Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Geneva Convention 'should be updated'

Kim Sengupta
Monday 03 April 2006 19:39 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

John Reid, the Defence Secretary, has called for a sweeping overhaul of international law to counter the threat of terrorism.

Acknowledging the idea would be "controversial", Mr Reid declared yesterday that radical changes were necessary to the Geneva Convention, that there should be a right to carry out pre-emptive strikes on a perceived threat and that intervention should be allowed in another sovereign country to save its people from internal repression.

He maintained that the alterations were necessary to counter terrorist organisations which were capable of carrying out devastating attacks while ignoring laws which governments have to abide by.

Critics claimed, however, that such "reforms" would herald a slide towards draconian actions by the Government, such as practised by the Bush administration at Guantanamo Bay, hitherto held to be illegal by British courts.

It would also have provided another excuse for invading Iraq in the light of the Government's failure to prove that Saddam Hussein was producing weapons of mass destruction.

More immediately the changes would allow military strikes against installations in Iran, suspected of attempting to manufacture nuclear weapons, which government ministers privately say will breach current international laws.

Mr Reid said "We risk trying to fight a 21st century conflict with 20th century rules which, when they were devised, did not contemplate the type of enemy which is now extant.

"The laws of the 20th century placed constraints on us all which enhanced peace and protected liberty. We must ask ourselves whether, as the new century begins, they will do the same. We now have to cope with a deliberate regression towards barbaric terrorism by our opponents. The legal constraints upon us have to be set against an enemy that adheres to no constraints whatsoever."

On the question of confronting regimes brutalising their own people, Mr Reid received an element of support from shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague. Mr Hague, on a visit to Darfur, said the international community must do more to provide "protection and security" for the people of the Sudanese province.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in