Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Landmark Lawsuits Filed in U.S. Courts Against Israeli Officials

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 04:24 PM
Original message
Landmark Lawsuits Filed in U.S. Courts Against Israeli Officials
http://wrmea.com/archives/March_2006/0603021.html

By Noura Erakat

DECEMBER 2005 marked the filing of two claims on behalf of Palestinian human rights in U.S. federal courts. On Dec. 8 the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), a civil and human rights litigation organization, along with the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) in Gaza, served Avi Dichter, the former head of Israel’s General Security Services, with papers to appear in court. The complaint filed against Dichter alleges that he provided the intelligence necessary, and the final approval, to drop a one-ton bomb on the residential area of Al-Daraj in Gaza just before midnight on July 22, 2002, killing 15 people, including 8 children, and injuring 150 others.

On Dec. 15 CCR, along with several other U.S.-based human rights attorneys, served Moshe Ya’alon, former head of Israel’s Intelligence Branch and former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces. The class action lawsuit charges Ya’alon with war crimes, extrajudicial killing, crimes against humanity, and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment for his role in the 1996 shelling of a United Nations compound in Qana, in the south of Lebanon.

The lawsuits against Dichter and Ya’alon are not the first attempts to sue Israeli officers in U.S. courts for the violation of Palestinian human rights. In July 2002, New York-based attorney Stanley Cohen filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of 23 Palestinian Americans against U.S weapons manufactures, Israeli officials and U.S. government officials. (See Sept./Oct. 2002 Washington Report, p. 20.) Unlike that case, which targeted Israeli and U.S. officials protected by diplomatic immunity, the recent lawsuits against Dichter and Ya’alon do not face the same challenge. Neither defendant any longer represents the Israeli government or military—both are retired from the latter and are now working as policy fellows in U.S.-based think tanks. Therefore, they no longer enjoy diplomatic immunity.

More....
http://wrmea.com/archives/March_2006/0603021.html
The author is
Noura Erakat is a Palestinian-American legal activist. She is the national grassroots organizer and legal advocate for the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, where she is developing a Palestinian Human Rights Litigation Project.

Noura is also a graduate of Boalt School of Law, UC Berkeley. I thought i would add that bit of info for the Bill O' Rielly types who like to demonize Berkeley.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. CCR Must have excess attorneys to ignore NSA and Gitmo and AbuGhraib

Rule 11. Signing of Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to Court; Sanctions

(a) Signature.

Every pleading, written motion, and other paper shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney's individual name, or, if the party is not represented by an attorney, shall be signed by the party. Each paper shall state the signer's address and telephone number, if any. Except when otherwise specifically provided by rule or statute, pleadings need not be verified or accompanied by affidavit. An unsigned paper shall be stricken unless omission of the signature is corrected promptly after being called to the attention of attorney or party.

(b) Representations to Court.

By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,--
    (1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation;

    (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law;

    (3) the allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and

    (4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on a lack of information or belief.

(c) Sanctions.

If, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond, the court determines that subdivision (b) has been violated, the court may, subject to the conditions stated below, impose an appropriate sanction upon the attorneys, law firms, or parties that have violated subdivision (b) or are responsible for the violation.

(1) How Initiated.
    (A) By Motion. A motion for sanctions under this rule shall be made separately from other motions or requests and shall describe the specific conduct alleged to violate subdivision (b). It shall be served as provided in Rule 5, but shall not be filed with or presented to the court unless, within 21 days after service of the motion (or such other period as the court may prescribe), the challenged paper, claim, defense, contention, allegation, or denial is not withdrawn or appropriately corrected. If warranted, the court may award to the party prevailing on the motion the reasonable expenses and attorney's fees incurred in presenting or opposing the motion. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be held jointly responsible for violations committed by its partners, associates, and employees.

    (B) On Court's Initiative. On its own initiative, the court may enter an order describing the specific conduct that appears to violate subdivision (b) and directing an attorney, law firm, or party to show cause why it has not violated subdivision (b) with respect thereto.

(2) Nature of Sanction; Limitations. A sanction imposed for violation of this rule shall be limited to what is sufficient to deter repetition of such conduct or comparable conduct by others similarly situated. Subject to the limitations in subparagraphs (A) and (B), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmonetary nature, an order to pay a penalty into court, or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order directing payment to the movant of some or all of the reasonable attorneys' fees and other expenses incurred as a direct result of the violation.
    (A) Monetary sanctions may not be awarded against a represented party for a violation of subdivision (b)(2).

    (B) Monetary sanctions may not be awarded on the court's initiative unless the court issues its order to show cause before a voluntary dismissal or settlement of the claims made by or against the party which is, or whose attorneys are, to be sanctioned.


