First Lieutenant Ehren Watada refused an order to deploy to Iraq because he believes America�s involvement is illegal and morally wrong. Today he pleaded not guilty to several charges at a court-martial that calls into question the right of officers to speak out. Watada said the order for him to go to Iraq was illegal because the war itself is illegal. The 28-year-old said he would have served in Afghanistan but not Iraq, refusing conscientious-objector status. Watada�s supporters, including Sean Penn, waved banners and gathered outside the army base on the first day of Watada�s court-martial.

If convicted on one count of missing movement and two counts of conduct unbecoming an officer, for refusing to go with his unit, Watada could face up to four years in prison. John Head, the military judge presiding over the case, has denied the defense’s request to argue the legality of the war, saying the question cannot be answered in a military court. The judge has further restricted the right to a fair trial by denying possible defense witnesses and limiting what Watada�s defense can ask the military panel. Eric Seitz, Watada’s lawyer, said, “It has become clear now that there is nothing for us to say in this courtroom.”

In a video statement in June, Watada said, “As the order to take part in an illegal act is ultimately unlawful as well, I must as an officer of honor and integrity refuse that order.” After being charged, Watada spoke in August at a Veterans for Peace rally in Seattle. He said, “Though the American soldier wants to do right, the illegitimacy of the occupation itself, the policies of this administration, and the rules of engagement of desperate field commanders will ultimately force them to be party to war crime.” Judge Head has rejected the argument that Watada’s comments were free speech protected under the US constitution.

Prosecutors say Watada�s comments were dangerous to �the mission� (regardless of whether or not that mission is illegal). Colonel Dan Baggio, a US army spokesperson, stressed how important it is to suppress free thought when trying to maintain a military state. “[It] sets a bad example for the soldiers underneath that person. It sets a bad precedent. At that point in time you’ve lost good order and discipline. You can’t have that in a military organization,” he said.

source