#joan donoghue

[pasparal]

Israel-Gaza War: Norman Finkelstein Debates The "Genocide" In Palestine | The Full Interview

Al Arabiya English

Jun 5, 2024

“Israel is carrying out a genocide in Gaza” American political scientist Norman Finkelstein told Al Arabiya English's Riz Khan.

Speaking in an exclusive interview, Finkelstein said the population of Gaza “sealed off from the world” is facing a “death sentence” following the long-time denial of aid – primarily food, water, fuel and medical supply.

Finkelstein is an American academic whose forthright analysis of the Israel-Gaza conflict has provoked strong opinions over many years. He's no less outspoken in this exclusive interview, in which he delivers his own hard talking judgment on the international courts, the ICJ and the ICC.

[the-organic-dynamic]

(1) The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the [Genocide Convention] ... take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II ... , in particular: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (2) The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above; (3) The State of Israel shall 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; (4) The State of Israel shall 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; (5) The State of Israel shall 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 Convention ... against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;

(6) The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one month as from the date of this Order.

-The International Court of Justice, The Hague (January 26, 2024)

[archtroop]

[coldmiraclequeen]

What is international justice day?

Is international justice mission a good charity?

Who is the first Indian judge in the International Court?

Who was the first Indian woman judge of the International Court?

Then Read On

#justice #humanity #icc #icj #justicesystem #justiceprevails #justiceforall

international justice day, international human justice, international court justice judges, international court of justice members, global justice issues, International justice day 2023, international justice court, international criminal justice, world justice forum, Kulbhushan Jadhav story, international justice court the hague, Joan Donoghue

What is international justice day? Is international justice mission a good charity? Who is the first Indian judge in the International Court? Who was the first Indian woman judge of the International Court? Then Read On https://padmalakshya5digi.com/cdk1 #justice #humanity #icc #icj #justicesystem #justiceprevails #justiceforall https://youtu.be/aS0c95TuRIg   international justice day, international human justice, international court justice judges, international court of justice members, global justice issues, International justice day 2023, international justice court, international criminal justice, world justice forum, Kulbhushan Jadhav story, international justice court the hague, Joan Donoghue

[biglisbonnews]

Lana Del Rey Is Engaged to Some Guy Named Evan Winiker Did you know there's a tunnel under Ocean Boulevard and Lana Del Rey is inside of it and also engaged?Billboard reports that several sources have confirmed the tunnel explorer is engaged to Range Media managing partner Evan Winiker, who's worked with various musicians and been a musician himself. According to the outlet, he was notably a member of Steel Train and has toured with Tegan and Sara, Ben Folds, and none other than former Steel Train member Jack Antonoff.Related | Lana Del Rey's Dad Is Dropping an AlbumFunny how that man finds a way to be included in everything.Prior to Winiker, Lana was linked to Salem member Jack Donoghue. The two were a frequent topic of conversation on the internet considering they launched their relationship outside the Cook County Jail in 2022. Why they were there, we might never know, although I'd suspect fans tried to dig for clues on her latest record, Did you know there's a tunnel under Ocean Blvd. \u201cthis is my kim k and pete davidson\u201d — salvatori (@salvatori) 1657642082 Donoghue also courted "controversy" online over videos he frequently posted that showed him kissing various men. Bisexuality might exist, but don't tell Lana Del Rey fans that!Back to Winiker, it's not clear when the two first linked up as they've kept their relationship somewhat under wraps. Fans first took notice of his presence on Instagram when they were out at a soccer game together and his hand could be seen in a photo. Fan pages also posted a photo of the two out and about in Pioneertown, California, where she embraced him for the shot. \u201cLana Del Rey estava jantando com o m\u00fasico Evan Winiker e alguns f\u00e3s tiraram foto com ela no restaurante Pappy + Harriet na Calif\u00f3rnia\u201d — Lana Del Rey Addiction \ud83c\udf0a (@Lana Del Rey Addiction \ud83c\udf0a) 1679236749 In other news, the singer's latest hit record, the aforementioned Ocean Blvd, just took the #1 spot on Billboard's U.K. chart, making it her sixth album to do so. Photo via Leon Bennett/Getty https://www.papermag.com/lana-del-rey-engaged-2659692632.html

[philipkindreddickhead]

100 Fiction Books to Read Before You Die

The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri

The Book of Margery Kempe by Margery Kempe

The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison

A Small Place by Jamaica Kincaid

The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy

Frankenstein by Mary Shelley

We Need to Talk About Kevin by Lionel Shriver

The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie by Muriel Sparks

The Girl by Meridel Le Sueur

The Kitchen God's Wife by Amy Tan

The Secret History by Donna Tartt

The Color Purple by Alice Walker

The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver

Veronica by Mary Gaitskill

Americanah by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

Alias Grace by Margaret Atwood

Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte

The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath

Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf

Kindred by Octavia Butler

Middlemarch by George Eliot

Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

Uncle Tom's Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe

Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston

Passing by Nella Larson

The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K. Le Guin

Brideshead Revisited by Evelyn Waugh

Death Comes for the Archbishop by Willa Cather

Play it as it Lays by Joan Didion

The House of Spirits by Isabel Allende

Wuthering Heights Emily Bronte

Little Women by Louisa May Alcott

White Teeth by Zadie Smith

The Power by Naomi Alderman

The Street by Ann Petry

The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton

Mary Barton by Elizabeth Gaskill

An American Marriage by Tayari Jones

Small Island by Andrea Levy

The Idiot by Elif Batuman

The Outsiders by S. E. Hinton

The Price of Salt/Carol by Patricia Highsmith

Room by Emma Donoghue

The Sea, The Sea by Iris Murdoch

Garden of Earthly Delights by Joyce Carol Oates

Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhys

Wise Blood by Flannery O Conner

Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn

Picnic at Hanging Rock by Joan Lindsey

Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier

Salt to the Sea by Ruta Sepetys

Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

The Awakening by Kate Chopin

Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe by Fannie Flagg

The House on Mango Street by Sandra Cisneros

The Well of Loneliness by Radclyffe Hall

House of Incest by Anaïs Nin

The Mandarins by Simone de Beauvoir

The Lottery by Shirley Jackson

A Little Life by Hanya Yanagihara

Corregidora by Gayl Jones

Whose Names are Unknown by Sanora Babb

Half of a Yellow Sun by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

The Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood

See Now Then by Jamaica Kincaid

The Lowland by Jhumpa Lahiri

Beloved by Toni Morrison

The Joy Luck Club by Amy Tan

The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt

Demon Copperhead by Barbara Kingsolver

The Ministry of Utmost Happiness by Arundhati Roy

To the Lighthouse by Virginia Woolf

My Antonia by Willa Cather

Democracy by Joan Didion

Black Water by Joyce Carol Oates

The Violent Bear it Away by Flannery O Connor

Sharp Objects by Gillian Flynn

My Cousin Rachel by Daphne du Maurier

The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand

I Must Betray You be Ruta Sepetys

The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson

The Mare by Mary Gaitskill

City of Beasts by Isabel Allende

Fledgling by Octavia Butler

A Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula Le Guin

The First Bad Man by Miranda July

Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen

Moses, Man of the Mountain by Zora Neale Hurston

Disobedience by Naomi Alderman

Quicksand by Nella Larsen

The Narrows by Ann Petry

The Blood of Others by Simone de Beauvoir

Under the Sea by Rachel Carson

Go Set a Watchman by Harper Lee

Under the Net by Iris Murdoch

The Birdcatcher by Gayl Jones

Desert of the Heart by Jane Rule

In the Time of the Butterflies by Julia Alvarez

The Memory Police by Yōko Ogawa

@gaydalf @kishipurrun @unsentimentaltranslator @algolagniaa @stariduks @hippodamoi

[tarotenvelhecida]

pick a card– which book speaks to your soul?

You read something which you thought only happened to you, and you discover that it happened 100 years ago to Dostoyevsky. This is a very great liberation for the suffering, struggling person, who always thinks that he is alone. This is why art is important.

—Conversations with James Baldwin.

this is my love letter to all the bookworms in the tarot community— pick a pile & i'll give you a list of genres + book suggestions carrying important messages to you.

I. THE FIRST

To the daydreamers and the escapists; to the ones that need to rest before following what you need follow.

