Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less



Looked it up, "Binyamin" seems to be the name for a group of settlements in the West Bank.
 
"Right-wing activists stop Palestinian trucks in Jerusalem and demand licenses from the drivers to make sure they are not carrying food to Gaza."

 
Perhaps this long-form NYT piece has been shared already but I can really recommend it. The story is worse than you could even imagine. With this level of rampant lawlessness and Israeli extremism, I struggle to see a good future for Palestinians in the West Bank. It's really bleak. It's the Wild West out there.

The Unpunished: How Extremists Took Over Israel

After 50 years of failure to stop violence and terrorism against Palestinians by Jewish ultranationalists, lawlessness has become the law.
Click to expand...
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/16/magazine/israel-west-bank-settler-violence-impunity.html
 
VorZakone said:
Perhaps this long-form NYT piece has been shared already but I can really recommend it. The story is worse than you could even imagine. With this level of rampant lawlessness and Israeli extremism, I struggle to see a good future for Palestinians in the West Bank. It's really bleak. It's the Wild West out there.

The Unpunished: How Extremists Took Over Israel


https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/16/magazine/israel-west-bank-settler-violence-impunity.html
Click to expand...

there was a video yesterday of ben-gvir brandishing his gun against what seemed to be fellow settlers. you know it's bad when a minister is resolving differences with his own base using a gun.
 
berbatrick said:
there was a video yesterday of ben-gvir brandishing his gun against what seemed to be fellow settlers. you know it's bad when a minister is resolving differences with his own base using a gun.
Click to expand...

Imagine calling this a democracy.
 
ICC prosector seeks arrest warrants for Israel’s Netanyahu and Hamas’s Sinwar

The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court said Monday that he was seeking arrest warrants against senior officials in the Israel-Gaza conflict, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

In a statement, the court’s prosecutor, Karim Khan, said that he was also seeking arrest warrants for Israel’s Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as two other top Hamas leaders — Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al-Masri, the leader of the Al Qassem Brigades and better known as Mohammed Deif, and Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas’ political leader.

A panel of ICC judges will now consider Khan’s application Monday for new arrest warrants.
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/05/20/israel-hamas-war-news-gaza-palestine/
 
Last edited:
Herzi Halevi really should be named there too, all the recent speculation about this move has included him, so a bit surprising not to see him.
 
Report of the Panel of Experts in International Law

The charges:

16. The Prosecutor seeks arrest warrants against three senior Hamas leaders for the war crimes of murder and the crimes against humanity of murder and extermination for the killing of hundreds of civilians on 7 October 2023. He also seeks to charge them with the war crime of taking at least 245 persons hostage. Finally, he seeks to charge them with the war crimes of rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture, cruel treatment, and outrages upon personal dignity and the crimes against humanity of rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture, and other inhumane acts for acts committed against Israeli hostages while they were in captivity. The Panel notes the Prosecutor’s statement that his investigations continue, including in relation to evidence of sexual violence on 7 October itself.

17. The suspects are: Yahya Sinwar, the Head of Hamas in the Gaza Strip; Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, known more commonly as Mohammed Deif, the Commanderin-Chief of the al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas; and Ismail Haniyeh, the Head of Hamas’ Political Bureau.

18. The Prosecutor seeks to charge Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh as co-perpetrators under article 25(3)(a) of the ICC Statute on the basis of a common plan to attack military bases in Israel, to attack and to kill civilians, and to take and detain hostages. The Prosecutor also states that they are criminally responsible under other modes of liability under article 25(3) and as superiors for failing to take all necessary and reasonable measures within their power to ‘prevent or repress’ the crimes or to ‘submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution’ under article 28 of the ICC Statute.

19. After assessing the material provided by the Prosecutor, including statements from survivors and eye-witnesses at the scene of six key attack locations -- Kfar Aza, Holit, the location of the Supernova Music Festival, Be’eri, Nir Oz, and Nahal Oz -- video material and statements by the perpetrators, the Panel has concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the three suspects had a common plan that necessarily involved the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The systematic and coordinated nature of the crimes, their scale, statements by the suspects supporting the commission of such crimes, evidence of the sophisticated planning of the attacks and the ideology and past practices of Hamas all support the finding that the common plan was criminal in character.

