Experts: Concerns over Gaza op prosecutions justified

[Scurrilous]

Israeli legal officials say international lawsuits may indeed ensue Operation Cast Lead. 'Every Israeli involved in the fighting is subject to prosecution anywhere in the world,' warns top litigator. 'We can sue Hamas for rocket fire,' adds former deputy JAG

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3660451,00.html

<snip>

"Top Israeli legal experts said Thursday that the recent concerns suggesting Israeli diplomats and military officials may find themselves facing legal action over the Israeli offensive in Gaza were justified.

Many human rights groups have already announced they would demand top Israeli officials be tried for war crimes in European courts.

Attorney General Menachem Mazuz said recently that Israel was preparing for a slew of international lawsuits following Operation Cast Lead; and Jerusalem has even issued a travel advisory for top IDF officials, urging them to refrain from visiting several European countries.

"If (Foreign Minister Tzipi) Livni wishes, I can recommend several good lawyers in Belgium," said attorney Avigdor Feldman Thursday. "The fighting in Gaza was too reminiscent of Bosnia. People there were tried for shooting at civilians, schools and UN facilities after that, so the concerns are justified."

Every Israeli involved in the Gaza campaign, he added, is subject to prosecution anywhere in the world. "There is no immunity in cases of war crimes and I personally know of elements in London that are gathering every possible evidence in order to build such cases.

"The law is on (the prosecutors') side. I would highly recommend any soldier or officer contemplating going to the UK to reconsider."

[Larkspur]

1. Hamas can sue Israel for intentionally starving Gazans because

Israel broke the ceasefire by continuing the blockade after the election of Hamas.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. There is this little thing called standing...which Hamas does not have

[Larkspur]

16. Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian government

and the election was observed by Jimmy Carter and other international groups, who said the election was legal. Therefore, Hamas is the legally elected government majority in Palestine, especially the Gaza strip.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

17. They can not sue in the ICC any more the Repukes

[iconicgnom]

18. You mean "standing in the eyes of Israel" and "in the eyes of the US".

And, of course, in your eyes.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. Actually I meant standing with the ICC. It has nothing to do with my views or yours.

[iconicgnom]

36. Actually the only thing that would stop it is that the US and Israel haven't ratified the treaty.

So they would refuse to cooperate, and they have the ammo to stand their ground. It has nothing to do with the standing of "Hamas".
Perhaps, tho', criminal charges will be laid anyway. Probably by third parties the world over.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

39. Not true, only national governments have standing in the ICC, not political parties

That is in addition to the non-ratification which means the ICC has no jurisdiction even if a nation files charges (Bolivia has said it would). Furthermore, the ICC is so slow that some participants will die of natural causes before anything happens. Look here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x419002 and the article it references.

There are localities that will assert some form of long arm jurisdiction. That was tried after Lebanon. Eventually that died out with no significant action taken.

[iconicgnom]

44. Hamas is the duly elected gov't.

Why should the fact that Israel (and the US) don't recognize the Hamas gov't be an issue?
I truly don't get your point.

I was recently speaking with someone about "Bushco and warcrimes". There was some disagreement, I with my usual "try 'em then hang 'em" approach, saying that if justice isn't done then history will for sure repeat itself, and worse. My partner led with a modified "look forward, not back" line -- but in the end there was agreement that justice should be seen to be done, in some way. But how? On reflection I think the way justice could be done is to hit them where it hurts. Not let them get away with weepy cries of victimization. Hit them by ensuring that history gets a fair and accurate record of their activities. How they advocated for torture, and twisted words to implement torture. How they lied to the world about the pretext for the Iraq war - with a book being published after a detailed fact-finding enquiry. Etc. Don't let them get away with "lost emails" and etc., don't let them get away with hiding in the darkness. Parade them in the light, then let them slink back to the shadows where they can make up any story that they want to tell themselves.

How does that relate? Well, both Israel and Palestine have issues with each other. Both deny or try to justify wrongdoing - when in fact there are perps on both sides. There are cries for UN intervention (tho' as usual only or mostly to intervene on behalf of Israel). Why shouldn't there be a cry for the UN to act not just as passive watchers, but as active recorders with some responsibility for ensuring that all UN pronouncements be adhered to or be brought to light, to some kind of court. Rockets fired from Gaza? Give the UN enough personnel on the ground enough power to dig into who the perps are, how they're supplied, etc., and call the Palestinian gov't (whatever it be named) to account in helping the UN mission - make them (collectively, as a gov't) lose face if they don't help the UN. The perps should be dealt with individually, whatever position they might have in the gov't or community. New settlements being built on West Bank land? Again, give the UN enough personnel, enough power to dig into who authorized this illegality, look into the "legal" machinations that attempt to justify it, etc., and call the Israeli gov't to account to aide in the investigation, to overthrow the "legal" language written to justify such theft, and so on. Or lose face in a big way. Again, the perps should be dealt with individually, whatever position they have in the gov't or community.

That, of course, is top of my head over morning coffee. It can of course be nitpicked to death, without ever addressing the spirit of the idea.

Without such active international peacekeeping help, with some kind of enquiry and enforcement power, I don't think it's realistic to expect these parties to ever accommodate each other in peace and fairness. There's too much water under the bridge, and far too great an imbalance of power and grievance itching to be expressed.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

52. Not relevant for this

The PA (or PNA) is the internationally recognized government, not Hamas which is a political party. It makes a difference. Similarly the Repukes can't file at the ICC even if they had a majority in both houses, the US can.

The PA has observer status at the UN, not full membership. It was just recently changed/upgraded (http://tech.mit.edu/V118/N29/palestine.29w.html)but it is still not full membership. As such, its not clear they are recognized either for the ICC.

Syria could file, Bolivia says it will, but since Israel is not a signatory either, it makes no difference.

[iconicgnom]

54. Oh well, good. so long as Israel can get free pass to do it again in a year or so.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

57. Surprised to see that you support that

I would think you would want to change the international legal structures so that which is technically legal today is no longer. I certainly do

[bemildred]

2. Good. nt

[dixiegrrrrl]

3. uhh....how is Gaza different than Iraq????

We used Plutonium weapons.
We used WP.


Dear War Criminals, foreign and domestic..

THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING !!!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. Pultonium? Have a credible site for that?

:rofl:

[iconicgnom]

19. It isn't funny. Depleted uranium, for sure. Fallujah wasn't funny. And you're sick.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. Plutonium is not Depleted Urainum

Hyperbole can indeed be laughable when it reaches such extremes. High school chemistry...it isn't rocket science

[iconicgnom]

35. well, duh. a mistake was made. It wasn't "extreme". Your point is null.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

38. The differences are extreme and very important . What is null is your scientific literacy

[iconicgnom]

45. Oh bullshit. You nitpick the example of Fallujah, as if your nits were the issue.. Shameful.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

53. Deflating preposterous claims is not nitpicking

Dixiegrrrrl said the US used plutonium in Iraq and am still waiting for her to back it up. Its a really really big deal if that is true.

You brought in Fallujah. No evidence that plutonium used there.

You also equated DU with Plutonium, indicating you don't know jack about either.

Not nits at all if you understand what is being said.

[iconicgnom]

55. wow, do you ever reach. As I said, shameful.

you go on ignore. bad faith ain't cool, and you ooze it.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

56. The subthread speaks for itself as does your lack of knowledge and intellectual integrity

[bemildred]

4. UN sees evidence of war crimes in Gaza

There is evidence that Israel committed war crimes during its 22-day campaign in the Gaza Strip and there should be an independent inquiry, UN investigator Richard Falk has said.

The mental anguish of the civilians who suffered the assault is so great that the entire population of Gaza could be seen as casualties, said Falk, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Falk, speaking by phone from his home in California, said compelling evidence that Israel's actions in Gaza violated international humanitarian law required an independent investigation into whether they amounted to war crimes.

"I believe that there is the prima facie case for reaching that conclusion," he told a Geneva news conference.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4827480a12.html

[Behind the Aegis]

5. Oh, it's Falk. Nevermind.

I thought it was someone who should be taken seriously.