RELEVANT GENRES & CONCEPTS– fiction in general; romance; fantasy; fairytale; poetry; ‘happy ever after’ endings; hopeful endings; fantasy; magic; dreamy.

AUTHORS – Ursula K. Le Guin; Louise Gluck; Mary Oliver; Jane Austen.

BOOKS FOR YOU–

‘The Paper Garden: An Artist Begins Her Life’s Work at 72 – Molly Peacock'

‘Good Bones – Maggie Smith’

‘If Not, Winter: Fragments of Sappho – Translation by Anne Carson’

‘Owls and Other Fantasies – Mary Oliver’

‘Dog Songs – Mary Oliver’

‘Emma – Jane Austen’

‘Howl’s Moving Castle – Diana Wynne Jones’

‘The Little Prince – Antoine de Saint-Exupéry’

‘Death Comes for the Archbishop – Willa Cather’

‘Sonnets from the Portuguese – Elizabeth Barrett Browning’

‘The Hawk and the Dove – Penelope Wilcock’

‘The Secret Life of the Lonely Doll: The Search for Dare Wright’

‘The Ink Dark Moon – Ono no Komachi & Izumi Shikibu’

‘Alice in Wonderland – Lewis Carroll’

‘The Letters of Vita Sackville-West and Virginia Woolf’

‘Little Women – Louisa May Alcott’

‘Anne of Green Gables – L.M. Montgomery’

‘Kissing the Witch: Old Tales in New Skins – Emma Donoghue’

II. THE SECOND

For the ones that carry the ache to learn and know everything; to the ones bored with life's commodities & seriousness. For the ones that question everything around them – as they should do.

You do not need to fit in. Don't change yourself for other people. If they want to see you this way, then become the proud witch in the edge of the woods.

RELEVANT GENRES & CONCEPTS– books on 'niche' knowledge; science; philosophy; true crime; drama; scandalous romances; adventure, magical realism; YA thriller & horror; comedy & sardonic comedy; ‘controversial’/'weird' books.

AUTHORS– Carmen Maria Machado, Kate Moore, Grady Hendrix.

BOOKS FOR YOU–

‘My Sister, The Serial Killer – Oyinkan Braithwaite'

‘The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat and Other Clinical Tales – Oliver Sacks'

‘St. Lucy’s Home for Girls Raised by Wolves – Karen Russell'

‘Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife – Mary Roach’

‘The Hitchhiker Guide to Galaxy – Douglas Adams'

‘Inferno – Dante Alighieri'

'Magic for Beginners – Kelly Link'

‘Lace Bone Beast: Poems & Other Fairytales for Wicked Girls – N.L. Shompole'

‘Severed: A History of Heads Lost and Heads Found – Frances Larson’

'The Woman They Could Not Silence – Kate Moore'

‘The Dictionary of Lost Words – Pip Williams'

‘She Kills Me: The True Stories of History’s Deadliest Women – Jennifer Wright’

‘Anatomy: A Love Story – Dana Schwartz'

‘Pretty Dead Queens – Alexa Donne'

‘I’m Glad My Mom Died – Jennette McCurdy'

'Rabid: A Cultural History of the World's Most Diabolical Virus – Bill Wasik'

‘Chilling Adventures of Sabrina – Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa’

III. THE THIRD

You need to put your sadness somewhere. If you can't, remember that someone has done it before – and transformed it into a story. Let the words you'll read be the resting place for whatever you're feeling right now; let yourself remember that not even your pain is lonely in this world.

RELEVANT GENRES AND CONCEPTS— poetry; gothic horror; thrillers; murder mysteries; tragedies; cathartic stories; biographies.

AUTHORS– Shirley Jackson, Osamu Dazai, Clarice Lispector, Sylvia Plath.

BOOKS FOR YOU—

'The Year of Magical Thinking – Joan Didion'

‘The Dead – James Joyce'

‘What The Living Do – Marie Howe'

‘The Hour of the Star – Clarice Lispector'

‘Why This World: A Biography of Clarice Lispector’

‘Some of Us Did Not Die – June Jordan'

Somewhere Towards the End – Diana Athill'

‘We Have Always Lived in The Castle – Shirley Jackson'

'Heaven: A Novel – Mieko Kawakami'

'Journal of a Solitude – May Sarton'

'Jane Eyre – Charlotte Bronte'

'Grief is the Thing with Feathers – Max Porter'

‘Carrie – Stephen King'

'Of Dogs and Walls – Yuko Tsushima'

'Frankenstein – Mary Shelley'

'The Stepping Off Place – Cameron Kelly'

'Letters to Milena – Franz Kafka'

‘Beloved – Toni Morrison'

[thisisabernieblog]

International Court of Justice Rules That Israel Must Stop Killing Palestinians

World BEYOND War

The International Court of Justice has ruled that Israel must cease its warmaking in Gaza — cease committing and inciting genocidal acts — and that the case charging Israel with genocide must proceed.

DETAILS OF THE RULING:

By 15-2: Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent all acts within the scope of Genocide Convention article 2

15-2: Israel must immediately ensure that its military does not commit acts within the scope of GC.2

16-1: Direct and punish all members of the public who engage in the incitement of genocide against Palestinians

16-1: Ensure provision of urgently needed basic services, humanitarian aid

15-2: Prevent the destruction of and ensure the preservation of evidence to allegation of acts of GC.2

15-2: Israel will submit report as to how they’re adhering to these orders to the ICJ within 1 month

This is Article 2 of the Genocide Convention:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(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;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Therefore, Israel must cease killing Palestinians.

This was a make or break moment for international law, or rather a break or make-a-first-step moment. There is hope for the idea and reality of international law, but this is only a beginning.

The president of the International Court of Justice, who read the ruling, is Judge Joan Donoghue, former top legal advisor under Hillary Clinton at the U.S. State Department during the Obama Administration. She previously was the lawyer for the United States in its unsuccessful defense before the ICJ against charges by Nicaragua of minining its harbor.

The court voted for portions of this decision by 15-2 and 16-1. The “No” votes came from Judge Julia Sebutinde of Uganda and Ad Hoc Judge Aharon Barak of Israel.

The case presented by South Africa was overwhelming (read it or watch a key part of it), and Israel’s defense paper-thin. And the case just grew more overwhelming during the bizarre delay (yes, courts are slow, but this genocide is swift).

People all over the world built the pressure to move South Africa to act and other nations to add their support. Over 1,500 organizations signed a statement. Individuals signed a petition by CODEPINK, and sent almost 500,000 emails to key governments’ United Nations consulates through World BEYOND War and RootsAction.org. Click those links because more emails are needed now. While several nations have made public statements in support of South Africa’s case, we need them to file papers officially with the International Court of Justice. To reach out to additional national governments, go here.

Governments that have made statement in support of the case against genocide include Malaysia, Turkey, Jordan, Bolivia, the 57 nations of the Organization of Islamic Countries, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Maldives, Namibia, and Pakistan, Colombia, Brazil, and Cuba.

Germany has backed Israel’s defense against the charge of genocide, which has been denounced by Namibia, victimn of a German genocide. Prominent Jews have denounced Germany’s shameful action.

Mass demonstrations in the streets of the world have continued in support of peace and justice, and to a far greater extent than major media outlets have reported.

Here’s a discussion of this campaign for justice with Sam Husseini on Talk World Radio.

Prior to today’s ruling from the International Court of Justice, the U.S. government pointedly refused to say whether it would comply with ruling, despite insisting that other nations comply with rulings by the ICJ.

Hamas said that it would cease fire if Israel does, and release all prisoners if Israel does

Germany, to its credit, reportedly said that it would comply.

Arming a genocide is complicity in genocide. While Israel gets most of its weapons from the United States, other weaponry comes from Germany, Italy, the UK, and Canada — at least some of which nations also provide parts to U.S. weaponsmakers that provide weapons to Israel. Italian opposition demanded an end to it. And then the Foreign Minister claimed Italy had stopped shipments on Oct 7. Meanwhile, Canada is coming under pressure to cease shipments and prevarications. In Canada, Members of Parliament are among over 250 people hunger striking for an arms embargo on Israel.

People in the United States can tell Congress to stop arming Israel here or here.

