From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #201 Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest Sender: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk abolition-usa-digest Friday, October 22 1999 Volume 01 : Number 201 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 14:47:43 -0400 From: Ellen Thomas Subject: (abolition-usa) US Campaign email list and Congressional working group: appeal Here's the e-mail list of the people who registered for the Ann Arbor meeting October 8-11. If you would like to consider yourself part of the U.S. Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, please send me your email and other addresses and I'll update the list. At the organizing meeting I became Convenor of the Congressional working group. If you'd like to plug in, please reply to me with "Ellen" at the beginning of the subject line, for prompt response. Please tell me your vital statistics (name/org/addresses), what you think the Congressional working group should do, and how you'd like to participate. Like all of us, I have limited time, but serious commitment to helping make it easy for people to communicate with Congress. You can start with http://prop1.org/prop1/letter.htm Ann Arbor meeting list: johnburroughs@earthlink.net (John Burroughs-LCNP), wslf@earthlink.net (Jackie Cabasso-WSLF), dwyer@msu.edu (Anabel Dwyer), shundahai@shundahai.org (Matteo Ferreira and Michelle Xenos-Shundahai), globenet@afn.org (Bruce Gagnon-Global Network-Space), ien@igc.apc.org (Tom Goldtooth-Indigenous Enviro Network), aav1@ctaz.com (Anthony Guarisco-Alliance of Atomic Vets), megiddo@umich.edu (Alan and Odile Haber-Megiddo Project and WILPF-Ann Arbor), jahn@cruzio.com (Jan Harwood-WILPF), will.hathaway@emich.edu (Will Hathaway-U.Michigan), orep@earthlink.net (Ralph Hutchinson-Oakridge EPA), jskatz@mich.com (Fern Katz-WAND), skent@kentcom.com (Stephen Kent), alichterman@worldnet.att.net (Andrew Lichterman-WSLF), sallight@earthlink.net (Sally Light-TVC), kmartin@fourthfreedom.org (Kevin Martin-FFF), afscct@igc.org (Bruce Martin-AFSC), pmeidell@igc.apc.org (Pamela Meidell-Atomic Mirror), masayanishio@msn.com (Masaya Nishio-Akahata), a2000@silcom.com (Carah Ong-Abolition 2000), claudiap@sginet.com (Claudia Peterson), cindypile@juno.com (Cindy Pile-Nevada Desert Experience), vyquatmann@aol.com (Oakrdige EPA), dave@paxchristiusa.org (Dave Robinson-Pax Christi), gourihap99@igc.org (Gouri Sadhwani-Hague Appeal for Peace), disarm@for-usa.org (Ibrahim Abdil-Muiid Clayton Ramey-FOR), aslater@gracelinks.org (Alice Slater-GRACE), prop1@prop1.org (Ellen Thomas-Proposition One), disarmament@igc.org (Joan L. Wade-Disarmament Clearinghouse), Ellen Thomas Proposition One Committee PO Box 27217, Washington DC 20038 202-462-0757 -- fax 202-265-5389 prop1@prop1.org -- http://prop1.org *** BAN AND BURY ALL RADIOACTIVE BOMBS * depleted uranium, fission, neutron * About NucNews: http://prop1.org/nucnews/nucnews.htm - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 13:46:21 +1000 From: FoE Sydney - Nuclear Campaign Subject: (abolition-usa) AUSTRALIAN SENATE MOTION ON NEW AGENDA RESOLUTION IN UNGA PASSED 21/10/1999 John Hallam Friends of the Earth Sydney, 17 Lord street, Newtown, NSW, Australia, Fax(61)(2)9517-3902 ph (61)(2)9517-3903 nonukes@foesyd.org.au http://homepages.tig.com.au/~foesyd AUSTRALIAN SENATE MOTION ON NEW AGENDA RESOLUTION IN UNGA PASSED 21/10/1999 The Senate motion reads: (1) That the Senate: (a) notes that: (i) the failure of the United States Senate to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty sends a strong negative signal to the global community regarding progress toward nuclear weapons disarmament and international security, and (ii) Agenda Item 76(R) of the First Committee of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly calls on nuclear weapons states to discharge their Article 6 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations without delay, and calls on all nations that have not done so to sign and ratify the Nuclear Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; and (b) calls on the Australian Government to strongly support Agenda Item 76(R) presented by Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa and Sweden, particularly in light of the above. (2) That the text of this resolution be conveyed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Downer), to the Australian Ambassador to the UN and to other UN delegations. size=3> Item 76 (R) is alternatively known as the New Agenda resolution. Its full title is "Towards a Nuclear Weapons Free World: the need for a new agenda. 