INFORMATION

DECLARATION ON PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCERNING FRIENDLY RELATIONS AND CO-OPERATION AMONG STATES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations 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. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

A war of aggression constitutes a crime against the peace, for which there is responsibility under international law.

States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute.

The parties to a dispute have the duty, in the event of failure to reach a solution by any one of the above peaceful means, to continue to seek a settlement of the dispute by other peaceful means agreed upon by them.

States parties to an international dispute, as well as other States shall refrain from any action which may aggravate the Situation so as to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, and shall act in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are in violation of international law.

Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to above in the elaboration of the present principle of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence. In their actions against, and resistance to, such forcible action in pursuit of the exercise of their right to self-determination, such peoples are entitled to seek and to receive support in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter.

The principles of the Charter which are embodied in this Declaration constitute basic principles of international law, and consequently [the General Assembly] appeals to all States to be guided by these principles in their international conduct and to develop their mutual relations on the basis of the strict observance of these principles.

Our legal duty to withhold tax

“ The very essence of the Charter is that individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by the individual State.   He who violates the laws of war cannot obtain immunity while acting in pursuance of the authority of the State, if the State in authorising action moves outside its competence under international law…”

Under the laws of war taxpayers are forbidden from funding an illegal war.  If a Government uses money raised by taxation to wage unlawful war, a taxpayer’s normal duty to pay tax is reversed and becomes a duty to withhold tax.  If taxpayers continue to pay tax knowing that a war is illegal they commit a criminal offence and can be charged with conduct ancillary to war crimes.

As each of the wars with Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya is illegal and the deaths of civilians constitute war crimes, every British, NATO or ISAF citizen who has paid tax since 2001 has technically committed a war crime and is liable for arrest, prosecution and punishment.  However, taxpayers who were deceived into believing that the wars were legal will be relieved to know that the legislation which gives rise to their criminal liability also provides relief.  Providing they abandon support for the war and pay their tax into ‘escrow’ accounts they will not be prosecuted.

DIVERT TAX INTO ‘ESCROW’ ACCOUNTS

Funds in an escrow account held by a third party cannot be released until the conditions of the escrow are met; in this case, when the war with Afghanistan has stopped, military forces have been recalled and criminal proceedings have started against those responsible for war crimes.

By paying taxes into an escrow account taxpayers fulfil their duty to pay tax as well as their duty to withhold tax and therefore cannot be prosecuted for tax evasion.  If, however, you continue to pay tax to government tax collectors after you’ve been warned that it is a criminal offence, you could be arrested and prosecuted as an accessory to murder, war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide for funding the crimes of NATO and ISAF leaders and Governments.

By diverting tax into escrow accounts taxpayers regain control over Government expenditure.  Without our money Governments are powerless.  No longer can they use our funds to wage war, murder civilians, bail out bankers, increase debt, cut jobs or support the rich at the expense of the poor.  By diverting taxes into escrow accounts we can force our leaders out of office and into court.  We will only succeed if thousands take part.  If the majority of taxpayers continue to pay tax then Governments will continue to wage war.  So it is down to each of us to end the carnage.  If you want to stop the war and end the killing, then divert your tax to an escrow account.   If you want the war and the killing to continue, then pay your tax to the Government – the choice is yours.

WHEN WAR IS ILLEGAL, PAYING TAX IS A WAR CRIME

Chris Coverdale – Making War History – May 2012
The lies that lead to illegal war

“ The Attorney General has been consulted and Her Majesty’s Government is satisfied that this Chapter VII authorisation to use all necessary measures provides a clear and unequivocal legal basis for deployment of UK forces and military assets to achieve the resolution’s objectives.”

This claim, by David Cameron and Dominic Grieve, that the attack on Libya was lawful, is a lie.  It is as false as the claims of legality made by Tony Blair and Lord Goldsmith when justifying the wars with Afghanistan and Iraq and the deaths of 1.5m civilians.  The truth is that war is never lawful, the Security Council is prohibited from using armed force and killing civilians is an act of genocide.

“The solemn renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy necessarily involves the proposition that such war is illegal in international law; and that those who plan and wage such a war with its inevitable and terrible consequences are committing a crime in so doing…

41. The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions …

In 1970 the UN issued 51 new rules to ensure that States could not misinterpret the law

Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force…  Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the State or against its political, economic and cultural elements are in violation of international law.

The principles of the Charter which are embodied in this Declaration constitute basic principles of international law, and consequently [the UN General Assembly] appeals to all States to be guided by these principles in their international conduct and to develop their mutual relations on the basis of the strict observance of these principles.

These rules are crystal clear. The use of force is prohibited; the use of armed force to attack other States is a crime; no State or group of States, such as NATO, ISAF or the EU, may intervene in another State’s affairs; every State must obey, uphold and enforce these rules, and individuals who start a war are responsible in law and accountable in court for a crime against the peace.  So why do UK, US and NATO Governments repeatedly misinterpret the rules and break the law?

War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression therefore, is not only an international crime, it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”

Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal

Chris Coverdale – Making Wars History – June 2012

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s