(3) Order. When imposing sanctions, the court shall describe the conduct determined to constitute a violation of this rule and explain the basis for the sanction imposed.

NOT COPYRIGHTED OR EVEN COPYRIGHTABLE - THEREFORE NOT SUBJECT TO THE "4 PARAGRAPH" RULE




STATE OF NEW YORK BAR DISCIPLINE RULES

1.1:520 Wrongful Use of Civil Proceedings; Abuse of Process

Relevant Disciplinary Rules

Several New York Disciplinary Rules proscribe the wrongful use of civil proceedings.

NY DR 7-102(A)(1) prohibits a lawyer from filing a suit, asserting a position, conducting a defense, delaying a trial, or taking other action on behalf of the client when the lawyer knows or when it is obvious that such action would serve merely to harass or maliciously injure another.

NY DR 7-102(A)(2) prohibits a lawyer from advancing a claim or defense that is unwarranted under existing law, except that the lawyer may advance such a claim or defense if it can be supported by a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.

NY DR 2-109 prohibits a lawyer from accepting employment if (s)he knows, or should have known, that the prospective client wants to bring a legal action, conduct a defense, or assert a position in litigation merely to harass or maliciously injure someone.

NY DR 2-110(B)(1) requires a lawyer to withdraw from employment if the lawyer knows or it is obvious that the client is bringing the legal action, conducting the defense, or asserting a position in the litigation, or is otherwise taking steps, merely for the purpose of harassing or maliciously injuring another person.

Relevant Ethical Considerations

NY EC 2-30 provides that a lawyer should not accept employment if it is obvious that the prospective client wants to institute an action merely for the purpose of harassing or maliciously injuring another.

NY EC 7-5 states that a lawyer can continue to represent a client even if the client insists on pursuing a course contrary to the attorney's advice--as long as (s)he does not thereby knowingly assist the client to engage in illegal conduct or to take a frivolous legal position. See also NY EC 7-4




Staff Attorney Maria LaHood is going to jeopardize on-going Gitmo, AbuGhraib, and NSA spying cases for this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Violet_Crumble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 01:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Note to self...
I WON! I WON!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Englander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Heh.
--Sun Apr-23-06 10:16 PM--

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Englander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. 'Look!! Over there!!' n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-23-06 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. For more info on the Center for Constitutional Rights, see....
http://www.ccr-ny.org

It is an invaluable organization doing incredible work.

http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/legal/human_rights/human_rights.asp

In a comment regarding the above mentioned suit against Dichter, a well known Palestinian human rights activist has this to say

Raji Sourani, Director of the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, said, "Justice must finally be delivered to the Palestinian families in this lawsuit who have suffered tremendously because of Avi Dichter's decision to bomb the al-Daraj neighborhood. These families are representative of scores of other Palestinians who have suffered and continue to suffer as a result of Dichter's actions."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Englander Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 06:12 AM
Response to Original message
6. From the archives;
'12 dead in attack on Hamas

Seven children killed as Israelis assassinate military chief

Suzanne Goldenberg in Jerusalem
Tuesday July 23, 2002
The Guardian

Israeli F-16 warplanes bombed the house of the military commander of Hamas in Gaza City last night, burying him and at least 11 other Palestinians, including seven children, beneath the rubble of a four-storey block of flats, and wounding 120 others.

Last night's assassination of Sheikh Salah Shehadeh is the most serious blow to the military wing of Hamas since the start of the Palestinian uprising nearly two years ago. Shehadeh was among the founders of Hamas's Izzedine al-Qassem Brigades, and spent a decade in Israeli jails.

His killing may also prove to be one of the most lethal acts of assassination by the Israeli army since it embarked on a strategy of killing Palestinian militants.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,761746,00.html

______________________________


Qana, Ten Years Later
April 18, 2006 will mark the 10th year since Israel's shelling of a UN Compound in Qana, Lebanon left 106 civilians and more than 300 injured, marking one of Lebanon's bloodiest massacres.

On April 18, 1996, Israeli Armed Forces shelled a United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon (UNIFIL) Compound in Qana, Lebanon killing 106 civilians and wounding hundreds of others. The shelling marked one of the bloodiest massacres in Lebanon’s modern history. Israeli and American pressures shelved a UN investigation, but legal actions are now being taken in an effort to redress this injustice.

http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=1198
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lithos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
8. Locking per I/P guidelines
Do not publicly accuse anyone of any bigoted bias. If you feel such a comment is warranted, you may do so privately using the "Alert" button.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 06:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC