Search: palestine icc

...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....

...guarantee? What if, after the release of hostages, Israel — as it has done repeatedly in the past — invokes a new pretext, reneges on the agreement, and persists with its occupation of Gaza? What if it declares dissatisfaction with a demilitarised Palestine and refuses to withdraw? Trump speaks of a new mandate-like regime. Hamas will be exiled, and in its place a version of Palestine that Israel can “approve of” will emerge. Far from paving the way to self-determination, the plan will render Palestine even more vulnerable to Israeli...

...“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...

...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...

...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...

...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...

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...

It's equally a fact that Israel has been occupying a large part of Palestine since 1948 -- the part that is called "Israel". The question of Geneva applying to the occupation isn't a matter of facts, but of law: "The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance." Palestine per se isn't a high contracting party, though Britain, Jordan and Egypt are. Geneva was signed in 1949, after...

considered the adoption of such a procedure. Some of these are clearly compelled to act outside of the reporting cycle, such as the statement of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child on 13 October on grave violations of children’s rights occurring in Israel and Palestine. An EWUA procedure would provide guidelines for triggering such a mechanism, as well as documenting Committee action and recommendations via decisions, statements and letters. CERD’s Statement on Israel and the State of Palestine CERD’s Statement is addressed to both Israel and Palestine...

...and other self-determination units. On this view, Israel’s occupation constitutes a ‘continued use of force’ (para. 253) engaging the prohibition of force, while its intent to exercise permanent control engages the corollary prohibition of forcible acquisition of territory, whether Palestine is a State or a self-determination unit. Again, I don’t wish to exaggerate the practical stakes of the issue. Palestine is a State, in my view, so the problems described above may not arise. But some courts, States, and scholars may be reluctant to determine that Palestine is a State,...