329

Israel appears to be in breach of ICJ orders on Gaza, senior UN official says. (amp.theguardian.com)

submitted 7 months ago by Mrkawfee@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

111 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 5 points 7 months ago

Direct quote from: https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240126-ord-01-00-en.pdf

The Court considers that, with regard to the situation described above, Israel must, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group. The Court recalls that these acts fall within the scope of Article II of the Convention when they are committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a group as such (see paragraph 44 above). The Court further considers that Israel must ensure with immediate effect that its military forces do not commit any of the above-described acts.

The Court is also of the view that Israel must take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip.

The Court further considers that Israel must take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

Israel must also take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Genocide Convention against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip.

Tell me again how you're a lawyer who read the order lol. But we've seen again and again how Israel operatives lie to justify their fascist regime and their genocide.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yes the language in that first paragraph about the Genocide Convention was left out of the Guardian articl and the person above, who purported to quote the order, but at least used an ellipses to indicate the omission, unlike the Guardian.

This part of the order (P79) refers only to killings to which are barred under the Genocide Conventions, not the mere killing of any Palestinian, which is what OP, you, and the Guardian article falsely implied.

P79 is another good example. You've quoted it here presumably to argue that "see, Israel does have to take affirmative steps." Here Israel must prosecute people for war crimes and incitement to genocide. Well, you're ignoring the part of the order that finds Israel is already doing that, and they are.

80 and 81, same thing. Israel is already in compliance, at least that's what they will argue and provide evidence of in their status report due to the ICJ on February 23.

E: If only down voting me could make your feelings about what's in the order actually match the order.

[-] crapwittyname@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

You said:

The language you are quoting here is neither from the article nor from the ICJ order.

u/LarmyofLone then quoted the order, showing that the language they used was exactly from the order.

Take the L, mate.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Are you dense?

Larmy omitted a key part of the sentence in paragraph 79, which is the paragraph the original news story was paraphrasing. Both Larmy and the Guardian's omission gave a misleading impression that the ICJ ordered Israel not to kill any more Palestinians.

Obviously, that's not what the order said.

[-] crapwittyname@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The actual text:

Israel must, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group

The paraphrasing:

The State of Israel shall … desist from the commission of any and all acts within the scope of Article II of the Convention, in particular: (a) killing members of the group; (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to the members of the group

It looks like the only difference here is changing "take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of", to "desist from the commission of", which is fairly reasonable and doesn't change the meaning, since "desist" alone can be taken to mean "refrain from" or "cease".

So yes, I must be dense, because I still can't see how your accusation of changing the language holds water. Also, it seems to be para. 78 we're dealing with, not 79, whose subject is incitement.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

You're still missing the key difference. Right, 78.

This is the language that was omitted:

In accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention,

Israel cannot kill Palestinians in violation of the Genocide Convention. No kidding?

That's not the same as saying Israel cannot kill any Palestinians.

[-] crapwittyname@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

Then that's what LarmyofLone said. "Within the scope of the convention." Why can't you back down mate? It'll be good for you. We all make mistakes.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Nah go back further to Larmy's initial comment and the Guardian article linked at the top of this post. Larmy's second post too leaves out the word "Genocide Convention" and just says "convention."

Both altered the text of the actual order to make it appear as though Israel was ordered not to kill any Palestinians, and they did it on purpose to make Israel look like it is violating the order.

It's always illegal by the ICJ standards to kill people in violation of the Genocide Convention. It's not always a violation of the Genocide Convention to kill people, though. That's a significant difference.

this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024

329 points (94.3% liked)

World News

38583 readers

2208 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.