20. The Panel also considers that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes were committed in the context of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Israel, pursuant to an organizational policy of Hamas.

21. The Panel additionally concurs with the Prosecutor’s view that Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh made essential contributions to this plan and that they have through their own words and actions admitted to their responsibility. This includes for one or more of the suspects: acknowledging their, and each other’s, roles in the attacks, and acknowledging their control over the hostages’ detention and release. The Panel also concurs with the Prosecutor’s view that Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh failed to prevent or to punish the commission of the crimes by their subordinates, although it is clear that they could have done so as senior leaders of the military and political arms of Hamas.

22. The Prosecutor seeks arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav Gallant, the Israeli Minister of Defense, on the basis that they committed the war crime of ‘intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare’ under article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the ICC Statute. The Prosecutor also seeks to charge the two suspects with various other war crimes and crimes against humanity associated with the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare under articles 7 and 8 of the ICC Statute. These include the war crimes of ‘[w]ilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health’ or cruel treatment, wilful killing or murder, and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population. The proposed charges also include the crimes against humanity of murder, extermination, other inhumane acts and persecution with respect to deaths and injuries resulting from or associated with the systematic deprivation of objects indispensable to the survival of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. The Panel notes the Prosecutor’s statement that other alleged crimes, including in connection with the large-scale bombing campaign in Gaza, are actively being investigated.

23. The Prosecutor seeks to charge Netanyahu and Gallant on the basis that they made an essential contribution to a common plan to use starvation and other acts of violence against the Gazan civilian population as a means to eliminate Hamas and secure the return of hostages as well as to inflict collective punishment on the civilian population of Gaza who they perceived as a threat to Israel. It is also alleged that they had effective authority and control over their subordinates and knew of their subordinates’ crimes but did not take necessary action to prevent or repress these crimes, leading to their criminal responsibility as superiors.

24. The war crime of ‘intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare’ requires ‘depriving [civilians] of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions’. The crime is not limited solely to the deprivation of food, but includes other objects indispensable for the survival of civilians such as water, fuel and medicine.

25. The Panel notes three preliminary points relevant to its analysis. First, as a result of a number of factors, including the imposition by Israel of restrictions on the movement of people and goods from and to Gaza in the aftermath of its 2005 disengagement, Gazans were highly dependent on Israel for the provision of and access to objects indispensable for the survival of the population even before 7 October.7

26. Second, although Israeli officials have a right to ensure that aid is not diverted to the benefit of the enemy and to stipulate lawful technical arrangements for its transfer, they cannot impose arbitrary restrictions -- such as restrictions that violate Israel’s obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, or that contravene the principles of necessity and proportionality -- when exercising these rights.

27. Third, parties to an armed conflict must not deliberately impede the delivery of humanitarian relief for civilians, including humanitarian relief provided by third parties. And when a territory is under the belligerent occupation of one party to the conflict, there is also an enhanced active obligation for the occupying power to ensure adequate humanitarian aid for civilians, including by providing such aid itself insofar as this is necessary. In the Panel’s view, while it can reasonably be argued that Israel was the occupying power in Gaza even before 7 October 2023, Israel certainly became the occupying power in all of or at least in substantial parts of Gaza after its ground operations in the territory began.

28. With this in mind, and based on a review of material presented by the Prosecutor, the Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant formed a common plan, together with others, to jointly perpetrate the crime of using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. The Panel has concluded that the acts through which this war crime was committed include a siege on the Gaza Strip and the closure of border crossings; arbitrary restrictions on entry and distribution of essential supplies; cutting off supplies of electricity and water, and severely restricting food, medicine and fuel supplies. This deprivation of objects indispensable to civilians’ survival took place in the context of attacks on facilities that produce food and clean water, attacks against civilians attempting to obtain relief supplies and attacks directed against humanitarian workers and convoys delivering relief supplies, despite the deconfliction and coordination by humanitarian agencies with Israel Defence Forces. These acts took place with full knowledge of the extent of Gazans’ reliance on Israel for essential supplies, and the adverse and inevitable consequences of such acts in terms of human suffering and deaths for the civilian population.

29. The Prosecutor has also sought charges against Netanyahu and Gallant for the war crimes of wilful killing or murder and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population, as well as the crimes against humanity of extermination or murder and persecution for deaths resulting from the use of starvation and related acts of violence including attacks on civilians gathering to obtain food and on humanitarian workers.