President Joe Biden already faces a lawsuit for aiding and abetting genocide in Gaza. In November 2023, Palestinian human rights organizations, along with Gaza- and U.S.-based Palestinians, filed suit in a U.S. federal court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the Biden Administration for failing to prevent genocide, and for aiding and abetting genocide. The plaintiffs seek an order to end U.S. military and diplomatic support to Israel. A hearing to address the government’s motion to dismiss will be held at 9 a.m. PT / 12 noon ET today, Friday. The hearing will be webstreamed to the public. You are encouraged to tune in and witness the U.S. government’s attempts at avoiding accountability and justify its support for the genocide that is happening in Gaza.

Handed down on Invasion Day (26th Jan in Australia)

How fitting ❤️ 🇵🇸 ❤️ 🇵🇸 ❤️

[mr-president]

Do you know of any petitions or email scripts to call for support for South Africas genocide case against Israel? I'm from the US and I've had trouble finding anything.

i do!

Here are the emails of:

President of the ICJ, Joan E Donoghue (United States): j.donoghue@icj-cij.org

Vice-President Kirill, Gevorgian (Russian Federation): k.gevorgian@icj-cij.org

Judge Mohamed Bennouna (Morocco): m.bennouna@icj-cij.org

Judge Ronny Abraham (France): r.abraham@icj-cij.org

Judge Georg Nolte (Germany): g.nolte@icj-cij.org

Judge Dalveer Bhandari (India): d.bhandari@icj-cij.org

Judge Patrick Robinson (Jamaica): p.robinson@icj-cij.org

Judge Yuji Iwasawa (Japan): y.iwasawa@icj-cij.org

Judge Nawaf Salam (Lebanon): n.salam@icj-cij.org

Judge Mohammad Bennouna (Morocco): m.bennouna@icj-cij.org

Judge Peter Tomka (Slovakia): p.tomka@icj-cij.org

Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf (Somalia): a.yusuf@icj-cij.org

Judge Julia Sebutinde (Uganda): j.sebutinde@icj-cij.org

Judge Hilary Charlesworth (Australia): h.charlesworth@icj-cij.org

Judge Leonardo Brant (Brazil): I.brant@icj-cij.org

Judge Xue Hanqin (China): h.xue@icj-cij.org

And here is an email chain, taken from twitter here! They have more specific copy-pastes, like calling the ICJ “Madam President” or “Vice President, but the general one is below!”

Subject: Urgent Concerns Regarding the impending matter of South Africa v. Israel with the ICJ

Dear Honourable Judge [JUDGE NAME HERE]

I hope this message finds you well and resolute. My name is [Your Name], I am a concerned citizen of the [Your Country]. I am reaching out to you with a sense of urgency and sincere apprehension which prompts me to break my customary silence.

I have always held the belief that individuals in positions of authority, such as yourself, harbour the best interests of humanity at heart. However, recent developments in the Middle East and the global response to them have stirred doubt in my convictions, compelling me to express my concerns directly to you.

As I explored the International Court of Justice's website, I took solace in the fact that it consists of "independent judges, elected regardless of their nationality from among persons of high moral character." With this understanding, I address you regarding the impending South Africa v. Israel matter, the provisional measures hearing of which is scheduled for Thursday, 11th and Friday, 12th January 2024.

I am sure that you are acutely aware of the gravity of the case before you, and I believe that your ability to discern the truth, resist external pressures, and deliver a just judgment is foremost on your mind. The Genocide Convention, a cornerstone of international law, was established in 1948 as a commitment to 'never again' allow atrocities akin to those committed by the Nazi’s in WW2. 152 states out of 194 nations of the world honourably signed up to the convention. It is a testament to our parents and grandparents that their generations committed to a set of standards that constitute the basic principles of right and wrong, which underpin the fabric of the world we live in and form the basis of the lives most of us are lucky enough to lead.

The very fact that the responsibility of adjudicating on this case has fallen upon your shoulders underscores a disheartening truth – the failure of existing systems of checks and balances within the international community. It is disconcerting that national interests have tainted the operations of our global systems, allowing the mass killing of civilians to persist without intervention. I find this reality appalling, as do countless citizens around the world who have expressed their horror through protests on the streets of cities across the globe.