[bemildred]

6. Thanks for the kick. nt

[Behind the Aegis]

7. Always glad to assist you.

[delad]

10. and he shouldn't be taken serious because...? n/t

[iconicgnom]

20. Because Aegis and Magistrate say so. And I'm sure they can bore you to tears with "reasons". n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

26. Falk has a position and some experience in Intl Law, he also has an agenda

[Behind the Aegis]

27. Not unlike David Duke.

[The Magistrate]

28. That is Not Quite It, Sir

He is just someone formed to a political kernel in U.S. Viet Nam era student radicalism who has passed essentially undigested down the years to emerge in his present place, intact and unchanged by the passage through the gullet of time and experience.

[Behind the Aegis]

30. His bias and bigotry are almost on the same level.

Pipes better?

[The Magistrate]

33. They Are Mirror Images, Sir: That is Pretty Apt

That was the time of my adventurous youth, and a lot of people just lost their heads, and some have never quite regained them. When you raise people up to believe their country is absolutely right and an enemy absolutely wrong, and then do something which rightly convinces them their country is doing something very wrong, a certain number cannot shake the basic world-view of absolute good and evil, but simply flip the polarities, and decide that if their country is not absolutely good, then it must be absolutely wrong, and the other must be the absolutely good one. The proper response, of course, is to conclude that no one is absolutely good, and all are wrong to some degree. This involves work, though, as one must start sifting through various degrees and kinds of wrong, and let go the comforts of ever being ranged with angels against demons....

[iconicgnom]

46. Ah yes, a bit of group-character assassination -- while putting oneself on a pedestal.

But hey, if that's all you've got to peddle...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. Thats hyperbole as well

[Behind the Aegis]

31. I am aware of what it is.

[The Magistrate]

12. Falk Does Not Impress Me Much, My Friend

[bemildred]

14. No Sir.

Not the worst, not the best. I am very disappointed with Mr Fisk lately too.

But Mr Falk does appear to be loud and to have official standing.

[The Magistrate]

15. True, Sir: Loud And Prominent

My recollection of him runs back to my adventurous youth, and his ludicrous argument people should not be subject to prosecution for revolutionary acts. It has always seemed to me that if one is willing to make war on a government, one should be willing to bear the traditional consequences, or find another hobby....

[bemildred]

43. I would like to say, Sir,

that I think the threat of legal process and war crimes trials is one of the best available restraints on unimaginative political and military leaders, and thus I think that loud partisanship on the subject can be a good thing.

Mr Falk seems like a self-important twit to me, but a potentially useful one.

[The Magistrate]

47. There Is Something To That, My Friend

But where both sides generally mis-behave, the hue and cry ought to be loud in both direction, and persons holding an official position with an entity from which neutrality ought to be expected do a disservice by aligning themselves so overtly with one party in this regard as does Falk. He provides a great deal of justification for any element within Israeli political life inclined to the view the United Nations is biased against Israel, and that claims Israeli actions are criminal are nothing but political posturings intended to damage Israel, rather than vindicate law.

[bemildred]

48. I just wanted to make sure you had my view of him, Sir.

I can't say I want to defend him or his use of his position.

[The Magistrate]

49. I Appreciate That, My Friend

As usual, we seem to over-lap somewhat, even where we do not completely agree.

[bemildred]

50. Well, I suppose if it prevents bad things, I'm willing to put up with a bit of yapping.

Even make use of it. And then it's true he yaps more in my direction than yours.

But there I go, the end justifies the means and all that.

[The Magistrate]

51. Black Robes, Sir, Can Be Had To Your Right Just Past the Foyer....

The visitor's pass will be waiting....

Be well, my friend!

[shira]

11. lemme guess.......no similar obsession about prosecuting Hamas war criminals?

nah, what else do we expect from "democratically elected" Hamas?

They're brown people killing their own....big whoop.

:eyes:

oh yeah, and deliberately targeting and killing Israeli civilians - and then boasting about it.

again, whoop-de-doo and who cares?