30. In the Panel’s view, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects committed these crimes. The Panel also considers that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes were committed in the context of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza, pursuant to State policy.

31. The Panel’s assessment is that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant are responsible for the killing of civilians who died as a result of starvation, either because the suspects meant these deaths to happen or because they were aware that deaths would occur in the ordinary course of events as a result of their methods of warfare. According to material submitted by the Prosecutor, a large number of Palestinian civilians have already died in these circumstances. In relation to extermination, the number of deaths resulting from starvation is sufficient on its own to support the charge, according to standards set out in international jurisprudence. And this number is, unfortunately, only likely to rise. There are also reasonable grounds to believe that the starvation campaign and associated acts of violence involved the severe deprivation of victims’ fundamental rights by reason of their identity as Palestinians. This can be qualified as the crime against humanity of persecution.

32. The Prosecutor has also sought to charge Netanyahu and Gallant with the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts and the war crime of wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health, or cruel treatment, with respect to the non-lethal suffering inflicted through starvation of the civilian population of Gaza. The Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects committed these crimes against many thousands of individuals in Gaza.

33. Based on the material it has reviewed, the Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant made essential contributions to the common plan to use starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and commit other acts of violence against the civilian population. This is evidenced by their own statements and the statements of other Israeli officials. It is also evidenced by the systematic nature of the crime, and the involvement of the suspects at the apex of the Israeli governmental apparatus, with effective authority and control over their subordinates and leadership positions in the War Cabinet and Security Cabinet, in which all key decisions on the conduct of the war -- including blocking and limiting humanitarian aid -- have been made. The Panel is also of the view that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects can be held responsible as superiors given their knowledge of the crimes and the fact that they took no steps to prevent or repress their subordinates who committed them.
 
Is smotrich, Ben Gvir mentioned in there by the ICC? Surely they have to be on the warrants too?
 
Pav1878 said:
Is smotrich, Ben Gvir mentioned in there by the ICC? Surely they have to be on the warrants too?
Click to expand...

No. I don't think they would be regarded as being in a decision-making capacity in terms of their current roles in the Israeli government.
 
Well done to the ICC for not bowing to political pressure. Certain US politicians have been trying to intimidate the court in recent weeks and threatening sanctions if they went ahead with the arrest warrants.
 
It's clear enough that these charges won't be the last targeting Israeli individuals, they don't even deal in any way with the bombing campaign, just the policy of starvation as a weapon of warfare.
 
berbatrick said:
"Right-wing activists stop Palestinian trucks in Jerusalem and demand licenses from the drivers to make sure they are not carrying food to Gaza."

Click to expand...


Norman Finkelstein said it best when he said that Israeli society is fundamentally racist and sick.
This is not just a government problem it is a societal problem.

Racism, Islamophobia, and an inherent superiority complex, blended with US and UK impunity, with military and diplomatic protection.
 
Fergies Gum said:
Well done to the ICC for not bowing to political pressure. Certain US politicians have been trying to intimidate the court in recent weeks and threatening sanctions if they went ahead with the arrest warrants.
Click to expand...

yes absolutely but the worry is the warrants seem to only mention starvation, what about all the other war crimes they have committed.

I hope they haven’t chosen that to portray they are going after these monsters, all the while knowing that they could easily defend the charge of starvation by somehow showing how much aid they have allowed in.
 
2cents said:
It's clear enough that these charges won't be the last targeting Israeli individuals, they don't even deal in any way with the bombing campaign, just the policy of starvation as a weapon of warfare.
Click to expand...

yes my thoughts exactly. I hope it doesn’t stop there. We need and the world needs, and most importantly the Palestinians need some justice to reinvigorate our belief in the system of International law. If nothing comes of this, we will know that International Law is only there to protect white colonialists and their interests.
 
2cents said:
No. I don't think they would be regarded as being in a decision-making capacity in terms of their current roles in the Israeli government.
Click to expand...
Perhaps not but all the vitriol has come from them and they are the ones pushing for the war crimes to be committed.
In the case of Ben Gvir, also directly involved in the decision to hand settlers weapons and army cover?
 
