Giovanni Di Stefano [lawyer for Ali Hassan al-Majid, dubbed "Chemical Ali", Studio Legale Internazionale, Rome]: "I have been asked on countless occasions by students at universities, fellow lawyers, colleagues, journalists my simple view on the current situation in Iraq.

It is without doubt the consequences of all that is occurring in Iraq is strictly owing to the unprovoked and unlawful attack on Iraq by the US/UK. They chose to do so not in the classical sense as a formal declaration of war but as a general declaration of war against 'terrorism' and rushed to judgement listing Iraq as a sponsor of terrorism thus justifying the unlawful actions.

The US Constitution was drafted in order to maintain proper controls and balances on a potentially oppressive government abusing its position. The whole concept of the Founding Fathers was solely to permit men and women to live a free life based upon justice and to allow the citizen to achieve any ambitions. The Constitution was NOT drafted to allow the United States of America to build or create or occupy empires or even to augment the powers of government.

September 11th in my view – and without doubt – did not place the US in a state of war. Constitutionally and as a matter of jurisprudence, war requires some form of physical invasion, a real threat to government, a valid challenge by force to a nation's sovereignty or against a country's security interests. That danger must pass through the second stage and it must emanate from a real nation with powers to raise military personnel and advance to war. This has never occurred in reality to the USA since the time of George III. Even in World War II it could never be said that Germany was a real threat to the US. Hypothetically Japan may have caused inconveniences, but in the classical sense no conquering army from Europe or Japan was ever likely to land on US sovereign soil.

September 11th proved to be a war against an ideal or concept rather than a country (like Germany and Japan in 1942) and that was troublesome. It is inconceivable that at some stage there will not be a single person who does not wish to harm a US citizen. Utopia is an ideal that will never be achieved. This is the problem with the Bush Administration view on terrorism. They wish to eradicate all and any citizens of the world who seek to kill a US citizen. It may be valiant and may even be prudent to attack countries to eliminate the possibilities of killing US citizens but it is not lawful and contrary to the US Constitution. This war on 'terrorism', purely because it is not a war against a named country for a specific reason, remains open ended. When will it end? Who will sign an armistice? Who can bind lawfully the 'cessation of terrorism'? Maybe the US can find someone for Iraq, but can they find someone for each and every country in the world?

The old USSR had – and still has – weapons of mass destruction, including at one time over 5,000,000 members of the military ready to march against Europe and with nuclear capacity. Al-Qaida at the most may have 1000? Supposedly led by two men? Yes, Al Qaida may have an evil intent but what relations did Mr Bin Laden have with Saddam Hussein? None! Nil! That is what has emerged from the three trials that I have attended in Iraq and the scores of documents discovered. We did find Mr. Bin Laden in the 1980's certainly did have good relations with the USA and on their behalf indeed went to Yugoslavia to acquire arms to fight against the Russians in Afghanistan. The only link that can be found with Mr Bin Laden is not with Iraq but with the US!

The byproducts of this perpetual war on 'terrorism' is the loss of human rights by those detained by the US. That is not what the US Constitution had in mind and the Founding Fathers would certainly be turning in their graves at the thought of simply arresting suspects in third countries and taking those suspects to Cuba, denying them even the basics of human assistance stripping them of their identity and dignity as well as their legal rights. Even Saddam Hussein did not go that far.

The abuse of human rights has damaged the US. It has caused many previously cooperative governments to stand aside and not assist the US; secondly and more important, the precedent created by President Bush in stripping detainees of their legal rights and representations may well be copied by other nations, thus causing a domino effect.

I am no politician but a simple lawyer. But I have witnessed a degradation of values and vanishing legal principles in favour of a supposed war on a notion rather than against an errant nation. That cannot be good for mankind."