21/10/1999 SENATE SUPPORT FOR UN N-RESOLUTION WELCOMED Friends of the Earth has welcomed the resolution passed this morning in the Senate, calling on the Government to support an upcoming resolution in the United Nations General Assembly that calls on the nuclear weapons states to negotiate to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. The 'New Agenda' resolution as it is called, calls on all nations to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty which the US Senate recently failed to ratify, calls for a series of short - term measures aimed at building trust notably the taking of nuclear forces off hairtrigger alert, and calls for the currently stalled arms reduction negotiations between the US and Russia to be accelerated and to proceed further. According to Friends of the Earth nuclear campaigner John Hallam, "While the Government did not actually vote for this resolution, Senator Hill said in response to a question by Senator Lyn Allison in parliament yesterday that there were many things in the resolution that the government agreed with and that they would have to carefully consider the resolution as a whole. "We earnestly hope that these indications are not just will of the wisp, and that the government is indeed moving toward a position in which it might be able to consider supporting the New Agenda Resolution, and in which this worthy and commonsense disarmament initiative will obtain the support that it deserves from the Government that distinguished itself by pushing through the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty." "If the Government can see its way to supporting this resolution it will have the overwhelming support of the electorate. In November 1998, a survey done by the Roy Morgan Research Company revealed that 92% of all voters agreed (75% strongly) that Australia should help to negotiate a treaty that would ban and destroy all nuclear weapons. Similar figures (87%) apply in the US and the UK." "We earnestly commend the New Agenda Resolution to the Government and hope and trust that they will be able to support it in the United Nations General Assembly." John Hallam, (02)9517-3903, h(02)9810-2598 20/10/1999 SENATE URGES GOVT TO VOTE FOR UN NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT RESOLUTION The Senate seems set to vote to urge the Government to vote for a resolution in the United Nations General Assembly that asks the nuclear weapons nations to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. Friends of the Earth and the Australian Peace Committee are urging the government itself to vote for the Senate resolution. In November 1998, a survey done by the Roy Morgan Research Company revealed that 92% of all voters agreed (75% strongly) that Australia should help to negotiate a treaty that would ban and destroy all nuclear weapons. The Senate motion put by Democrat Senator Lyn Allison, urges the government to vote for the New Agenda Resolution, which is likely to go through the United Nations General Assembly First Committee in early November. The New Agenda Resolution reminds the Nuclear Weapons States that they are legally obliged under article 6 of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) to negotiate away their nuclear arsenals. It urges nations that have so far not signed or ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban treaty to do so, and it provides for a detailed series of measures to eliminate the nuclear arsenals of the Nuclear Weapons States and to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. According to FOE Sydney nuclear campaigner John Hallam and Irene Gale (AM) of the Australian Peace Committee: " This motion is especially critical now that the US Senate has voted not to ratify the CTBT. The issue of nuclear disarmament is one that ultimately affects the prospects for survival of the whole planet. It's a truism to say that unless we get rid of nuclear weapons, they will get rid of us. The New Agenda Resolution acknowledges this at the level of the the United Nations General Assembly, and urges the nuclear powers to get a move on with the process of elimination of nuclear weapons." "Australia is a friend and ally of the US, and as such it has a responsibility to give the US a strong message on nuclear weapons. The US and Russia need to be pushed on this issue. The world community needs to show that it will not allow the possession of weapons of planetary destruction to become a global norm. We urge the government to vote for Senator Lyn Alisons resolution and to vote for the New Agenda resolution in the UN General Assembly. Australia must pick up the lead it held on nuclear weapons matters when it pushed through the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty." Contact: John Hallam, (02)9517-3903 (02)9810-2598 Irene Gale AM, (08)8364-2291 20 October 1999 Senate to consider nuclear disarmament motion The Medical Association for Prevention of War (MAPW) hopes that all parties will support the nuclear disarmament motion that is currently before the Senate. The motion calls on the Government to support the "Towards a Nuclear Weapons Free World: the need for a new agenda" resolution which is to be considered at the United Nations General Assembly in November. MAPW President Dr Susan Wareham said: "It really is time to move ahead at a much faster rate towards nuclear weapons abolition. The New Agenda resolution brings together all of the various mechanisms needed for that to happen". "Australia can no longer sustain an argument that the nuclear disarmament process is in good shape. The failure of the US to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) is just one area where progress is stalled. The Government must now act in international fora to support other initiatives to rid the world of nuclear weapons" said Dr Wareham. "The Australian Government should support the New Agenda resolution. Indeed it would be appropriate to