Pav1878 said:
yes absolutely but the worry is the warrants seem to only mention starvation, what about all the other war crimes they have committed.

I hope they haven’t chosen that to portray they are going after these monsters, all the while knowing that they could easily defend the charge of starvation by somehow showing how much aid they have allowed in.
Click to expand...

Takes a very long time to put a case like this together, especially something of this magnitude. Whilst we can see with our eyes the genocide happening in real time, they still need to gather all the evidence and put it into a charge with the hope of prosecuting it all at a later date.

The charges will grow in due course, I’m relatively certain.
 
Spark said:
Takes a very long time to put a case like this together, especially something of this magnitude. Whilst we can see with our eyes the genocide happening in real time, they still need to gather all the evidence and put it into a charge with the hope of prosecuting it all at a later date.

The charges will grow in due course, I’m relatively certain.
Click to expand...
I hope you’re right. I feel justice in future conflicts hinges on these decisions over Gaza.
We need to set a precedent to say these atrocities will not be tolerated and now in the advent of social media they will be documented, shared and used against you in a court of law.
 
2cents said:
Report of the Panel of Experts in International Law

The charges:

16. The Prosecutor seeks arrest warrants against three senior Hamas leaders for the war crimes of murder and the crimes against humanity of murder and extermination for the killing of hundreds of civilians on 7 October 2023. He also seeks to charge them with the war crime of taking at least 245 persons hostage. Finally, he seeks to charge them with the war crimes of rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture, cruel treatment, and outrages upon personal dignity and the crimes against humanity of rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture, and other inhumane acts for acts committed against Israeli hostages while they were in captivity. The Panel notes the Prosecutor’s statement that his investigations continue, including in relation to evidence of sexual violence on 7 October itself.

17. The suspects are: Yahya Sinwar, the Head of Hamas in the Gaza Strip; Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, known more commonly as Mohammed Deif, the Commanderin-Chief of the al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas; and Ismail Haniyeh, the Head of Hamas’ Political Bureau.

18. The Prosecutor seeks to charge Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh as co-perpetrators under article 25(3)(a) of the ICC Statute on the basis of a common plan to attack military bases in Israel, to attack and to kill civilians, and to take and detain hostages. The Prosecutor also states that they are criminally responsible under other modes of liability under article 25(3) and as superiors for failing to take all necessary and reasonable measures within their power to ‘prevent or repress’ the crimes or to ‘submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution’ under article 28 of the ICC Statute.

19. After assessing the material provided by the Prosecutor, including statements from survivors and eye-witnesses at the scene of six key attack locations -- Kfar Aza, Holit, the location of the Supernova Music Festival, Be’eri, Nir Oz, and Nahal Oz -- video material and statements by the perpetrators, the Panel has concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the three suspects had a common plan that necessarily involved the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The systematic and coordinated nature of the crimes, their scale, statements by the suspects supporting the commission of such crimes, evidence of the sophisticated planning of the attacks and the ideology and past practices of Hamas all support the finding that the common plan was criminal in character.

20. The Panel also considers that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes were committed in the context of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Israel, pursuant to an organizational policy of Hamas.

21. The Panel additionally concurs with the Prosecutor’s view that Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh made essential contributions to this plan and that they have through their own words and actions admitted to their responsibility. This includes for one or more of the suspects: acknowledging their, and each other’s, roles in the attacks, and acknowledging their control over the hostages’ detention and release. The Panel also concurs with the Prosecutor’s view that Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh failed to prevent or to punish the commission of the crimes by their subordinates, although it is clear that they could have done so as senior leaders of the military and political arms of Hamas.

22. The Prosecutor seeks arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav Gallant, the Israeli Minister of Defense, on the basis that they committed the war crime of ‘intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare’ under article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the ICC Statute. The Prosecutor also seeks to charge the two suspects with various other war crimes and crimes against humanity associated with the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare under articles 7 and 8 of the ICC Statute. These include the war crimes of ‘[w]ilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health’ or cruel treatment, wilful killing or murder, and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population. The proposed charges also include the crimes against humanity of murder, extermination, other inhumane acts and persecution with respect to deaths and injuries resulting from or associated with the systematic deprivation of objects indispensable to the survival of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. The Panel notes the Prosecutor’s statement that other alleged crimes, including in connection with the large-scale bombing campaign in Gaza, are actively being investigated.

23. The Prosecutor seeks to charge Netanyahu and Gallant on the basis that they made an essential contribution to a common plan to use starvation and other acts of violence against the Gazan civilian population as a means to eliminate Hamas and secure the return of hostages as well as to inflict collective punishment on the civilian population of Gaza who they perceived as a threat to Israel. It is also alleged that they had effective authority and control over their subordinates and knew of their subordinates’ crimes but did not take necessary action to prevent or repress these crimes, leading to their criminal responsibility as superiors.

24. The war crime of ‘intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare’ requires ‘depriving [civilians] of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions’. The crime is not limited solely to the deprivation of food, but includes other objects indispensable for the survival of civilians such as water, fuel and medicine.

25. The Panel notes three preliminary points relevant to its analysis. First, as a result of a number of factors, including the imposition by Israel of restrictions on the movement of people and goods from and to Gaza in the aftermath of its 2005 disengagement, Gazans were highly dependent on Israel for the provision of and access to objects indispensable for the survival of the population even before 7 October.7

26. Second, although Israeli officials have a right to ensure that aid is not diverted to the benefit of the enemy and to stipulate lawful technical arrangements for its transfer, they cannot impose arbitrary restrictions -- such as restrictions that violate Israel’s obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, or that contravene the principles of necessity and proportionality -- when exercising these rights.

27. Third, parties to an armed conflict must not deliberately impede the delivery of humanitarian relief for civilians, including humanitarian relief provided by third parties. And when a territory is under the belligerent occupation of one party to the conflict, there is also an enhanced active obligation for the occupying power to ensure adequate humanitarian aid for civilians, including by providing such aid itself insofar as this is necessary. In the Panel’s view, while it can reasonably be argued that Israel was the occupying power in Gaza even before 7 October 2023, Israel certainly became the occupying power in all of or at least in substantial parts of Gaza after its ground operations in the territory began.

28. With this in mind, and based on a review of material presented by the Prosecutor, the Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant formed a common plan, together with others, to jointly perpetrate the crime of using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. The Panel has concluded that the acts through which this war crime was committed include a siege on the Gaza Strip and the closure of border crossings; arbitrary restrictions on entry and distribution of essential supplies; cutting off supplies of electricity and water, and severely restricting food, medicine and fuel supplies. This deprivation of objects indispensable to civilians’ survival took place in the context of attacks on facilities that produce food and clean water, attacks against civilians attempting to obtain relief supplies and attacks directed against humanitarian workers and convoys delivering relief supplies, despite the deconfliction and coordination by humanitarian agencies with Israel Defence Forces. These acts took place with full knowledge of the extent of Gazans’ reliance on Israel for essential supplies, and the adverse and inevitable consequences of such acts in terms of human suffering and deaths for the civilian population.

29. The Prosecutor has also sought charges against Netanyahu and Gallant for the war crimes of wilful killing or murder and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population, as well as the crimes against humanity of extermination or murder and persecution for deaths resulting from the use of starvation and related acts of violence including attacks on civilians gathering to obtain food and on humanitarian workers.

30. In the Panel’s view, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects committed these crimes. The Panel also considers that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes were committed in the context of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza, pursuant to State policy.

31. The Panel’s assessment is that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant are responsible for the killing of civilians who died as a result of starvation, either because the suspects meant these deaths to happen or because they were aware that deaths would occur in the ordinary course of events as a result of their methods of warfare. According to material submitted by the Prosecutor, a large number of Palestinian civilians have already died in these circumstances. In relation to extermination, the number of deaths resulting from starvation is sufficient on its own to support the charge, according to standards set out in international jurisprudence. And this number is, unfortunately, only likely to rise. There are also reasonable grounds to believe that the starvation campaign and associated acts of violence involved the severe deprivation of victims’ fundamental rights by reason of their identity as Palestinians. This can be qualified as the crime against humanity of persecution.

32. The Prosecutor has also sought to charge Netanyahu and Gallant with the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts and the war crime of wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health, or cruel treatment, with respect to the non-lethal suffering inflicted through starvation of the civilian population of Gaza. The Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects committed these crimes against many thousands of individuals in Gaza.

