Granted, it's from the Guardian
, so I expect it to be purposefully obtuse and anti-war at all times, but this is dense, even so. To sum up: Coalition forces in Iraq will continue to have legal immunity from Iraqis after the June 30 handover.
'How is anyone in Iraq expected to bring a case in the British courts?' said Adam Price, the Plaid Cymru MP for Carmarthen East, who has been credited with uncovering many of the claims made against British troops.
'It is taking the idea of diplomatic immunity and applying it to 130,000 troops. There is a danger that you are actually going from immunity to being able to act with impunity.'
Incorrect. There will still be a chain of command, one that frowns on and is more than willing to punish abuses of said immunity of its own accord.
The reason why this is necessary is the same reason the US didn't join the International Criminal Court - showboating activist lawyers
. Without these provisions, how long would it take some soulless leech to bring a class-action suit against George Bush or Tony Blair on behalf of Iraqis? Sure, it's not certain, and any such suit would be thrown out, but the phenomenon is a known one in the political fiction of "International Law." To pretend otherwise is dishonest and shoddy journalism.