Preamble
	Summary of Points			UN Charter - Principals and Purpose
	Colorado: Execution of a Public Duty

Summary of Points in trial of Collateral Damage Defendants:

The relationship between International and U.S. law

Under Article VI of the Constitution, treaties signed by the United States are the supreme law of the land and supersede all other laws, including all state and federal laws. When the U.S. signs an international treaty, convention, or agreement, the treaty, agreement, etc. is no longer just "international" law, but is a U.S. federal law applicable to all levels of governmental law, including courts at all levels in the states. The UN Charter, the Hague Conventions, the Charter of the International Military Tribunal (which came out of the Nazi atrocities and is sometimes referred to as the Nuremberg principles or the Nuremberg Tribunal), the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal (which also tried war criminals in the Pacific region following World War II), and the Genocide Convention (plus many other treaties and agreements), therefore, are codified (or written) into U.S. Law. When a president or Congress violates these treaties or convention, they are violating U.S. law, as well as international law. Judges at the state level must enforce this law.

UN Charter

Under the UN Charter, Article 2 (section 4), nation states agree to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Article 51 gives a country the right of collective or individual self defense in the event of an attack on that country. Legitimate self defense was first defined by Secretary of State Daniel Webster in the following way: "there must be a necessity of self-defense, instant, overwhelming and leaving no choice of means and no moment of deliberation." and the responsive measures must be neither "unreasonable" nor "excessive". This definition was employed at Nuremberg and has been accepted in U.S. courts. The U.S. is a signatory to the UN Charter (in fact was a found member). The preemptive attack on Iraq in March of 2003 was a violation of the UN Charter and cannot be justified by self defense, since Iraq was not an immediate or imminent threat to the United States, in spite of Bush Administration's attempts to create this as a justification. Also the UN weapons inspections were successfully searching Iraq for weapons, in the event that Iraq would present a threat in the future. Members of the UN Security Council did not give their approval to the war on Iraq; the U.S. therefore violated international and U.S. law in its attack.

Individual Responsibility Under International Law:

Under the Nuremberg Tribunal decisions and under the Genocide Convention, individuals are bound to uphold international law, including war crimes and crimes against humanity. Citizen's failure to act against the crimes of their government may render them accessories sharing complicity in the crime (see motion filed for more details).

Colorado Law-Execution of a Public

This law states that conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when it is required or authorized by a provision of law or a judicial decree binding in Colorado. "Provision of law" includes: laws defining the duties and functions of public officials, and laws governing the military service or conduct of war. Since defendants were attempting to convince Senator Allard to listen to the public on the issue of U.S. violations of international and U.S. law, and since the situation involved laws governing the conduct of war, this statute is applicable.

Amendment 1 of the U.S. Constitution

Amendment 1 protects free speech and the "right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." Defendants were seeking to redress their grievances with Senator Allard by requesting he hold a Town Meeting on going to war against Iraq and by seeking to convince him that his constituency was not supporting his position on the war.