Guest Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 The Palestinian leadership needs to be tried by the ICC for crimes against humanity. They, not Israel, are the criminals. Published January 06th 2015 01:08am Israeli NGO files war crimes suit against Palestinian ministers at ICC The Israel Law Center filed on Monday three lawsuits with the International Criminal Court against Palestinian Authority leaders, including Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah, for alleged war crimes carried out during this summer's Operation Protective Edge. The Israel Law Center, an NGO which represents victims of terror in legal proceedings against groups that they believe support terror, filed the lawsuits the week after PA President Mahmoud Abbas made a move to join the court. In addition to citing Hamdallah in the lawsuit, PA Minister Jibril Rajoub and PA Intelligence Chief Majed Faraj were also included. According to the group, the three ministers are guilty of "terrorism, torture and civil rights violations which are all international law offenses and actionable under the Rome Treaty of the ICC." Ed Oudenaarden (ANP/AFP)"The International Criminal Court is based in The Hague, and was officially opened in 2002"In their lawsuit against Rajoub, the law center says he was "a leader of Fatah at the time the terrorist group was responsible for numerous rocket attacks, during the summer’s Gaza War, on Israeli civilians." "Fatah has boasted on its FACEBOOK [sic] page and in other social media that it was responsible for launching rockets at Israel this summer. As a senior Fatah leader Rajoub should be held responsible for the actions of his subordinates who act according to the terrorist faction’s policies and goals. The terrorist rocket attacks from Gaza left numerous I Israelis dead and injured," the law center said in a press release about the cases. The lead attorney for the group, Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, told the Times of Israel that they would make it hard for Palestinian leaders at the ICC. “Abbas and his friends in terror organizations believe that the courts can be used as a weapon against Israel," Darshan-Leitner told the Times, "while at the same time, the Palestinian leadership carries out crimes with utter impunity against their own people and against Israeli civilians." The press release also notes that all three ministers hold Jordanian citizenship, which could allow their prosecutions to begin immediately as Jordan is a member of the ICC. http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/diplomacy-defense/56785-150105-israeli-ngo-files-war-crimes-suit-against-palestinian-ministers-at-icc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted January 6, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted January 6, 2015 as what, the criminals? if only. . . If you are a member of the ICC, you can file charges. If not, you can be a defendant, but not file charges. Being a member means that you accept the rulings of the ICC, more or less. The ICC is much like any other court, it decides whether charges brought against party have merit and what that punishment should be. by whose laws??? The UN. As for how that applies... If Britain was not signatory to the Rome Statue/did not recognize the authourity of the ICC whereas France and Norway did, and Britain took actions against France (especially inside the borders of France)... Then France would be able to bring charges to the ICC against people involved in Britain, and if those people went to France or Norway, then they could be arrested and go to the Hague. In this example, if Britain wanted to bring charges in the ICC against people in it's own country, or for actions France took in Britain, not being signatory to the Rome Statue, it would not be able to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 The Palestinian Authority is not a country. They are not a legitimate political entity. They are nothing but thugs and it is criminal, terrorist elements like them that make courts like the ICC, necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinky Posted January 6, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 200 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 1,602 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 291 Days Won: 8 Joined: 10/24/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/01/1986 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Seriously, the only reason the PA wants to be part of the ICC is to harass, intimidate, and punish Israel at every turn. The ICC will ignore war crimes committed by the PA and other Islamic factions, and zero in on alleged Israeli crimes. My guess is, the ICC will welcome the PA with open arms. Heck, the UN allowed China to head the Human Rights Council after all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted January 6, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 599 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,249 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,976 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Online Share Posted January 6, 2015 as what, the criminals? if only. . . If you are a member of the ICC, you can file charges. If not, you can be a defendant, but not file charges. Being a member means that you accept the rulings of the ICC, more or less. The ICC is much like any other court, it decides whether charges brought against party have merit and what that punishment should be. by whose laws??? The UN. As for how that applies... If Britain was not signatory to the Rome Statue/did not recognize the authourity of the ICC whereas France and Norway did, and Britain took actions against France (especially inside the borders of France)... Then France would be able to bring charges to the ICC against people involved in Britain, and if those people went to France or Norway, then they could be arrested and go to the Hague. In this example, if Britain wanted to bring charges in the ICC against people in it's own country, or for actions France took in Britain, not being signatory to the Rome Statue, it would not be able to do so. but who wrote the laws that gives them the authority to make judgements...... there has to be some laws....... who wrote them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted January 6, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted January 6, 2015 as what, the criminals? if only. . . If you are a member of the ICC, you can file charges. If not, you can be a defendant, but not file charges. Being a member means that you accept the rulings of the ICC, more or less. The ICC is much like any other court, it decides whether charges brought against party have merit and what that punishment should be. by whose laws??? The UN. As for how that applies... If Britain was not signatory to the Rome Statue/did not recognize the authourity of the ICC whereas France and Norway did, and Britain took actions against France (especially inside the borders of France)... Then France would be able to bring charges to the ICC against people involved in Britain, and if those people went to France or Norway, then they could be arrested and go to the Hague. In this example, if Britain wanted to bring charges in the ICC against people in it's own country, or for actions France took in Britain, not being signatory to the Rome Statue, it would not be able to do so. but who wrote the laws that gives them the authority to make judgements...... there has to be some laws....... who wrote them. The Rome Statue is the law itself. As for who wrote that, probably someone at the UN, I wasn't able to find it after about ten minutes of google. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncn Posted January 6, 2015 Group: Graduated to Heaven Followers: 6 Topic Count: 406 Topics Per Day: 0.09 Content Count: 5,248 Content Per Day: 1.13 Reputation: 1,337 Days Won: 67 Joined: 08/07/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted January 6, 2015 as what, the criminals? if only. . . If you are a member of the ICC, you can file charges. If not, you can be a defendant, but not file charges. Being a member means that you accept the rulings of the ICC, more or less. The ICC is much like any other court, it decides whether charges brought against party have merit and what that punishment should be. by whose laws??? The UN. As for how that applies... If Britain was not signatory to the Rome Statue/did not recognize the authourity of the ICC whereas France and Norway did, and Britain took actions against France (especially inside the borders of France)... Then France would be able to bring charges to the ICC against people involved in Britain, and if those people went to France or Norway, then they could be arrested and go to the Hague. In this example, if Britain wanted to bring charges in the ICC against people in it's own country, or for actions France took in Britain, not being signatory to the Rome Statue, it would not be able to do so. but who wrote the laws that gives them the authority to make judgements...... there has to be some laws....... who wrote them. The Rome Statue is the law itself. As for who wrote that, probably someone at the UN, I wasn't able to find it after about ten minutes of google. This is the best I could come up with. http://www.iccnow.org/?mod=icchistory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts