cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/19768980

archive.org link

In a historic ruling the International Court of Justice has found multiple and serious international law violations by Israel towards Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including, for the first time, finding Israel responsible for apartheid. The court has placed responsibility with all states and the United Nations to end these violations of international law. The ruling should be yet another wake up call for the United States to end its egregious policy of defending Israel’s oppression of Palestinians and prompt a thorough reassessment in other countries as well.

  • @FireTower
    link
    English
    -144 months ago

    A global judicial body unrecognized is effectively moot. You, me, and a few other here on Lemmy could all denounce any nation’s treatment of others but that wouldn’t mean much. We’d just be some random people complaining on the Internet.

    Legitimacy and respect are critical to any court. Without them the courts have no merit.

    • @kaffiene
      link
      English
      114 months ago

      It has legitimacy and respect. What it doesn’t have is enforcement. That’s left to individual states

      • @FireTower
        link
        English
        -44 months ago

        Seemingly not among the involved party. What punishment can flow for this crime and the court’s finding that wouldn’t be levied otherwise.

        The indica of respect and legitimacy of a court is if their rulings are abided. Convince Israel a court with no Israelis should be the final arbitrator of their nations course of acts.

        • @kaffiene
          link
          English
          104 months ago

          If you’ve shifted your claim to “Israel doesn’t respect the ICJ” then yeah of course, they clearly have no respect for international law but that is a very different claim to what you posted earlier

          • @FireTower
            link
            English
            -34 months ago

            For the sake of clarity is my claim is that most nations won’t accept the legitimacy of any ICJ ruling against them as there is no practicable means of holding a nation to account. A judiciary without an executive is an exercise in futility.

            There is no crime without a consequence.

            Any nation at the point of which informed reasonable third parties declare them to have committed war crimes isn’t likely to just slap their knee and say “you know what, my bad” after a ICJ ruling.

            It’s one thing to respect the ICJ when you are a third party. It’s another when you are in the nation subject.

            If the ICJ declared that many European countries violated human rights by not allowing criminals defendants to face their accusors, I doubt many of them would reform their justice system.

            • @kaffiene
              link
              English
              44 months ago

              Ah well again, that’s a different claim. The court is respected but everyone knows they have no enforcement powers. Their strength is entirely diplomatic

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                44 months ago

                I think what’s missing here is the existence of legal precedence. The UN had an arms embargo on apartheid South Africa starting in the 70s, so there’s precedent for that.

                Fun fact: Israel violated the South Africa arms embargo. Big time.

                • @kaffiene
                  link
                  English
                  14 months ago

                  Clearly, enforcement is the weak part of international law.

                  Soooooo surprised to find Israel working against the international community thou :-)

    • @Maggoty
      link
      English
      64 months ago

      Well not with that attitude.