Saleh v. Bush
| Date | March 13, 2013 - 19 December, 2014 |
|---|---|
| Type | legal case |
| Plaintiffs | Sundus Shaker Saleh |
| Defendants | George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz |
| Description | A clair that the Iraq war was an illegal act of aggression, dismissed by the Westfall Act since it was carried out while acting professionally. |
Supported pro bono by Inder Comar of Comar Law, the defendants claimed that the war against Iraq was panned as early as 1998, and capitalized on 9-11 attacks to ramp up support for the invasion through fear tactics and intentional misinformation. The suit argued that the true purpose of the subsequent war in 2003 was to enact regime change in Iraq, and as such the war was not carried out in self defense, nor with the authorization of the UN Security Council or other relevant international treaties.
As such, the defendants were accused of conspiring and committing the crime of aggression against the Iraqi people, a violation of the Nuremberg Principles on crimes against peace.
Dismissal
On 19 December, 2014, the court made a ruling on the motion of the U.S. Department of Justice to substitute itself for all of the defendants and dismiss the action with prejudice and on the plaintiff's motion for an evidentiary hearing. The DOJ cited the Westfall Act, claiming that the defendants were acting within their scope of employment when planning and waging the Iraq War, and therefore can not be held individually accountable for the harm caused. The Westfall Act rules that harm done within the scope of employment is the responsibility of the employer. In this case the employer is the United States government, which is protected by sovereign immunity, the legal doctrine that a sovereign state can not commit a crime and is immune from prosecution.
