US applied "Doctrine of Responsibility" in past, now it points to Bush

[Alpharetta]

Below are excerpts from this article:
http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/june16/karl-616.html
=====

in a Florida courtroom, Karl served as expert witness in the trial of two Salvadoran generals living in the United States. As their country's top commanders, they were charged with responsibility for the abuse of Salvadoran civilians.

Karl documented how the generals' actions were interpreted down the chain of command as a "green light" to commit torture. The generals argued that they could not be expected to control the actions of all their soldiers. Why, they asked, were they on trial for what a few "bad apples" had done?

Because the law demands it, Karl said.

"The doctrine of 'command responsibility' is the product of an American initiative enshrined in law since the Nuremberg Statutes after World War II," she said. It affirms that civilian and military leaders may be held legally accountable for abuses committed by their subordinates ­ even when the commanders did not personally order abuses, witness abuses, have direct knowledge about abuses or conspire to commit abuses. Authorities have a duty to prevent crimes, control troops, act when a crime is discovered and punish those found guilty of committing the actual crime.

In a world-watched ruling that reaffirmed the doctrine of command responsibility, the Florida jury found the generals responsible for the human rights abuses.

====

Above are excerpts from this article:
http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/june16/karl-616.html

[Alpharetta]

1. "Doctrine of Command Responsibilty"

I couldn't fit the full doctrine name in the headline. :)