The International Criminal Court's allegations to order arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, is a lie and based on "wholesale inaccuracy," a group of NGOs claimed.
ICC Prosecutor Karim "Allahu Akbar" Khan KC [not to be confused with the Kansas CITY Chiefs] asked the body in May to order the arrest of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on the alleged grounds that Israel has employed starvation of Palestinian civilians as a method of warfare.
For some reason, tens of thousands of trucks delivering food and supplies to Gazan residents and then having it commandeered by Hamas is Israel's fault.
In response to that blatant lie the NGOs point out that the Rafah crossing is between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, not Israel, so Israel can’t open it if Egypt insists on closing it, without going to war with Egypt. It's like blaming a wild pitch on the center fielder.
They contest a series of other allegations made by the Prosecutor, including the assertion that famine exists in certain areas of Gaza and is imminent in others. The NGOs argue that this assertion is based on previous reports that did not account for a significant portion of the food and water supplies in Gaza, which have since been officially deemed "implausible."
In their statement, they assert: "Instead of working with relevant Israeli officials to investigate his allegations, the Prosecutor abruptly canceled a planned visit to Israel and announced his intention to file applications for arrest warrants at the ICC."
The NGOs argue that disregarding the information and evidence they have provided would constitute a "disgraceful dereliction of duty" by both the Court and the Prosecutor, raising serious concerns about "the integrity of the Court, its processes, and its Prosecutor."
Furthermore, the NGOs emphasize that proceeding on the basis of false information could threaten the freedom of not only Netanyahu and Gallant but also other Israelis. Secret arrest warrants could be issued against them, potentially restricting their ability to travel internationally without fear of arrest.
In response, the ICC claimed that it was “an independent and impartial judicial institution focused on ensuring accountability for the gravest crimes under international law," adding, "blah, blah, blah de blah."
"As Prosecutor Khan had referenced on many occasions –including in his Elie Wiesel Distinguished Lectureship in Human Rights in May last year – the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the court, “stems from all religious traditions, including Judaism,” the court said.
“The Office of the Prosecutor executes its mandate based solely on the evidence and the law, devoid of extraneous considerations. The Office’s actions and decisions are, at all times, strictly guided by the evidence in accordance with the Rome Statute legal framework.”
The ICC confirmed that the Office of Public Counsel for the Defense (OPCD) was due to have submitted observations against the decision by no later than last Friday, with the Office of the Prosecutor to submit a consolidated response no later than next Monday, Inshallah.
According to observations filed with the Court by the NGOs, “every phrase of every sentence of a statement of the International Criminal Court’s Prosecutor summarizing his allegations against Netanyahu and Gallant is untrue.”
The lengthy report – compiled earlier this month by UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), the International Legal Forum (ILF), the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC), B’nai B’rith UK (BBUK) and the Jerusalemites Initiative (JI) – rebuts a number of crucial claims laid out by the obvious anti-Semite Khan that justify the arrest warrants.
Among the jihadi prosecutor’s claims, for example, is that Israel is imposing “a total siege over Gaza that involved completely closing the three crossing points, Rafah, Kerem Shalom and Erez, from October 8 2023 for extended periods.”
The lengthy report – compiled earlier this month by UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), the International Legal Forum (ILF), the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC), B’nai B’rith UK (BBUK) and the Jerusalemites Initiative (JI) – rebuts a number of crucial claims laid out by the obvious anti-Semite Khan that justify the arrest warrants.
Among the jihadi prosecutor’s claims, for example, is that Israel is imposing “a total siege over Gaza that involved completely closing the three crossing points, Rafah, Kerem Shalom and Erez, from October 8 2023 for extended periods.”
 |
| Hamas steals supplies and Israel gets the blame |
In response to that blatant lie the NGOs point out that the Rafah crossing is between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, not Israel, so Israel can’t open it if Egypt insists on closing it, without going to war with Egypt. It's like blaming a wild pitch on the center fielder.
They contest a series of other allegations made by the Prosecutor, including the assertion that famine exists in certain areas of Gaza and is imminent in others. The NGOs argue that this assertion is based on previous reports that did not account for a significant portion of the food and water supplies in Gaza, which have since been officially deemed "implausible."
In their statement, they assert: "Instead of working with relevant Israeli officials to investigate his allegations, the Prosecutor abruptly canceled a planned visit to Israel and announced his intention to file applications for arrest warrants at the ICC."
 |
| Hamas steals from their own people |
The NGOs argue that disregarding the information and evidence they have provided would constitute a "disgraceful dereliction of duty" by both the Court and the Prosecutor, raising serious concerns about "the integrity of the Court, its processes, and its Prosecutor."
Furthermore, the NGOs emphasize that proceeding on the basis of false information could threaten the freedom of not only Netanyahu and Gallant but also other Israelis. Secret arrest warrants could be issued against them, potentially restricting their ability to travel internationally without fear of arrest.
Jonathan Turner, chief executive of UK Lawyers for Israel, said: “If the International Criminal Court proceeds without properly addressing the points we have made, it will show that it is a successor to the mediaeval disputations and the Spanish Inquisition. It will mark a new stage in the age-old persecution of Jewish people based on false information.”
So what else is new?
Arsen Ostrovsky, Chief Executive of International Legal Forum, called the Islamist Prosecutor’s decision to seek arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant amounts to a “modern-day antisemitic blood libel that violates every norm of international law.
“It not only entirely lacks substance, but also underscores the court’s blatant lack of jurisdiction in the first instance. If the ICC wishes to maintain any shred of dignity, it will dismiss these legally baseless and mendacious proceedings,” Ostrovsky said.
Arsen Ostrovsky, Chief Executive of International Legal Forum, called the Islamist Prosecutor’s decision to seek arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant amounts to a “modern-day antisemitic blood libel that violates every norm of international law.
“It not only entirely lacks substance, but also underscores the court’s blatant lack of jurisdiction in the first instance. If the ICC wishes to maintain any shred of dignity, it will dismiss these legally baseless and mendacious proceedings,” Ostrovsky said.
In response, the ICC claimed that it was “an independent and impartial judicial institution focused on ensuring accountability for the gravest crimes under international law," adding, "blah, blah, blah de blah."
"As Prosecutor Khan had referenced on many occasions –including in his Elie Wiesel Distinguished Lectureship in Human Rights in May last year – the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the court, “stems from all religious traditions, including Judaism,” the court said.
“The Office of the Prosecutor executes its mandate based solely on the evidence and the law, devoid of extraneous considerations. The Office’s actions and decisions are, at all times, strictly guided by the evidence in accordance with the Rome Statute legal framework.”
The ICC confirmed that the Office of Public Counsel for the Defense (OPCD) was due to have submitted observations against the decision by no later than last Friday, with the Office of the Prosecutor to submit a consolidated response no later than next Monday, Inshallah.
And if you believe the ICC is really impartial, you might be an anti-Semite.
No comments:
Post a Comment