33. Based on the material it has reviewed, the Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant made essential contributions to the common plan to use starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and commit other acts of violence against the civilian population. This is evidenced by their own statements and the statements of other Israeli officials. It is also evidenced by the systematic nature of the crime, and the involvement of the suspects at the apex of the Israeli governmental apparatus, with effective authority and control over their subordinates and leadership positions in the War Cabinet and Security Cabinet, in which all key decisions on the conduct of the war -- including blocking and limiting humanitarian aid -- have been made. The Panel is also of the view that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects can be held responsible as superiors given their knowledge of the crimes and the fact that they took no steps to prevent or repress their subordinates who committed them.
Click to expand...

One of the legal experts listed there is Judge Theodor Meron who, according to the attached bio, once served as “Legal Advisor of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs” and in that role warned the Israeli government in the immediate aftermath of the 1967 war of the illegality of founding settlements in the territories occupied that summer.
 
“the warrant applications announced today are just the first step. We hope that the prosecutor will continue to conduct focused investigations including in relation to the extensive harm suffered by civilians as a result of the bombing campaign in Gaza and evidence of sexual violence committed against Israelis on October 7.”

Why we support ICC prosecutions for crimes in Israel and Gaza
 
Kudos to ICC prosecutor, going for the jugular here. Hopefully this gets approved by the judges.

They obviously won't get arrested, but it might make their travelling a bit harder. Essentially, states that are Israel's allies such as the US, the UK and EU members might not want to have them in those states for visits cause then they'll either need to arrest them or essentially acknowledge that ICCmeans nothing. It will also show hypocrisy by criticising other countries for not arresting Putin. So, I can see Israel's leadership getting increasingly isolated.
 
Last edited:
So apparently the ICC are anti-semitic and conducting Nazi propaganda now. This from supposedly serious politicians.

I don't think the warrants will have any actual outcome on the ongoing genocide but it's important nonetheless. Such institutions need to demonstrate accountability irrespective of who it is committing the crime.
 
2cents said:
Report of the Panel of Experts in International Law

The charges:

16. The Prosecutor seeks arrest warrants against three senior Hamas leaders for the war crimes of murder and the crimes against humanity of murder and extermination for the killing of hundreds of civilians on 7 October 2023. He also seeks to charge them with the war crime of taking at least 245 persons hostage. Finally, he seeks to charge them with the war crimes of rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture, cruel treatment, and outrages upon personal dignity and the crimes against humanity of rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture, and other inhumane acts for acts committed against Israeli hostages while they were in captivity. The Panel notes the Prosecutor’s statement that his investigations continue, including in relation to evidence of sexual violence on 7 October itself.

17. The suspects are: Yahya Sinwar, the Head of Hamas in the Gaza Strip; Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri, known more commonly as Mohammed Deif, the Commanderin-Chief of the al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas; and Ismail Haniyeh, the Head of Hamas’ Political Bureau.

18. The Prosecutor seeks to charge Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh as co-perpetrators under article 25(3)(a) of the ICC Statute on the basis of a common plan to attack military bases in Israel, to attack and to kill civilians, and to take and detain hostages. The Prosecutor also states that they are criminally responsible under other modes of liability under article 25(3) and as superiors for failing to take all necessary and reasonable measures within their power to ‘prevent or repress’ the crimes or to ‘submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution’ under article 28 of the ICC Statute.

19. After assessing the material provided by the Prosecutor, including statements from survivors and eye-witnesses at the scene of six key attack locations -- Kfar Aza, Holit, the location of the Supernova Music Festival, Be’eri, Nir Oz, and Nahal Oz -- video material and statements by the perpetrators, the Panel has concluded that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the three suspects had a common plan that necessarily involved the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The systematic and coordinated nature of the crimes, their scale, statements by the suspects supporting the commission of such crimes, evidence of the sophisticated planning of the attacks and the ideology and past practices of Hamas all support the finding that the common plan was criminal in character.

20. The Panel also considers that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes were committed in the context of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Israel, pursuant to an organizational policy of Hamas.

21. The Panel additionally concurs with the Prosecutor’s view that Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh made essential contributions to this plan and that they have through their own words and actions admitted to their responsibility. This includes for one or more of the suspects: acknowledging their, and each other’s, roles in the attacks, and acknowledging their control over the hostages’ detention and release. The Panel also concurs with the Prosecutor’s view that Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh failed to prevent or to punish the commission of the crimes by their subordinates, although it is clear that they could have done so as senior leaders of the military and political arms of Hamas.

22. The Prosecutor seeks arrest warrants against Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav Gallant, the Israeli Minister of Defense, on the basis that they committed the war crime of ‘intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare’ under article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the ICC Statute. The Prosecutor also seeks to charge the two suspects with various other war crimes and crimes against humanity associated with the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare under articles 7 and 8 of the ICC Statute. These include the war crimes of ‘[w]ilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health’ or cruel treatment, wilful killing or murder, and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population. The proposed charges also include the crimes against humanity of murder, extermination, other inhumane acts and persecution with respect to deaths and injuries resulting from or associated with the systematic deprivation of objects indispensable to the survival of Palestinian civilians in Gaza. The Panel notes the Prosecutor’s statement that other alleged crimes, including in connection with the large-scale bombing campaign in Gaza, are actively being investigated.

23. The Prosecutor seeks to charge Netanyahu and Gallant on the basis that they made an essential contribution to a common plan to use starvation and other acts of violence against the Gazan civilian population as a means to eliminate Hamas and secure the return of hostages as well as to inflict collective punishment on the civilian population of Gaza who they perceived as a threat to Israel. It is also alleged that they had effective authority and control over their subordinates and knew of their subordinates’ crimes but did not take necessary action to prevent or repress these crimes, leading to their criminal responsibility as superiors.

24. The war crime of ‘intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare’ requires ‘depriving [civilians] of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions’. The crime is not limited solely to the deprivation of food, but includes other objects indispensable for the survival of civilians such as water, fuel and medicine.

25. The Panel notes three preliminary points relevant to its analysis. First, as a result of a number of factors, including the imposition by Israel of restrictions on the movement of people and goods from and to Gaza in the aftermath of its 2005 disengagement, Gazans were highly dependent on Israel for the provision of and access to objects indispensable for the survival of the population even before 7 October.7

26. Second, although Israeli officials have a right to ensure that aid is not diverted to the benefit of the enemy and to stipulate lawful technical arrangements for its transfer, they cannot impose arbitrary restrictions -- such as restrictions that violate Israel’s obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, or that contravene the principles of necessity and proportionality -- when exercising these rights.

27. Third, parties to an armed conflict must not deliberately impede the delivery of humanitarian relief for civilians, including humanitarian relief provided by third parties. And when a territory is under the belligerent occupation of one party to the conflict, there is also an enhanced active obligation for the occupying power to ensure adequate humanitarian aid for civilians, including by providing such aid itself insofar as this is necessary. In the Panel’s view, while it can reasonably be argued that Israel was the occupying power in Gaza even before 7 October 2023, Israel certainly became the occupying power in all of or at least in substantial parts of Gaza after its ground operations in the territory began.

28. With this in mind, and based on a review of material presented by the Prosecutor, the Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant formed a common plan, together with others, to jointly perpetrate the crime of using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. The Panel has concluded that the acts through which this war crime was committed include a siege on the Gaza Strip and the closure of border crossings; arbitrary restrictions on entry and distribution of essential supplies; cutting off supplies of electricity and water, and severely restricting food, medicine and fuel supplies. This deprivation of objects indispensable to civilians’ survival took place in the context of attacks on facilities that produce food and clean water, attacks against civilians attempting to obtain relief supplies and attacks directed against humanitarian workers and convoys delivering relief supplies, despite the deconfliction and coordination by humanitarian agencies with Israel Defence Forces. These acts took place with full knowledge of the extent of Gazans’ reliance on Israel for essential supplies, and the adverse and inevitable consequences of such acts in terms of human suffering and deaths for the civilian population.

29. The Prosecutor has also sought charges against Netanyahu and Gallant for the war crimes of wilful killing or murder and intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population, as well as the crimes against humanity of extermination or murder and persecution for deaths resulting from the use of starvation and related acts of violence including attacks on civilians gathering to obtain food and on humanitarian workers.

30. In the Panel’s view, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects committed these crimes. The Panel also considers that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crimes were committed in the context of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza, pursuant to State policy.

