مسئولیت کیفری مافوق در نقض قواعد و مقررات حقوق بشر و بشردوستانه از سوی مأمورین امریکایی در اشغال عراق

نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه حقوق دانشگاه جامع امام حسین(ع)

چکیده

هدف اساسی از شکل‌گیری دکترین مسئولیت کیفری مافوق نظامی و غیرنظامی به جهت ارتکاب رفتارهای غیرانسانی نیروهای تحت امر خود در حقوق بین‌الملل کیفری، تضمین این موضوع مهم است که آن‌ها برای جلوگیری از ارتکاب جرم به‌وسیله نیروهای تحت امر خود، کنترل مناسبی انجام دهند و در صورت وقوع جرم، به سرکوب، مجازات و گزارش آن بپردازند. مبنای نظری مسئولیت کیفری مافوق، هر چه باشد، نتیجه آن است که آن‌ها به جهت موقعیتی که دارند، مسئول نظارت بر نیروهای تحت امر خود هستند. بنابراین درصورتی‌که بدانند یا می‌بایست بدانند که جنایات جنگی در حوزه تحت مأموریت و از سوی نیروهای تحت امرشان‌ واقع شده یا در حال وقوع است یا به‌زودی اتفاق خواهد افتاد و مانع ارتکاب آن نشده‌ یا آن را به مقام‌های ذی‌صلاح گزارش ندهند یا تدابیر لازم را برای محاکمه و مجازات متخلفین اتخاذ نکرده باشند، دارای مسئولیت کیفری هستند. مقاله حاضر، ضمن تبیین اجمالی شکل‌گیری مسئولیت کیفری مافوق در حقوق بین‌الملل کیفری و همچنین روند تکاملی آن در آرای دادگاه‌ها، به شرایط تحقق این مسئولیت نیز دقت کرده و به‌طور مختصر، نقض مقررات حقوق بشر و حقوق بشردوستانه به‌وسیله نیروهای امریکایی را در عراقِ تحت اشغال بررسی و ثابت می‌کند که بر اساس هنجار‌های پذیرفته‌شده بین‌المللی، فرماندهان نظامی و مافوق‌های غیرنظامی امریکاییِ درگیر تهاجم به عراق و اشغال این کشور، نسبت به جرائم ارتکابی نیروهای مادون خود، مسئولیت کیفری دارند و محاکم صالح ملی و بین‌المللی باید آن‌ها را تعقیب، محاکمه و مجازات کنند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Superior Criminal Responsibility for Violations of Human Rights and Humanitarian Rules and Regulations of the US Forces in the Occupation of Iraq

نویسنده [English]

  • Sohrab Salami
چکیده [English]

The main purpose of the doctrine of superior criminal responsibility for inhuman treatment by the military and civilian-led forces in international criminal law is to ensure that they have adequate controls to prevent crimes committed by troops under their command and in committal of crimes, they make suppression, punishment and prepare a report thereof. The theoretical basis of superior criminal responsibility, after all, is that they are in a position which makes them responsible for supervising the troops under their command. Hence, if the superiors are aware of the war crimes occuring in the area of their mission and commited by the troops under their control, and they fail to prevent or report it to the competent authorities or hesitate to take the necessary measures to prosecute and punish the offenders, they will have penal responsibility. This article contains a brief explanation of the formation of superior criminal responsibility under international law as well as its evolutive process in criminal courts. It also focuses on the fulfillment of this responsibility and briefly examines the violation of human rights and humanitarian law by US forces in occupied Iraq. It also confirms that on the basis of internationally accepted standards, military commanders and the US civilian superiors involved in the invasion of Iraq are held criminally responsible in relation to the crimes committed by their subordinate forces and the competent national and international courts should prosecute and punish them.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Criminal Responsibility of Commander
  • Occupation
  • Violations of Regulations
  • US Commanders’ Failure

منابع:

الف) فارسی

ـ کتاب

  • حامد، سهیلا؛ صلاحیت جهانی، جهاد دانشگاهی، 1385.
  • ساعد، نادر؛ حقوق بشردوستانه و مسائل نوظهور، چاپ دوم، خرسندی، 1389.

 

ـ مقاله

  • ·         اردبیلی، محمد‌علی؛ «شکنجه»،مجله تحقیقات حقوقی، شماره 9، 1370.
  • رنجبریان، امیرحسین؛ «پویایی حقوق بین­الملل و پایایی شکنجه»، فصلنامه حقوق، مجله دانشکده حقوق­وعلوم­سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، دوره 38، شماره 1، 1387.
  • ___________؛ «جایگاه قاعده منع شکنجه در حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر»، فصلنامه حقوق، مجله دانشکده حقوق­وعلوم­سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، شماره 70، 1384.
  • صلاحی، سهراب؛ «بازخوانی دلایل اشغال عراق از منظر حق توسل به زور و بررسی آثار آن در پرتو حقوق بین‌الملل کیفری»، فصلنامه حقوق، مجله دانشکده حقوق­وعلوم­سیاسی دانشگاه تهران، دوره 42، شماره 4، زمستان 1391.
  • _________؛ «امریکا و بازتعریف قواعد حقوقی در اعمال رفتارهای غیرانسانی نسبت به اسیران جنگی»، مجله مطالعات حقوقی دانشگاه شیراز، دوره پنجم، شماره اول بهار و تابستان 1392.

 

ب) انگلیسی

  • Army Regulation 15-6, (1996), Procedure for Investigating Officers and Board of Officers (Sept. 30), available at:http://www.usma.edu/eo/regspubs/r156.pdf.
  • Army Regulation 195-2, (1985), Criminal Investigation Activities, Appendix B (Oct. 30), at:   http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r1952.pdf.
  • Askin, Kelly D, (2003), “Prosecuting Wartime Rape and Other Gender–Related Crimes under International Law: Extraordinary Advances, Enduring Obstacles”, Berkeley J. INT’L. L, vol. 21.
  • Bonafe, Beatrice I, (2007), “Finding a Proper Role for Command Responsibility”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, 5.
  • Buncombe, Andrew, (2003), “U.S. Admits It Used Napalm Bombs in Iraq”, The Independent , August 10. http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/ news/2003/030810-napalmIraq01.htm.
  • Bothe, M, (2001), “The Protection of the Civilian Population and NATO Bombing in Yugoslavia: Comments on a Report to the Prosecutor of the ICTY”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 12, No.3.
  • Department of the Army, (2004), Criminal Investigation Division, Frequently Asked Question, http://www.cid.army.mil/faqs.htm. see also, Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on the Treatment by the Coalition Forces of Prisoners of War and Other Protected Persons by the Geneva Conventions in Iraq During Arrest Interment and Interrogation, Feb. 2004, at 20, 46, available at: http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/iraq/icrc-report.pdf.
  • Department of the Army, (2003), Informal Investigation of Shooting of Obeed Radad (Sept. 13,), at 23, available at: http://www.aclu.org/projects/ foiasearch/pdf.
  • Department of the Army, (2004), CID, CID Report of Investigation, Final (Feb. 4) [Criminal Investigation, Al – Obodi], available at: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/doa–1727–1780–pdf.
  • Fay-Jones, (2004), Report: Executive Summary Investigation of Intelligence Activities at Abu Ghraib, www.FindLaw.com.
  • Final Report of the Independent Panel to Review DoD Detention Operations, August 2004, Available at: http://www.findlaw.com.
  • Gibson McGuire & Others (2008), “The Looting and Destruction of Iraq’s Past”, University of Chicago.
  • Hwang Geum Joo v. Japan, (2001), 172F. Supp.2d52 , No.OO–CV-2288, Renumbered OO–CV–2233.
  • Human Rights First Notes from Observation of Welshofer Court Martial, (2006), “Welshofer in His Own Words”, at: http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/ us–law/eten/trial/welshofer–o12006d.
  • Hersh, Seymour M, (2004), The New Yorker, at: http://www.newyorker.com/ fact/content/?040510fa-fact.
  • Hersh, Seymour M, (2004), “Torture at Abu Ghraib”, New Yorker.
  • ICJ Reports,(1996), Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion.
  • ICJ Reports, (2004), Lagal Consequences of the Construction of the Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion.
  • ICTY, Judgment, (2001) Delalic and Others), It–96–21–A) Appeals Chamber.
  • ICTY, Krnojelac (1999), Case, Case No. IT–97–25–T, Trial Chamber.
  • ICTY, Hadzihasanovic and Kubura (2006),Case, Trial Judgment.
  • “Iraq Bridge Incident” (2004), Associated Press, 30 July, at: http://www.msn.com
  • “Information Paper on Samarra Bridge Incident”(2004), July 15, at 47, available at: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/051805/8055-8181.pdf
  • Jamail, Dahr, (2005), “An Increasingly Aerial Occupation”, ZNet, December 14, at: http://www.zmang.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectuonID=15& ItemID=9325.
  • Johnson, Ian M, (2003), “The Impact on Libraries and Archives in Iraq of War and Looting in 2003- A Preliminary Assessment of the Damage and Subsequent Reconstruction Efforts”, The International Information and Library Review, 37, at: www.elsevier.com/locate/iilr, p. 210.
  • Jones, Anthony R. & George R. Fay, (2005), AR 15-6 Investigation of the Abu Ghraib Detention Facility and 205th Military Intelligence Brigade , at: http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/reports/2004/intell-abu-ghraib_ar1 5-6.pdf.
  • Karsten, Nora, (2009), “Distinguishing Military and Non–Military Superiors”, 7 Journal of International Criminal Justice.
  • Lippman, Matthew, (1996), Conundrums of Armed Conflict: Criminal Defenses to Violations of the Humanitarian Law of War, 15 DICK. J. INT’LL. 1.
  • Luke Harding, (2004), “The Other Prisoners”, The Guardian, U.K., available at: www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/9/4566/printer.
  • Memorandum from General Ricardo Sanchez to Combined Joint Task Force Seven.
  • Commander, (2003), 205th Intelligence Brigade, available at: http://www.humanrightsfirst.info/pdf/06124–etn–sep-10–sanchez–memo. pdf.
  • McClelland, Gregory A, (2002), “A Non-Adversary Approach to International Criminal Tribunals”, 26 SUFFOLK TRANSNAT’L L. REV. 1.
  • Memorandum from the Secretary of Defense for Secretaries of the Military Departments, (2004), Procedures for Investigation into Deaths of Detainees in the Custody of the Armed Forces of the United States (June 9), at: http://www.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/navy3797.3798.pdf.
  • Mitchell, David S, (2005), “The Prohibition of Rape in International Humanitarian Law as a Norm of jus cogens: Clarifying the Doctrine”, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, vol. 15.
  • Nerlich, Volker, (2007), “Superior Responsibility under Article 28 ICC Statute”, 5 Journal of International Justice.
  • Plett, Barbara Plett, (2001), “Iraqi Alarm over DU Ammunition”, BBC News. 15 January, 2001, at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east /1118306.stm.
  • Prosecutor v. Dario Kordic and Mario Cerkez, (2001), Trial Judgment, No IT-95-14/2-T,ICTY.
  • Prosecutor v.Miodrag Jokic (2004). Trial Chamber I, ICTY.
  • Prosecutor v. Kayishema & Ruzindana (1999),(Case No. ICTR-95-1-T).
  • Bagilishema
  • Prosecutor v. Bagilishema (2001),(Case No. ICTR-95-1A-T).
  • Prosecutor v. Delalic et al. (1998), (Case No. IT-96-21-T).
  • Prosecutor v. Musema (2000)(Case No. ICTR-96-13-T).
  • Prosecutor v. Kayishema & Ruzindana (1999),(Case No. ICTR-95-1-T0.
  • Prosecutor v. Bagilishema (2001), (Case No. ICTR-95-1A-T), Judgment.
  • Prosecutor v. Musema (2000), (Case No. ICTR-96-13-T), Judgment and Sentence.
  • Roberta, Arnold, (2002), “Command Responsibility: A Case Study of Alleged Violations of the Laws of War at Khiam Detention Conter”, 2 Journal of Conflict and Security Law.
  • Ricobono, Francesco and Others, (2001), “Trace Element Distribution and 235U/238U Ratios in Euphrates Waters and in Soils and Tree Barks of Dhi Qar Province (Southern Iraq). Science of the Total Environment 409.
  • Sarche, Jon, (2006), “Army Officer Found Guilty in Iraqi’s Death”, Associated Press, at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10950946.
  • Singh, Avi, (2005), “Criminal Responsibility for Non-State Civilian Superiors Lacking de jure Authority: A Comparative Review of the Doctrine of Superior Responsibility and Parallel Doctrines in National Criminal Laws”, 28 HASTINGS INT’L & COMP. L. REV.
  • The Massachusetts Articles of War Case. 5, (1775), Reprinted in William Winthrop, Military Law and Precedents, Amo Press.
  •  “The Taguba Report” (2004), On Treatment of Abu Ghraib Prisoners in Iraq”, at: http://news.findlaw.com/hodcs/docs/iraq/.
  • U.N. War Crimes Commission, (1997), Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, (William S. Hein & Co.)
  • Viseur, Patricia, Sellers, (2002), “Sexual Violence and Peremptory Norms: The Legal Value of Rape”, Case Western Reserves, Journal of International Law, vol. 34.
  • Vrdoljak, Ana Filipa, (2009), Cultural Heritage in Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Electoronic Copy, available at: http:// ssrn.com/abstract=1401231.
  • war crimes committed by the united states in iraq and mechanisms for accountability (2006), www.consumersforpeace.org/pdf/war_crimes_ iraq_101006.
  • White, Josh, “U. S. Army Officer Conricted in Death of Iraqi Detainee”, Washington Post, 23 Jan. 2006.