see Australia join and take a leading role within the New Agenda Coalition. It would be a fitting beginning to the new millennium". "I take encouragement from Senator Hills comments today in the Senate that it appears that the resolution is not inconsistent with Government policy", said Dr Wareham. The New Agenda resolution was first put to the United Nations in December 1998 when 114 countries voted in favour. Australia abstained. The New Agenda Coalition is a grouping of eight countries that on 9 June 1998 issued a joint declaration calling on the nuclear weapons states and the nuclear weapons capable states to commit to the "speedy, final and total elimination of their nuclear weapons" and to "take that step now". For further information contact: Clare Henderson on (02) 6262 9345 - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 08:45:12 -0500 From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) NO!Scottish Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2 Condemned Dear Friends: As I said before, Sheriff Margaret Gimblett is one of the very best judges i have ever appeared before since i did my first anti-nuclear case in the spring of 1982. She is very bright, very professional and very courageous. I submit that we must ALL mobilize to her support and make it very clear to the British Establishment that the ENTIRE WORLD wants her to keep her job. Francis A. Boyle Professor of International Law - -----Original Message----- From: Scottish CND [mailto:cndscot@dial.pipex.com] Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 4:54 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Sheriff worried about her job Sheriff Margaret Gimblett has said that she is worried about her job after her historic decision about Trident on 21 October. In an exclusive interview with the Scottish Express from her home on the Isle of Bute she said: "I have the highest respect for these CND women, but I myself am not a CND supporter: I am totally apolitical. I am rather worried about my job after this. I certainly won't be expecting a mention in the Queens Honours list." - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 21:49:19 -0400 From: "Esther Pank" Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) US Campaign email list and Congressional working group: appeal Please include: Esther Pank, Peace Links 666 11th St NW, Suite 202, Washington, DC 20001 202-783-7030/202-783-7040 fax. esther.p@erols.com - ----- Original Message ----- From: Ellen Thomas To: Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 2:47 PM Subject: (abolition-usa) US Campaign email list and Congressional working group: appeal > Here's the e-mail list of the people who registered for the Ann Arbor > meeting October 8-11. If you would like to consider yourself part of the > U.S. Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, please send me your email and > other addresses and I'll update the list. > > At the organizing meeting I became Convenor of the Congressional working > group. If you'd like to plug in, please reply to me with "Ellen" at the > beginning of the subject line, for prompt response. Please tell me your > vital statistics (name/org/addresses), what you think the Congressional > working group should do, and how you'd like to participate. Like all of > us, I have limited time, but serious commitment to helping make it easy for > people to communicate with Congress. You can start with > http://prop1.org/prop1/letter.htm > > Ann Arbor meeting list: > > johnburroughs@earthlink.net (John Burroughs-LCNP), > wslf@earthlink.net (Jackie Cabasso-WSLF), > dwyer@msu.edu (Anabel Dwyer), > shundahai@shundahai.org (Matteo Ferreira and Michelle Xenos-Shundahai), > globenet@afn.org (Bruce Gagnon-Global Network-Space), > ien@igc.apc.org (Tom Goldtooth-Indigenous Enviro Network), > aav1@ctaz.com (Anthony Guarisco-Alliance of Atomic Vets), > megiddo@umich.edu (Alan and Odile Haber-Megiddo Project and WILPF-Ann > Arbor), jahn@cruzio.com (Jan Harwood-WILPF), > will.hathaway@emich.edu (Will Hathaway-U.Michigan), > orep@earthlink.net (Ralph Hutchinson-Oakridge EPA), > jskatz@mich.com (Fern Katz-WAND), > skent@kentcom.com (Stephen Kent), > alichterman@worldnet.att.net (Andrew Lichterman-WSLF), > sallight@earthlink.net (Sally Light-TVC), > kmartin@fourthfreedom.org (Kevin Martin-FFF), > afscct@igc.org (Bruce Martin-AFSC), > pmeidell@igc.apc.org (Pamela Meidell-Atomic Mirror), > masayanishio@msn.com (Masaya Nishio-Akahata), > a2000@silcom.com (Carah Ong-Abolition 2000), > claudiap@sginet.com (Claudia Peterson), > cindypile@juno.com (Cindy Pile-Nevada Desert Experience), > vyquatmann@aol.com (Oakrdige EPA), > dave@paxchristiusa.org (Dave Robinson-Pax Christi), > gourihap99@igc.org (Gouri Sadhwani-Hague Appeal for Peace), > disarm@for-usa.org (Ibrahim Abdil-Muiid Clayton Ramey-FOR), > aslater@gracelinks.org (Alice Slater-GRACE), > prop1@prop1.org (Ellen Thomas-Proposition One), > disarmament@igc.org (Joan L. Wade-Disarmament Clearinghouse), > Ellen Thomas > Proposition One Committee > PO Box 27217, Washington DC 20038 > 202-462-0757 -- fax 202-265-5389 > prop1@prop1.org -- http://prop1.org > > *** > > BAN AND BURY ALL RADIOACTIVE BOMBS > * depleted uranium, fission, neutron * > About NucNews: http://prop1.org/nucnews/nucnews.htm > > > - > To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" > with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. > For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send > "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:28:34 -0500 From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) RE: Scotch court: Nuclear weapons illegal Dear Fredrik: Thanks for this. I will forward it on to Scotland. Since = you are up there in Norway, maybe you could nominate the entire PLOWSHARES MOVEMENT for the Nobel Peace Prize. Imagine the world news media = headlines: "The Nobel Peace Prize Winning Plowshares Movement just put another = Trident 2 submarine out of action!" That will certainly accelerate the process = of worldwide nuclear disarmament. Best regards, Francis. - -----Original Message----- From: Fredrik S. Heffermehl [mailto:fredpax@online.no] Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 4:38 AM To: fboyle@law.uiuc.edu; cndscot@dial.pipex.com Cc: stale.eskeland@jus.uio.no; Pol D'Huyvetter; Trond; ialana@antenna.nl; petweiss@igc.apc.org Subject: Scotch court: Nuclear weapons illegal Oslo, 22.10, 1999 Dear Francis, Thanks a lot for your orientation on the fabulous sheriff=B4s decision = to acquit. This is a time for congratulation and enthusiastic jubilation. Professor Stale Eskeland of Oslo University joins me in sending, on = behalf of the Norwegian chapter of IALANA, our warmest congratulations and = words of thanks to Angie as the initiator of the Trident 2000 Plowshares = action and all her partners and co-defendants for the success of their effort = and struggle - and time in cells - through many years. They really have shown loyalty to this precious globe of ours and done a tremendous job to take care of our common future. I don=B4t have Angie=B4s address, so can you make sure that this = greeting will reach her? Below is today=B4s release for the Norwegian media and = peace activists in the 5 Nordic countries. Fredrik Til NTB Skotsk dommer: atomv=E5pen ulovlige Nedenfor er dommerens uttalelse i en sak mot atomdemonstranter som hadde tatt seg inn p=E5 Fairlane atombase i Skottland og =F8delagt mye utstyr p=E5 en lekter. De tre tiltalte ble frifunnet - de hadde prosedert tungt p=E5 at det var regjeringens atompolitikk som var i strid med internasjonal rett, og at aksjoner for =E5 dra oppmerksomhet til dette var straffrie. En av de tiltalte spurte om man burde v=E6rt d=F8mt for tilsvarende = aksjoner mot Hitlers forbrenningsovner. De tiltalte viste prim=E6rt til avgj=F8relsen i den internasjonale = domstol i Haag 8.7.96 som understreket at ogs=E5 atomv=E5pen m=E5 overholde = alle regler i krigens lover og sedvaner. Den britiske regjering hadde i saken ikke gjort noe fors=F8k p=E5 =E5 hevde at folkerettmessig bruk = var mulig (selv om NATOs standpunkt etter avgj=F8relsen har v=E6rt det helt urimelige og uforst=E5elige at alliansens atomstrategi var helt i pakt med det Haag-domstolen fastslo om gjeldende folkerett og atomv=E5penets karakter) og dommeren ans=E5 seg dermed forpliktet til =E5 frifinne. Avgj=F8relsen kommer i en skjebnefase for atomnedrustningen - like = etter vedtaket i USAs senat om =E5 ikke ratifisere CTBT og kort foran viktige avstemninger i FN om 8-statsforslaget (New Agenda Coalition) om snarlig =E5 f=E5 i gang forhandlinger om atomnedrustning. Denne resolusjonen = har satt NATO-lojaliteten p=E5 en alvorlig pr=F8ve. Ved avstemningen i UNGA i = 1998 sprakk NATO-samholdet. Bare Tyrkia som fulgte USAs =F8nske, mens resten = av NATO-statene stemte avholdende. I =E5r er det godt h=E5p om at Norge og = andre NATO-land vil stemme *for* resolusjonen i begynnelsen av november. Endelig kommer den skotske dommen bare et halv=E5r f=F8r hele traktaten om ikkespredning og atomnedrustning (Non Proliferation Treaty, NPT) - om man ikke har f=E5tt i gang forhandlinger om =E5 avskaffe atomv=E5pen = - - vil bli satt p=E5 meget store pr=F8ver under tilsynskonferansen i New York (Year 2000 NPT Review Conference). Norges Fredsr=E5d, 22.10.99 Fredrik S. Heffermehl styreleder ************************************************** * Fredrik S. HEFFERMEHL * * President, Norwegian Peace Alliance * * Vice President, International Peace Bureau * * Vice Pres., I Assn. Lawyers Ag. Nuclar Arms * * International Free Vanunu Committee * * * * N. Juels g. 28 A, N-0272 Oslo, Norway * * Phone +47-2244 8003 (fax: +47-2244 7616) * * E-mail: fredpax@online.no * ************************************************** USA - Professor Francis Boyle, ekspert p=E5 internasjonal rett mener = det er lite sannsynlig at avgj=F8relsen blir anket til h=F8yere = rettsinstans: This Scottish Judge was very bright, very thorough, and very professional--one of the very best i have seen in 17 years of doing = these cases. Given the fact that there is NO evidence in support of Trident2 = in the trial record put in by the Government, it might not be a very smart thing for the UK government to appeal. fab. From: Boyle, Francis [mailto:FBOYLE@LAW.UIUC.EDU] Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 4:00 PM The UK government never came in to defend Trident2: You can't defend = the indefensible! FAB -----Original Message----- From: Scottish CND [mailto:cndscot@dial.pipex.com] Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 