:eyes:

What we have here are partisan moral hypocrites who pretend to care about human rights infractions and are looking for ANYTHING they can find (no matter how weak the evidence or disreputable the source) to hang on Israel and its military officers. The evidence against Hamas, however, is so overwhelming as to not even be questioned....and yet, no similar obsession by the moral hypocrites.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

25. I though Israel invaded to solve that very problem. Are you saying they failed?

[azurnoir]

13. Well I see alot of IDF changing vaction plans n/t

[iconicgnom]

21. I hear the same being said of Bush!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. This kind of thing flared after Lebanon and then went away

Any reason to think that will not repeat this time as well?

[azurnoir]

32. Different war different circumstances

there was not a 1/100 kill ratio in Lebanon and Lebanon/Hezbollah was a bit more of an adversary than Hamas and because of what happened then I believe that it will not be allowed to die now

[ProgressiveProfessor]

34. The legal fundementals have not changed. Kill ratios should not matter in courts

[azurnoir]

37. delete n/t

[azurnoir]

40. Whether or not this gets traction in the ICJ

this "operation" will not be quickly forgotten, there may be charges filed against individuals or not but one thing is certain Israeli officials seem more "concerned" now than in 2006

[ProgressiveProfessor]

41. Israel clearly took precautions this time

Lots and lots of video, one can assume other documentation was captured. That means any local prosecutions will have little to go on and the IDF will have all the hard data, which they will be under no onus to turn over.

There was as much made about Lebanon as there was about Gaza. I do not expect a different legal outcome. What may happen is that there will be updates to the LOW with regards to WP use, MOUT with civilians present, and other things where the LOW are seriously lagging

[Scurrilous]

42. TIME: Could Israelis Face War Crimes Charges Over Gaza?

<snip>

"Israel likes to believe that its Defense Force is the world's most "moral" army, and it insisted throughout the recent Gaza war that great care was always taken to avoid inflicting civilian casualties. It may surprise and rile many Israelis, then, that their government is trying to protect its citizens from war crimes charges that could be filed in foreign courts over the conduct of hostilities in Gaza. Fearful that Israeli commanders could be targeted for arrest while traveling abroad as private citizens on business or vacation, Attorney General Menachem Mazuz on Tuesday ordered the Israeli media to refrain from revealing the names of any military personnel who took part in the 22-day offensive. Officers involved in the operation who want to travel abroad are now required to first check in with the office of the Judge Advocate, which will determine if the soldier is on a foreign watch list that might lead to his arrest.

Israeli military experts insist that their forces are far more careful to avoid civilian casualties than, say, the U.S. military has been in Iraq and Afghanistan. Still, the high civilian casualty toll in Gaza has put the Israeli military's conduct of operations there under scrutiny, and one senior U.N. official has suggested Israel may have committed "crimes against humanity" in the course of its campaign against Hamas militants hiding among Gaza's civilian population. Palestinian medical sources claim that over 300 children and 100 women were among Gaza's 1,200 fatalities. And the United Nations, Amnesty International, the International Committee for the Red Cross (I.C.R.C.), Human Right Watch, as well as Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups have all been investigating allegations of conduct that violates the laws of war. (See pictures of Israel's ground offensive in Gaza)

Among the allegations being probed are claims that Israel targeted ambulances and medical crews, improperly used incendiary bombs such as white phosphorus in dense civilian areas (a claim also being internally investigated by the Israeli military), prevented the evacuation of wounded carrying white flags, and targeted schools, hospitals, supply convoys and a U.N. compound where over 1,000 civilians had taken shelter. Although Israel dropped thousands of leaflets and made phone calls to targeted buildings warning of impending bombardments, Palestinians argue that they had no safe places in which to take refuge amid Israel's fierce bombardment.

Legal experts doubt that Israelis could be hauled before the International Court of Justice in the Hague, because Israel, like the U.S., is not party to the treaty that created it, and also because the U.S. and European governments would likely prevent such a course of action. What worries authorities in Jerusalem is that many European countries are signatories to a Geneva Convention that allows their courts to arrest and prosecute individuals accused of committing war crimes in other countries. Such legal options, Israel fears, may be used to bring politically motivated charges against its citizens. The daily Yedioth Ahronoth reported Wednesday that Israel's Foreign and Justice ministries have begun drawing up lists of law firms in different European countries that could be enlisted to defend Israelis in any future cases."

more