|
Well, first of all, they couldn't sue the US government through the US courts as a political decision would be made to throw out the case on the grounds that no crime took place as it was a 'justifiable' act during war.
If they took the case straight to the ICJ, it would probably throw it out too for the same political reasons (it did this with several similar cases both during and after the conflict).
So to get around this, they are engaging in legal manouvres. Germany has some fairly liberal laws which will allow this action to be heard in a court of law - and the government is powerless to order the case to be thrown out.
What the plaintiffs are seeking is a ruling that Germany, by virtue of its membership of NATO, was guilty of being culpable of the alleged crime.
If they get this ruling, then they have effectively proven (in a court of law) that a crime took place. It then becomes possible for them to approach the ICJ to hear a claim for damages against the US - without fear of the ICJ refusing to hear the case on the (political) grounds that it was a valid military action in a time of war.
Of course, I'm only offering a hypothesis...
|