11:18 AM To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Sheriffs decision on Trident Greenock Sheriff Court 2.08 pm Wednesday 20th October 1999 Sheriff Margaret Gimblett: The defence is based on two matters: Firstly the three accused consider Trident was being used illegally based on an understanding on what international law said and on advice given to them; if they were right that the use and threat of nuclear weapons was illegal, not just possession, then they had a right given the enormity of the risks of nuclear weapons to try and do something to stop that illegality. Secondly they had an absolute necessity, in which case it didn't matter whether Trident is illegal or not, the necessity was there. In considering this I have really not a great deal to go on other than what the ICJ said in 1996 and their opinion, which although advisory, acknowledges in words what is authoritative and agreed by all. On the face of it very careful consideration should be given to its = terms. In reaching their opinion the ICJ based the opinion on all the body of law that went before it which was carefully outlined. That law was canvassed in court. The opinion did not say possession of nuclear weapons was illegal, nowhere does any law say that. Even our own High Court of Judiciary has said that possession of nuclear weapons is not itself illegal. They did not consider the law except as far as it related to possession. The Helen John case can be distinguished. Here there is a defence of international law and necessity, but the whole defence hinges on the use made of nuclear weapons now and the percieved threat or threats made by the nuclear state. The use or threat of use, I would conceed that the ICJ did not say that in all circumstances threat or use of nuclear weapons was universally prohibited. Equally there no conventional law that authorises the threat or use of nuclear weapons. They issued what may be considered an enigmatic decision which has been read on a number of occassions "the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be generally contrary to the rules and principles of international law applicable in armed conflict and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law. However, in view of the current state of international law and of the elements of fact at its disposal, the Court cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defence, in which the very survival of the State would be at stake." The last words are important. We do not know what they meant by generally, but their final conclusion implies that the use or threat = could only apply in very tight circumstances of self defence the very = survival of the state. The President of the ICJ said "I cannot overemphasise = that the inability of the court to go further than the formal pronouncement = at which it has arrived cannot in any way be interpreted as a half-open = door to recognition of the legality of the threat or use of nuclear = armaments." Also the way in which the judges voted showed that a majority voted against the use of nuclear weapons. Lord Murray quote on this very helpful given the status of Lord Murray: "Turning to the central matter the judges were divided until the President's casting vote. The court decided that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is unlawful under all circumstances except last resort self-defence to avoid annihilation. Three of the judges dissenting = took the opposite view to the other four dissenters. Four said that nuclear = threat or use in not unlawful. The other three considered that nuclear threat or use is always unlawful. It follows that an absolute majority of 10 = out of 14 judged that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is either = entirely illegal or generally illegal subject to one possible exception. A two thirds majority rejected the general lawfulness of nuclear weapons." I have the ividious task of deciding on international law as it = relates to nuclear weapons. I am only a very junior sheriff without the wisdom or experience of those above me. I have a knowledge of the repercussions which could be far reaching. As a sheriff I took an oath to act = without fear or favour in interpreting the law. A point of international law has been raised here and I have to answer = it. I take comfort from the fact that there are other higher courts which = can rectify any mistake. In the absence of anything other than the ICJ and having regard to the article by Lord Murray, in particular the part relating to treaties = and conventions ... Lord Murrays article concludes "there then are the principles on which the lawfulness of the proposed use of a particular weapons are to be assessed .. to be noted that in so far as they consist of = international customary law they are part of the domestic laws of this country." I listened carefully to Professor Boyle and have taken into account = all the evidence in this case from him and the other experts and in the = absence of any expert contradictory evidence from the crown, I have to conclude = that the three accused in company with many others were justified in = thinking that Great Britain in their use of Trident, not simply possession, the = use and deployment of Trident allied with that use and deployment at times of great unrest, coupled with a first strike policy and in the absence of indication from any government official then or now that such use fell into any strict category suggested suggested in the ICJ opinion .. the threat or use of Trident could be construed as a threat, has indeed been construed by others as a threat and as such is an infringement of international and customary law. The three took the view that if Trident is illegal, given the = horrendous nature of nuclear weapons, they had the obligation in terms of international law to do whatever little they could to stop the deployment and use of nuclear weapons in situations which could be construed as a threat. It follows, if I consider that Angie Zelter, Ulla Roder and Ellen = Moxley were justified in the first leg of their defence and having given that as the principle reason the crown has a duty to rebut that defence. They have not done so and so I uphold the three defence submitions in so far as they refer to malicious and willful damage. I uphold the comments of Mr McLaughlin with regard to malice. Gordon says "no act is punishable unless it is committed with a criminal mind ..." I have heard nothing which would make it seem to me that the accused acted with criminal intent Therefore I will instruct the jury that they should acquit all three accused on charges 1 to 3 which leaves only the alternative in charge 4, they should also be acquited on the first alternative in charge 4. I anyone else takes such action they do so at their peril. The law is not clear on nuclear arms. I may be totally wrong. If it goes to appeal I may not be upheld and every case depends on whatever circumstances. What I have said is with regard to the very special circumstances of this trial and in the light of international tension around June 8th. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:35:42 -0500 From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) ISRAEL: NO!Scottish Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2 Conde mned Dear Adam and Beate: I will be certain to forward your message on to Scotland. I read of your heroic exploits on behalf of the Palestinians in the New York Times. I think the time has now come for us to submit a Motion for Reduction of Sentence to Time Served on behalf of Mordechai Vanunu.I have already sent a Memorandum on this to Mordechai and his attorney, Avigdor Feldman. We all need to work very hard to set Mordechai free! Shalom. Francis. - -----Original Message----- From: otherisr@actcom.co.il [mailto:otherisr@actcom.co.il] Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 9:52 AM To: Boyle, Francis Subject: Re: NO!Scottish Sheriff worried about her job/Trident2 Condemned Dear Francis Boyle. Congratulations with this fantastic story. Please put our names under any petition on behalf of Sheriff Margaret Gimblett, who has done more than just judging for once from an open mind; she acted in a significant way in the struggle to preserve some independence for the legal system. And please, pass on our regards to Angie whom we met. Adam Keller Beate Zilversmidt editors The Other Israel - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:40:04 -0500 From: "Boyle, Francis" Subject: (abolition-usa) FW: [Fwd: [downwinders] Britains Nuclear Deterrent Illegal] This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_000_01BF1C9B.56C06F06 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" - -----Original Message----- From: Winston Weeks [mailto:wweeks@aros.net] Sent: Friday, October 22, 1999 9:37 AM To: Boyle, Francis Subject: [Fwd: [downwinders] Britains Nuclear Deterrent Illegal] - ------_=_NextPart_000_01BF1C9B.56C06F06 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Message-ID: <38102834.41614FF8@memes.com> From: Ivan Buchbinder Reply-To: downwinders@onelist.com To: DownWinders Subject: [downwinders] Britains Nuclear Deterrent Illegal Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 04:02:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----_=_NextPart_002_01BF1C9B.56C06F06" - ------_=_NextPart_002_01BF1C9B.56C06F06 Content-Type: text/plain Y'all, Watch the Dragon's slap this down! But Hell! Three Cheers for Margaret Gimblett., de womans got khutspe Later http://www.scotsman.com/cgi-bin/t3-2.cgi/index.taf?function=detail &Scotsman_uid1=TS9s061169&desk=News&cat=scotland&sec=11 - ------_=_NextPart_002_01BF1C9B.56C06F06 Content-Type: text/html; name="index.taf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="index.taf" Content-Base: http://www.scotsman.com/cgi-bin/t3-2.cgi /index.taf?function=detail&Scotsman_uid1 =TS9s061169&desk=News&cat=scotland&sec=1 1 The Scotsman Online =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20
=20
= =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20
HOME
 		=20
|
 		=20
SPORT
 		=20
|
 		=20
BUSINESS
 		=20
|
 		=20
WORLD
 		=20
|
 		=20
PROPERTY
 		=20
|
 		=20
INTERACTIVE
=20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20 =20 =20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20
=20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
22/10/99
=20 =20 Site Guide
Site Search
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
NEWS
All the = headlines
Scotland
UK
Business
Parliament
World
Sport
Newsweek
 
NEWSANGLES
Editorial = Comment
Commentators
Letters
Forum
Weather
Weekend = Weather
Columnists
People
 
SCOTTISH=20 LIFE
Health
Living
Families
Environment
Interiors
Motoring
Hype
 
CULTURE
Film
Music
Clubs
Books
Theatre
Galleries
Other arts
 
TIME-OFF
Entertainment
TV & Radio
Travel
Food & Drink
Outdoors
Gardening
 
SECTIONS
Interactive
Education
Farming
Style
Law

Gaelic
Gazette
Games
Weekend Games
Competitions & = Offers
 
PROPERTY
 
 

=20 =20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
RELATED ARTICLES
=20 Why the Faslane ruling is flawed
WHEN THE International Court of Justice = issued its advisory opinion that the threat or use of nuclear force = would generally be a breach of international law.
=20 Extraordinary ruling is based on opinions of UN = judges
THE basis of Sheriff Margaret = Gimblett’s instruction to acquit was, in effect, that it is = permissible to commit a crime in order to prevent some other crime from = occurring.
=20 Determined protest aims to sink nuclear deterrent
ON A still summer night, three mothers = silently clambered aboard a rented dinghy sitting in the shallows of = Loch Goil. Their short trip across the water would inevitably end in = arrest.
=20 Lawyer who always aimed to have her own court
THE RULING delivered by Sheriff Margaret = Gimblett yesterday may have stunned prosecutors and grabbed = international attention, but it was little surprise to those following = her career.
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
TOP STORIES
Inquiry call after death of ‘at risk’ teenager
AN INDEPENDENT inquiry was demanded last = night after a 16-year-old girl died of an apparent heroin overdose = while in the care of social workers.
UN chief under pressure over Gaddafi letter
KOFI Annan, the secretary general of the = United Nations, was under increasing pressure last night to reveal the = contents of a document passed to Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi
=20 =20
=20 =20

  =20 =20 =20 =20
Untitled Document =20
=20
=

Anti-nuclear = protesters Ellen Moxley, Angela Zelten and Ulle Roder pictured earlier = this year. Picture - David MacKenzie.

Outcry as sherrif rules nuclear = weapons illegal

KATRINA TWEEDIE
A SHERIFF yesterday triggered an outcry when she branded = Britain’s nuclear deterrent illegal under international = law.

Margaret Gimblett’s judgment, in the case of three = anti-nuclear campaigners who caused more than £80,000 of damage to = a laboratory at a naval base, was attacked as "absurd" and an = encouragement to other protesters.

Legal experts said the = sheriff had got it wrong. The Crown Office moved to launch an appeal = over her ruling.

The sheriff ordered a jury to acquit the three = women campaigners of maliciously damaging equipment at the Faslane = base, near Lochgoilhead, Argyll, part of the Trident nuclear submarine = installation.

She accepted the defence argument that nuclear = weapons were illegal and the women, therefore, had a right to commit a = crime to prevent their use.

Ellen Moxley, 63, from Dollar, = Clackmannanshire, Angela Zelter, 48, from Norfolk and Ulla Roder, 45, = who is Danish, walked free after the 17-day trial. Miss Zelter was = among four women protesters who were freed two years ago following an = attack on a British Aerospace Hawk aircraft they claimed would be used = to suppress civilians in East Timor.

Yesterday she and her = co-accused, who had spent four months on remand after refusing to give = assurances that they would not try to break into the base again, told = how they evaded security for three and a half hours at the base after = sailing on to the loch on a leaky boat.

"We gave ourselves = 10 minutes and got three and a half hours," said Ms Moxley. = "The police pretended not to be embarrassed but I’m sure they = must have been."

It was the first time in Scotland that a = jury had been asked to consider the legal authority of the £11 = billion Trident nuclear submarine programme.

The women were = arrested on 8 June after boarding an unmanned barge used to test sonar = equipment and throwing documents and laboratory equipment = overboard.

John Mayer, defending, argued a ruling by the = International Court of Justice at the Hague which made nuclear weapons = illegal gave the women the right to "disarm" them. This meant = the women’s actions had technically been a crime, but were = justified by Trident’s status as an illegal weapon.

They = had been acting in the same way as someone who disarms a man carrying a = knife or gun illegally – a view that Sheriff Gimblett = accepted.

Sheriff Gimblett, sitting at Greenock Sheriff Court, = ruled the women had the right to disarm the submarine installation and = ordered the jury to acquit them. A charge of stealing two inflatable = life-rafts was dropped earlier in the hearing.

But, addressing = the women after the jury had delivered a formal verdict, the sheriff = warned her ruling did not give legal sanction to future sabotage. = "I made it clear that the courts do not allow crimes to be = committed to prevent other crimes, except in very special = circumstances," she said.

"There were such = circumstances in this particular case and the same circumstances may = not apply to anyone who carries out actions similar to those carried = out … in June. You do so at your peril – be very = careful."

Legal experts questioned the sheriff’s = ruling and politicians voiced fears that it could encourage activists = to escalateaction against military bases.

The Crown cannot = appealafter an acquittal and the women will not face a retrial. = However, officials have requested a report from the procurator-fiscal = at Greenock and will ask Lord Hardie, the Lord Advocate, to refer the = case to the High Court to consider the implications of the = ruling.

Last night, Sheriff Gimblett said she was disappointed = by the way her ruling had been interpreted and denied suggesting that = nuclear missiles were illegal under any and all circumstances. She = said: "It is not appropriate to comment further since I fully = expected the case might be subject of a review in the High = Court."

But the decision was described as = "groundbreaking" by supporters of the women, who were = immediately dubbed the "Trident Three". Speaking after the = verdict, the women, who are members of the Trident Ploughshares 2000 = campaign group, said they were both relieved and jubilant.

Ms = Zelter said: "Nuclear weapons have always been perceived as = unlawful. Although the defence policy is official, it is not = legal."

Their acquittal was also welcomed by Dorothy-Grace = Elder, a Glasgow MSP, who chairs the Scottish parliament’s CND = group. She said: "Trident is a product of the Cold War and has no = place in Scotland, or indeed anywhere else in the = UK."

Supporters of the women rejected suggestions that the = four-week trial, which is said to have cost more than £100,000, = was a waste of money.

The International Court of Justice in The = Hague, whose function is to settle inter-state legal disputes in = accordance with international law, issued an advisory opinion in 1996 = on nuclear weapons.

Fifteen judges stated that there were = occasions in which it would be illegal to use nuclear weapons, but they = also said there were extreme circumstances in which it would be legal = to use them.

A spokeswoman for the MoD said: "This is the = first time there has been an acquittal under these circumstances. In an = academic argument we are confident that there are circumstances in = which it would be legal to use nuclear weapons."

Dr Iain = Scobbie, a expert on international law, said: "I think the sheriff = has got the law wrong in this case."

He said the UN = court’s guidance was not binding, adding: "It did not say = that nuclear weapons were illegal. The defence counsel has = misinterpreted the case and I’m rather surprised at the outcome. = These women have been very lucky to get off."

Donald Dewar, = the first minister, said: "It’s the Lord Advocate’s = business and it would be wrong for me to comment on the merits or the = substance."

However, Phil Gallie MSP, the Scottish Tory = home affairs spokesman, demanded an immediate review of the = ruling.

He said: "Sheriff Gimblett’s comments beggar = belief. Given the kind of signals this nonsense will have sent out to = pacifist loonies everywhere, there should be a clear warning from the = government that attacks on military establishments and installations = will not be tolerated."

Trident three, Page 3Editorial = comment, Page 22
 
TO TOP  TO SCOTLAND INDEX TO HOMEPAGE
=20
=20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20
=20
HOME
 		=20
|
 		=20
SPORT
 		=20
|
 		=20
BUSINESS
 		=20
|
 		=20
WORLD
 		=20
|
 		=20
PROPERTY
 		=20
|
 		=20
INTERACTIVE
=20
About The = Scotsman
Advertise with The Scotsman =
The Scotsman Calendar = Web-site
©Copyright The = Scotsman Publications Ltd    1999 =20
=20 - ------_=_NextPart_002_01BF1C9B.56C06F06-- - ------_=_NextPart_000_01BF1C9B.56C06F06-- - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #201 *********************************** - To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.