Search: palestine icc

of the Geneva Civilians Convention, “The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.” The states party thus bear a collective responsibility to ensure compliance. They convened, in fact, in July 1999 in Geneva, at the call of the Government of Switzerland, to consider Israel’s violations as belligerent occupant in the occupied Palestine territory. That session was adjourned at the request of Palestine President Yassir Arafat to facilitate direct negotiations with Israel, but it could readily re-convene. A conference of the...

...the historical context of their ongoing suffering and struggle: “Genocost” and “Nakba”. These terms highlight that “genocide” for both Congolese and Palestinians is a continuous process, not a singular event. Many organisations are pushing for campaigns against genocides in DRC and Palestine, particularly Al-Haq and the Congolese Action Youth Platform (CAYP). Due to the campaigns by Al-Haq and CAYP, the term “genocide” has gained traction among social media users globally, deployed to describe the atrocities in both Eastern DRC and Gaza Strip in Palestine. At the time of this writing,...

...ICERD should not be understated … the two concepts and the two Conventions are joined at the hip.’ CERD, Apartheid and Palestine v Israel While CERD has been active under its EWUA procedure, it notably has yet to reach a decision in Palestine v Israel, likely to be the first inter-State case to be decided by a UN treaty body. Among other aspects, Palestine v Israel urges CERD to reach a determination that the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories constitutes apartheid in violation of Article 3 ICERD, which reads:...

that the PTC was badly fractured, with one of the judges believing that the ICC has no jurisdiction over the Palestine situation, even though all three judges actually agreed on that critical point. Just imagine if the headline read “ICC Rules Unanimously It Has Jurisdiction to Examine Possible Israel War Crimes.” Or, even better (don’t get me started on this one): “ICC Rules Unanimously It Has Jurisdiction to Examine Possible Israeli and Palestinian War Crimes.” The difference is obvious. The New York Times can — and must — do better....

...not have been, and wasn't, a "High Contracting Party" to that 1949 Convention so that too is problematic for the application of its terms to a country/state that never existed. I will not enter into another problem: that the leader of the Arab community in the Palestine Mandate himself committed war crimes in aligning the Arab movement in Palestine with the Nazis, engaging in war crimes and sending agents back into the Palestine Mandate to fight the Allies there. Another legal concern is that the League of Nations decision was...

...“The use of the term “Palestine” is historical fiction; it encourages the Palestine entity concept; its “revived usage enrages” individual Israelis”. Crawford replied “It is difficult to see how it “enrages” Israeli opinion. The practice is consistent with the fact that, ”in a de jure sense”, Jerusalem was part of Palestine and has not since become part of any other sovereignty. That it was not a simple matter, since there was a ''quota nationality'', in regard to which U.S. legislation and regulation continue to employ the term Palestine. See Foreign...

...would possess state-like characteristics in that they would have combatant immunity and Israel would need to give them, if captured, prisoner of war status so long as they complied with Article 4, Geneva Convention III. However, the elevation of a non-state group to state-like status simply by the conflict occurring in occupied territory may be problematic. While it could be supported by Article 1(4) of Additional Protocol I, to which Palestine is a party, Israel is not and the provision’s customary status is contested. Application of that provision is therefore...

...on the homes and lands of others, the UN General Assembly Resolution 181 adopted the partition of Palestine between Arabs and Jews in an unjust manner, which starkly contradicted the realities on the ground, particularly regarding the population distribution and land ownership of the respective communities. This was the first-ever UN resolution on the question of Palestine, the original sin that created a built-in injustice within the entire framework. It was the start of a chain of mistakes that have yet to be undone. Subsequent efforts to alleviate Palestinian suffering...

to non-member-state status — retroactive effect. In my view, therefore, the 2009 declaration is effectively (and perhaps even legally) void. That conclusion is supported by Fatou Bensouda’s public statement that “the ball is now in the court of Palestine”, “Palestine has to come back,” and “we are waiting for them.” The bottom line for me is that Palestine needs to submit a new declaration accepting the ICC’s jurisdiction on an ad hoc basis. (Assuming the Palestinian Authority has the authority to do so — about which see my previous post.)...

...in the above-mentioned parliamentary debates that preceded South Africa’s decision to accede to the Apartheid Convention, the question of Palestine and the system of apartheid imposed on the people of Palestine, were explicitly mentioned as part of the rationale to accede to the Apartheid Convention.  Establishing a Special Mechanism to Combat Contemporary Forms of Apartheid  Since the suspension of the Apartheid Convention’s treaty monitoring body in 1995, the following 11 states, including South Africa, have acceded to the Convention: Azerbaijan (1996), Georgia (2005), Kyrgyzstan (1997), Montenegro (2006), Paraguay (2005), Moldova...

not name any particular courts, but it could be domestic courts that find they have jurisdiction. Importantly, it could be the International Criminal Court. The ICC Prosecutor could include evidence the commission assembles in the current investigation of crimes in the territory of Palestine. The crimes involved are not limited to those perpetrated in the recent Gaza-Israel conflict. A second innovative aspect of the resolution is that it calls for investigation not only of acts during the recent hostilities, but of the circumstances that led to those hostilities. Beyond the...

moral harms that arise from sharing footage of crimes online are similar in nature to those previously recognised in ICL jurisprudence. For instance, in the recent case of Al Hassan at the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Office of the Prosecutor submitted as part of its application for an arrest warrant that the fact that videos of crimes committed by Ansar Dine were posted to YouTube contributed to a ‘sense of public humiliation’ (para. 136). Similarly, in Al-Werfalli, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber stated in its two arrest warrants that ‘the...