The upcoming case is a litmus test for humanity's commitment to the solemn pledge of 'Never Again.' Generations have been educated about the horrors of the Holocaust, and this case challenges us to live up to the principles we profess. It is a stark reminder that the values we hold dear are being tested in real-time, with devastating consequences.

In March 2022, the International Court of Justice ordered Russia to immediately suspend military operations in Ukraine and ensure that affiliated units take no further steps in furtherance of the military operations. Despite this intervention, an estimated 10,000 civilians have tragically lost their lives in Ukraine since Russia's military operation in 2022. Moreover, and by comparison, the death toll in Gaza has already surpassed 22,000 since October 2023, with a staggering 70% of the victims being women and children.

In an age where mainstream media faces scepticism due to perceived biases, the global community has been witness to Israel's actions in real-time through various social media platforms such as X, TikTok, and Telegram. Enclosed with this letter, you'll find compelling evidence pointing towards Israel's culpability in intending to commit genocide and engaging in genocidal military actions, among other alleged war crimes.

We find ourselves in a world where trust in global institutions is eroding rapidly. The International Court of Justice, in particular, cannot afford to make an erroneous judgment in the #SouthAfrica v. #Israel genocide case. A misjudgement in this matter would not only underscore the ICJ's ineffectiveness but also prompt scrutiny regarding its autonomy from nation-state political influences, potentially compromising the esteemed moral character of the individuals involved.

In 1945 we celebrated Winston Churchill as the leader that brought the world together in war to put-down the threat of Nazi Germany and the horror it inflicted. That war claimed over 50 million lives. We do not wish to celebrate a wartime hero again; we wish to celebrate new heroes who averted a war by presiding over justice without fear or favour.

I humbly beseech you to approach this case with the utmost diligence, impartiality, and commitment to justice. The eyes of the world are upon you, and the outcome of this particular case will reverberate through history, shaping perceptions of the ICJ's impartiality and moral standing.

Yours sincerely,

(Insert Name)

Also, here’s a bigass link about what’s being done and what you can do

And here’s a link where you can search for protests near you (remember, never give your personal information away if you’re going to a protest—don’t announce it publicly or nothing, yadda yadda):

hope this helps :D!

[head-post]

Why ICC’s impartiality threatened by US influence

For many years, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been adjudicating conflicts around the world, but recently there have been increasing concerns over the Court’s impartiality, especially against the backdrop of judgements on Israel that were allegedly influenced by top US officials.

The credibility of the ICC has been shaken after South Africa’s landmark lawsuit against Israel, accused of genocide of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. South Africa’s Minister of International Relations and Co-operation of South Africa, Ronald Lamola, the chief accuser, said the UN International Court of Justice’s judgement in the lawsuit against Israel proved the rule of international law.

All countries must be treated equally and Israel is no exception. It cannot in any exceptional way disregard the UN Genocide Convention, other UN conventions as well as international law.

Genocide of Palestinians

Israel’s retaliatory offensive against Hamas since the 7 October 2023 attack has resulted in catastrophic damage to the people of Gaza, as the Israeli government has been unable to provide essential food, water, medicine, fuel, and other humanitarian aid to the civilian population, South Africa’s representatives to the Court said.

However, Israeli military action continues despite the Court’s ruling, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant and his predecessor Benny Gantz still unpunished.

In response to Netanyahu’s request, US President Joe Biden’s administration ordered a cut in funding to the UN agency for Palestinian refugees and Works Agency (UNRWA), which only exacerbates hunger and the collapse of social services.

UNRWA provides food and basic needs to some 5.7 million registered Palestinian refugees in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.

It is clear from what is happening in Gaza that the ICJ’s 26 January ruling has only further emboldened the Netanyahu government accused by South Africa of genocide against the people of Palestine. Israel promised to “take all measures within its authority to prevent and punish those responsible for committing acts of genocide.” At the same time, the Netanyahu administration, “appointed” to fulfil the mandate to “prevent and punish,” cannot be accused of committing “acts of genocide.”

Roots of the issue

In other words, the judges upheld almost all of the urgent measures that South Africa requested, but did not stop the Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip. The lack of an explicit demand for a ceasefire is presumably due to who was heading the ICC.

