Pericles, I too immediately reading the question of Demos gained the view he would more then likely refer to John Howard, and I take the view that in fact John Howard can be charged and more then likely would be convicted.
.
John Howard (as I have set out in my blog at http://au.360.yahoo.com/profile-ijpxwMQ4dbXm0BMADq1lv8AYHknTV_QH) had no constitutional powers to authorise any armed invasion, as such the fact he did so in itself ensures he committed at the very least TREASON and TREACHERY!
.
Also, I successfully proved in Courts that all 2001 writs were defective and as such no candidate was validly elected, hence neither John Howard. The fact that they nevertheless remain in power does not alter the fact they were so unconstitutionally (illegally).
.
Again, my blog deals with it already extensively and so no need to try to repeat the same.
.
As for Demos, a very good point you raised, not merely because I am already pursuing this issue since 2003, but because it shows you are interested in FACTS and how they can be translated in dealing with matters, and not go along with the sheep!