Having finished the commemoration of the nakba day on May 15, the day in 1948 when five Arab armies tried but failed to destroy the State of Israel created a few hours earlier, the P.A. is continuing the battle by the weapon of international law.
The foreign minister, Riyad Maliki, on May 22, 2018 at The Hague, called on the International Criminal Court to open an "Immediate investigation" into the alleged "Crimes" committed by Israel against the Palestinian people.
One is clear: Israel has not ratified and is not a member of the ICC. The other, more controversial issue is whether "Palestine" can be considered a state and therefore eligible to bring a suit.
The introduction against Israel of the charge of apartheid, absurd though it is, is a shrewd move by the P.A., not only because of the obnoxious significance of the concept, but because it has relevance to a crucial international case involving apartheid South Africa.
Because of increasing casualties, Israel in 2003 began building a physical barrier, a "Security fence," that Palestinians called a "Wall." Their arguments also asserted that the barrier was not simply built for security reasons, but also is intended as a land grab, the future border line.
International tribunals, including the ICJ, dispensing impartial jurisprudence, have an easy task in rejecting charges of "Apartheid" against Israel, but a more difficult one in discussing and challenging the charge of legality or illegality of Israel activity and presence in disputed areas.
The ICC should reject both the absurd P.A. charge of the commission by Israel of "Systematic crimes" or "Grave crimes," and also any Palestinian political pressure on the court.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/crime_and_punishment_the_palestinian_image.html
The foreign minister, Riyad Maliki, on May 22, 2018 at The Hague, called on the International Criminal Court to open an "Immediate investigation" into the alleged "Crimes" committed by Israel against the Palestinian people.
One is clear: Israel has not ratified and is not a member of the ICC. The other, more controversial issue is whether "Palestine" can be considered a state and therefore eligible to bring a suit.
The introduction against Israel of the charge of apartheid, absurd though it is, is a shrewd move by the P.A., not only because of the obnoxious significance of the concept, but because it has relevance to a crucial international case involving apartheid South Africa.
Because of increasing casualties, Israel in 2003 began building a physical barrier, a "Security fence," that Palestinians called a "Wall." Their arguments also asserted that the barrier was not simply built for security reasons, but also is intended as a land grab, the future border line.
International tribunals, including the ICJ, dispensing impartial jurisprudence, have an easy task in rejecting charges of "Apartheid" against Israel, but a more difficult one in discussing and challenging the charge of legality or illegality of Israel activity and presence in disputed areas.
The ICC should reject both the absurd P.A. charge of the commission by Israel of "Systematic crimes" or "Grave crimes," and also any Palestinian political pressure on the court.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/crime_and_punishment_the_palestinian_image.html
No comments:
Post a Comment