day 2

bread not bombs / english / trial / first trial / day 2

A Barrow policeman was tested on his knowledge of genocide and international law at Preston Crown Court today.

Detective Sergeant Robert Kerr was being cross-examined by two peace protesters he had interviewed last September, when they were caught inside Vickers shipyard in Barrow, near a Trident nuclear submarine. Det Sgt Kerr said he had read in statement found on the protesters when they were arrested that a crime was being committed at VSEL (now known as Marconi Marine). He had done nothing about any such "crime", he said. "From my experience there are not any crimes being committed within the area of VSEL. It depends on what kind of crime you are talking about - if you mean petty thefts from lockers, then yes, there have been crimes," he said. Vinthagen said he was talking about a serious crime against humanity. "Under the law of England and Wales it is not an offence to build a Trident submarine," said Det Sgt Kerr. He had no information about international law, he added. He did not know whether genocide was a crime under the law of England and Wales.

A barrister yesterday accused Tony Blair's government of breaking international law on nuclear weapons.

Vera Baird, known for her defence of the women who caused £25,000 worth of damage to a Hawk jet fighter at Bae Warton, was speaking in the Preston Crown Court trial of three Swedish peace protesters arrested as they tried to damage a Trident nuclear submarine in a Barrow dockyard.

For the first time in a British court, Miss Baird called on the 1996 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is against international law, with the possible exception of a threat to a nation's survival.

Each of the warheads on the submarine's missiles could kill eight times the number of people who died at Hiroshima, Miss Baird told the jury. "Is Trident lawful?" asked Miss Baird. Questions such as this had led the UN Security Council - including Britain -- to ask the highest court in the world for its opinion. The court's conclusion was that the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law, counsel told the court. "Save that in extreme circumstances, for self-defence, when the very survival of a state is at stake, the court could not say that that is unlawful." But self-defence is not the only purpose of Trident, said Miss Baird. She quoted speeches from former Defence Secretary Malcolm Rifkind supporting the use of Trident for "limited" nuclear strikes as "tools in political negotiations". The present government's Strategic Defence Review also supported the use of Trident to guard "vital national interests" - "protecting our trade routes, more than anything to do with being under attack," said Miss Baird. "No one is suggesting that Britain cannot defend itself or should not defend itself. But we are talking about manoeuvring these horrendous weapons into place to further Britain's political interests -- that is unlawful," she said.

A person may do criminal damage if it is a reasonable use of force in order to prevent a crime, Miss Baird told the jury. For example, it would be reasonable to slash the car tyres of a person one knew or suspected was about to drive away and plant a nail bomb. The three peace activists believed that, a week after their action, the submarine would set off to Faslane, be equipped with nuclear missiles and then go to sea. "Once it had got to Faslane, a military base, there would be no prospect of getting to it, so this was their opportunity." The protesters' action was a last resort. They had tried every possible legal means to persuade the Government to obey international law.

Spalde, a nurse studying international relations, from Hammarkullen in Sweden, told the court: "If someone has a loaded gun, saying he or she will use it, that threat constitutes a crime, and in this way Trident is used today and every day. "When a crime of these dimensions is taking place and so much is at risk, we have not only a right but a duty to intervene and do whatever we can, as ordinary citizens," she said, quoting the Nuremburg principles of moral and civic duties over and above obedience to authority. "The Nuremberg principles say that if our authorities are preparing a crime , a war crime or crime against peace, then we as ordinary citizens have an obligation to intervene. If we know about these crimes and don't do anything, we are accomplices. It is a moral duty." Under cross-examination, she denied the group of three had been hasty in moving to direct action. She had not known that the submarine's first tour of duty was not until 2000, even though this fact was in the "Tridenting It" handbook the group was carrying when they were arrested. She was aware that at Barrow the submarine had no missiles - that was why they wanted to act in September, before it was armed. It had been a serious attempt to disable the submarine so that nuclear missiles could not be fitted - not just a public statement, she said.

When asked whether her goal had been to damage the submarine, Spalde told prosecution counsel Miss Nicholls: "It was to try and disarm it - 'disarm' is a better word." The three defendants had refused to answer police questions after their arrest, apart from giving their names, the name of their campaign group and a brief statement of why they were there. They had carried books and papers explaining in detail their reasons for trying to disarm the submarine. Prosecution counsel asked Spalde whether she was using the court for political purposes. "No," said Spalde, "this is a legal issue, suitable to be tried in this court." She did not agree with passages from the "Tridenting It" handbook which advised protesters to "go along with the whole legal process" and "play it your way with conviction", she said.

Stellan Vinthagen, a peace researcher from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, said: "It was not a conspiracy, it was a consensus among us to try to do a lawful, moral disarmament of a weapon of mass destruction. "Nuclear weapons are unjust and immoral in the way they are usd against the countries of the Third World, like armed robbery, demanding what they should do with their money and their resources. That gun is not just a theoretical threat, it's a very real threat against the heads of those people. This is the way Trident submarines are used."


The trial continues.

Contact: Andrew Hobbs
Tel: 01772 721466 or 0403 615894

----------------------------------
Andrew Hobbs (NUJ)
8 Hampton Street
Preston
Lancashire
PR2 2JL
UK