Spanish minister backs legal initiative to bring Israel before ICC for 'war crimes' in Palestine

www.presstv.ir...


Thursday, 09 November 2023

Spain's social rights minister, Ione Belarra, has backed a legal initiative to bring the Israeli regime before the International Criminal Court (ICC) for "war crimes" in Palestine.

Belarra on Wednesday asked any dual-nationals from Palestine and European countries and their family members who are victims of war crimes to contact French lawyer Juan Branco to bring Israel's crimes before the national jurisdictions and at the International Criminal Court, "free of charge."

Branco earlier wrote on X platform (formerly known as twitter) that he agreed to represent "any victim of war crimes or crimes against humanity as well as any member of their family” free of charge.

A very interesting development showing clearly an increasing number of politicians and lawyers who think Israel must be held accountable for its actions, including the mass killings of innocent civilians many of who are women and children, the forced expulsion of hundreds of thousands of people from Northern Gaza, the disproportional aerial bombardment of the civilian population, the attacks on civilian structures, hospitals, and humanitarian workers, the deprivation of the population from the vet basics such as food, water, electricity, and others.

French Lawyer Juan Branco has said they have agreed to represent victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity as well as members of their family, free of charge.


Here is the twitter page of Juan Branco

twitter.com...

We’ve been asked to represent dual-nationals from Palestine and European countries, both in national jurisdictions and at the International Criminal Court.

We have agreed to represent pro-bono any victim of war crimes or crimes against humanity as well as any member of their family.

Recently one of Belgium's Deputy Prime Ministers has argued for sanctions against Israel because of the inhumane bombing of Gaza and the war crimes committed against the Palestinian people.

SPAM

a reply to: quintessentone

How do you think about the current development? I am strongly in favour of the indictment of whoever is responsible for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on both sides.

originally posted by: Leviathan4
a reply to: quintessentone

How do you think about the current development? I am strongly in favour of the indictment of whoever is responsible for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on both sides.

Once the dust settles we will most likely see the West and EU countries continue their business as usual, that being keep the oil and gas flowing, keep those armaments flowing to Israel, and all will be forgotten.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Leviathan4
a reply to: quintessentone

How do you think about the current development? I am strongly in favour of the indictment of whoever is responsible for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on both sides.

Once the dust settles we will most likely see the West and EU countries continue their business as usual, that being keep the oil and gas flowing, keep those armaments flowing to Israel, and all will be forgotten.

I hope the arms race doesn't continue at the same rate. At one point Palestine will become an Independent State no matter how much the extremists in both sides don't want it to happen. Imagine what could happen when Palestine will start getting armed by powers like Iran or Russia and China? Although I don't find it impossible the US could make the appropriate arrangements to sell them weapons too. Profit is profit after all...

originally posted by: Leviathan4

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Leviathan4
a reply to: quintessentone

How do you think about the current development? I am strongly in favour of the indictment of whoever is responsible for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on both sides.

Once the dust settles we will most likely see the West and EU countries continue their business as usual, that being keep the oil and gas flowing, keep those armaments flowing to Israel, and all will be forgotten.

I hope the arms race doesn't continue at the same rate. At one point Palestine will become an Independent State no matter how much the extremists in both sides don't want it to happen. Imagine what could happen when Palestine will start getting armed by powers like Iran or Russia and China? Although I don't find it impossible the US could make the appropriate arrangements to sell them weapons too. Profit is profit after all...

I really can't make any calls on the future outcome here because I don't understand knuckle dragging tribal warfare over compromise and negotiating, or hate and revenge that comes first with leaders of all countries.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Leviathan4

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Leviathan4
a reply to: quintessentone

How do you think about the current development? I am strongly in favour of the indictment of whoever is responsible for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on both sides.

Once the dust settles we will most likely see the West and EU countries continue their business as usual, that being keep the oil and gas flowing, keep those armaments flowing to Israel, and all will be forgotten.

I hope the arms race doesn't continue at the same rate. At one point Palestine will become an Independent State no matter how much the extremists in both sides don't want it to happen. Imagine what could happen when Palestine will start getting armed by powers like Iran or Russia and China? Although I don't find it impossible the US could make the appropriate arrangements to sell them weapons too. Profit is profit after all...

I really can't make any calls on the future outcome here because I don't understand knuckle dragging tribal warfare over compromise and negotiating, or hate and revenge that comes first with leaders of all countries.

I see.

Let's hope that common sense prevails and the conflict stops. But I am very confident that if it wasn't for the MSM and the establishment pretty everyone would do what the Spanish Minister did and back whatever legal initiative to hold those accountable for committing war crimes.

a reply to: Leviathan4 if you use civilians as human shields, THAT is the war crime. There seems to be this new trend of ignorance where peille don't read the rules but claim to have some Understanding of them.

originally posted by: Jhayesdvm
a reply to: Leviathan4 if you use civilians as human shields, THAT is the war crime. There seems to be this new trend of ignorance where peille don't read the rules but claim to have some Understanding of them.

War crimes also include cutting off water and power to civilians and refusing to negotiate as Netanyahu has done here. It becomes obvious that Netanyahu has his own agenda which does not include any type of compromise, agreement nor negotiation.

a reply to: Jhayesdvm

Good luck. Bring a dictionary. They will spin you around and around with new definitions for long understood standard vocabulary. Like 'war' 'war crimes' and 'woman'.

And now come the anti-Semitic Europeans weighing in. There is a large population of Muslims in Spain.

Israel stands alone.

God's chosen people. Chosen for suffering and the target of bullies. Chosen to expose evil.

Their numbers are small. How many Jews on the planet? Less than 100 million. Far less. How many Muslims? Over a billion.

Who is the persecuted minority?

originally posted by: MoreCoyoteAngels
a reply to: Jhayesdvm

Good luck. Bring a dictionary. They will spin you around and around with new definitions for long understood standard vocabulary. Like 'war' 'war crimes' and 'woman'.

You don't need a dictionary all you need to do is understand Israel's desire to not want to following International Law.

Two legal regimes are directly relevant to Israel's obligations in the Occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The first legal regime is that of International Humanitarian Law (particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention), which applies to situations of belligerent occupation as well as situations where hostilities rise to the level of international armed conflict. However, the application of international humanitarian law (IHL, as codified in the Geneva Conventions, its protocols, and other sources) does not preempt the application of a separate legal regime, the human rights regime, particularly the non-derogable rights such as the right to life. On the contrary, in situations of this complexity, both legal regimes complement and reinforce each other.

When considering which legal standards apply to a particular situation, it is incumbent to distinguish between a legitimate military response in situations of armed confrontation, such as the fire exchanges amounting to hostilities between Palestinian gunmen and Israeli forces, and a policing response in the more common situations of civilian protests, which include the almost daily rock-throwing clashes. Declaring a state of "armed conflict" does not negate Israel's obligation to continue to apply appropriate policing standards to civilian protests, even if some of these civilian protests turn violent and require dispersal by law enforcement officials.

Under Protocol I, Article 51(4), indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Israel is not a party to Protocol I, but the provisions prohibiting indiscriminate warfare are considered to be norms of customary international law, binding on all parties to a conflict, regardless of whether it is an international or internal armed conflict.47 Indiscriminate attacks are "those which are not directed against a military objective," "those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective," or "those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by the Protocol," "and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction."48 Military objectives are defined as "those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action."49 Among the types of attack specifically prohibited as indiscriminate is "an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated."50 Also prohibited are "attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals."51

www.hrw.org...#:~:text=Israel%20ratified%20the%20Geneva%20Conventions%20on%20July%206%2C%201951.&text=Israel%2 0has%20not%20signed%20or,not%20party%20to%20the%20treaty.

originally posted by: MoreCoyoteAngels
And now come the anti-Semitic Europeans weighing in. There is a large population of Muslims in Spain.

Israel stands alone.

God's chosen people. Chosen for suffering and the target of bullies. Chosen to expose evil.

Their numbers are small. How many Jews on the planet? Less than 100 million. Far less. How many Muslims? Over a billion.

Who is the persecuted minority?

Who has U.S. high tech weapons to defend themselves?

originally posted by: Jhayesdvm
a reply to: Leviathan4 if you use civilians as human shields, THAT is the war crime. There seems to be this new trend of ignorance where peille don't read the rules but claim to have some Understanding of them.

This is one of the war crimes.
But this doesn't justify the war crimes committed by Israel.

I think you need to realise just as everyone else who tries hard and goes into the same path that every crime is separate and a separate issue. And if a crime is committed then that doesn't justify another crime and it doesn't nullify it.

a reply to: MoreCoyoteAngels

Yeah lotta people dont realise that Spain was an honest to God, Fascist country as recently as 1976.

Crazy to my mind cos its in my lifetime.

And it was only a little while ago they were sending the cops out to batter the Catalans who were trying to vote in a referendum.