31. The Panel’s assessment is that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant are responsible for the killing of civilians who died as a result of starvation, either because the suspects meant these deaths to happen or because they were aware that deaths would occur in the ordinary course of events as a result of their methods of warfare. According to material submitted by the Prosecutor, a large number of Palestinian civilians have already died in these circumstances. In relation to extermination, the number of deaths resulting from starvation is sufficient on its own to support the charge, according to standards set out in international jurisprudence. And this number is, unfortunately, only likely to rise. There are also reasonable grounds to believe that the starvation campaign and associated acts of violence involved the severe deprivation of victims’ fundamental rights by reason of their identity as Palestinians. This can be qualified as the crime against humanity of persecution.

32. The Prosecutor has also sought to charge Netanyahu and Gallant with the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts and the war crime of wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health, or cruel treatment, with respect to the non-lethal suffering inflicted through starvation of the civilian population of Gaza. The Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects committed these crimes against many thousands of individuals in Gaza.

33. Based on the material it has reviewed, the Panel assesses that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant made essential contributions to the common plan to use starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and commit other acts of violence against the civilian population. This is evidenced by their own statements and the statements of other Israeli officials. It is also evidenced by the systematic nature of the crime, and the involvement of the suspects at the apex of the Israeli governmental apparatus, with effective authority and control over their subordinates and leadership positions in the War Cabinet and Security Cabinet, in which all key decisions on the conduct of the war -- including blocking and limiting humanitarian aid -- have been made. The Panel is also of the view that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the suspects can be held responsible as superiors given their knowledge of the crimes and the fact that they took no steps to prevent or repress their subordinates who committed them.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right. Although, this isn't likely to go anywhere given that Israel and the US aren't signatories, and the looming threat of Congress taking action against the ICC.
 
Just saw a video of Biden making up stuff again about imaginary photos in his speech yesterday.
 


No wonder it took them this long and they are still sitting idle on what has been happening in the West Bank for years.
 
Revan said:
Kudos to ICC prosecutor, going for the jugular here. Hopefully this gets approved by the judges.

They obviously won't get arrested, but it might make their travelling a bit harder. Essentially, states that are Israel's allies such as the US, the UK and EU members might not want to have them in those states for visits cause then they'll either need to arrest them or essentially acknowledge that ICCmeans nothing. It will also show hypocrisy by criticising other countries for not arresting Putin. So, I can see Israel's leadership getting increasingly isolated.
Click to expand...
Hopefully we won’t see Netanyahu here in the US meeting with his major funders anytime soon. And if he is, we should ask why he’s not arrested as soon as he lands on US soil.
 
utdalltheway said:
Hopefully we won’t see Netanyahu here in the US meeting with his major funders anytime soon. And if he is, we should ask why he’s not arrested as soon as he lands on US soil.
Click to expand...

The US isn't a signatory to the ICC's founding statute and has previously said it has no jurisdiction in the states. Also, I would seriously doubt any NATO or EU country would comply with an arrest warrant for an Israeli leader given that Israel is a close ally to most large EU nations. That said, I wouldn't exactly book a safari to Kruger if I was Bibi.
 
utdalltheway said:
Hopefully we won’t see Netanyahu here in the US meeting with his major funders anytime soon. And if he is, we should ask why he’s not arrested as soon as he lands on US soil.
Click to expand...

The US is not a party to the ICC and would be under no legal obligation to arrest him.
 
Raoul said:
The US isn't a signatory to the ICC's founding statute and has previously said it has no jurisdiction in the states. Also, I would seriously doubt any NATO or EU country would comply with an arrest warrant for an Israeli leader given that Israel is a close ally to most large EU nations. That said, I wouldn't exactly book a safari to Kruger if I was Bibi.
Click to expand...
One can only hope/wish that he was stupid enough to book that safari, and a rhino or lion has their way with him before he’s arrested.
 
"As Israel faces setbacks both on the ground and in international opinion, it escalates its attacks by bombing residential neighborhoods of Gaza, resulting in the slaughter of thousands of innocent citizens as they seek shelter in their homes".

https://x.com/QudsNen/status/1792558907426042188

Over a hundred were killed in the last 24 hours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.