Until February 2024, the president of the UN International Court of Justice was Joan Donoghue, who previously served as legal advisor to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton under the administration of then-President Barack Obama.

The court ruled that the Israeli government must guarantee that its armed forces will not commit genocide against the people of Gaza, take steps to prevent and punish calls for such action, and ensure that all evidence of the alleged genocide is preserved. However, there were apparently some difficulties with the ceasefire demand.

In such a situation, the US, Israel’s staunch ally, remained victorious. After the Court’s ruling, Israel was entitled to “take measures in accordance with international law to ensure that the attack of 7 October is not repeated.” In other words, Israel, accused of genocide of the Palestinians of Gaza, became, in the judgement of the International Court of Justice, the victim of genocide by the Palestinians themselves.

Read more HERE

[mariacallous]

This week, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro took unprecedented steps to establish control over the contested Esequibo region of neighboring Guyana, violating an International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling. Esequibo, a region in western Guyana, accounts for two-thirds of the country’s territory, 16 percent of its population—and, crucially, would give Caracas a claim to offshore oil riches that Guyana recently found and that Venezuela clearly covets.

The fact that international arbiters marked the boundary lines well over a century ago won’t stop Maduro from claiming land that many Venezuelans have long been told is rightfully theirs. On Sunday, Caracas held a referendum to determine sovereignty over Esequibo despite the ICJ warning against threatening the status quo. The results, though heavily criticized, showed that 95 percent of voters were in favor of Venezuela annexing the disputed region.

With Caracas ordering mass arrests on Wednesday of those who allegedly oppose the annexation, regional forces gathering to defend the small nation, and the U.S. military conducting flight exercises in Guyana in a blatant show of support for Georgetown, Latin America is teetering on the edge of a potential major continental war for the first time in more than 75 years.

“Latin Americans love to say, ‘We haven’t had a major border conflict since the 1940s,’” said Christopher Sabatini, a senior research fellow for Latin America at Chatham House. “This would really sort of challenge their fundamental self-conception of their peaceful nature and the historical absence of interstate conflict.”

Well, who has the legal right to Esequibo?

Both nations lay claim to the land, which is a little larger than the U.S. state of Alabama, though much better endowed. Venezuela once had possession of it in the nine-tenths-of-the-law sense, but it was never a legal part of what became modern Venezuela, either before or after its independence. A Paris-based arbitration panel ruled in 1899 that the territory belonged to Guyana (well—at the time, to the British colony of British Guiana.) However, Venezuela long argued that the decision should be nullified, as the country’s government was not present during the talks but rather represented by the United States.

Last Friday, the ICJ ordered Maduro not to attempt to change the region’s status—just days before Caracas was set to hold its sovereignty referendum. The court did not, however, ban the vote from occurring despite Guyana pressuring the body to do so.

Venezuela’s government appears to be “taking steps with a view toward acquiring control over and administering the territory in dispute,” ICJ President Joan Donoghue warned following Venezuela’s blatant disregard of the court ruling.

“The ICJ has credibility, but it can’t enforce its ruling,” Sabatini said. However, that’s not to say it isn’t a big deal. If Venezuela were to use military force to take control of Esequibo, then it would likely damage the possibility of the ICJ ever ruling in its favor in the future. It would also slice Guyana by more than half and open a whole new can of ugly worms.

What makes the Esequibo region so worth coveting?

Home to significant swaths of the Amazon rainforest, Esequibo is a mineral-rich territory, containing vast gold and copper deposits. In 2015, the region’s worth skyrocketed after ExxonMobil discovered large quantities of oil off its coast, setting Guyana up to become the richest nation in Latin America on a per capita basis. Just offshore and almost, but not quite entirely, in Guyana’s exclusive economic zone, is an oil gusher with at least 11 billion barrels of crude.

If Venezuela were to grab Esequibo, then it could lay claim to basically all of that offshore wealth.

Now, billions of dollars and thousands of beefsteaks pour into Georgetown, the capital of a once-backwater, now-developing nation. Guyana has used the funds to launch major infrastructure developments, its first deep-water port, and a gas-to-energy project that would double the nation’s energy output while cutting power bills in half. And in September, it announced its intention to sell oil to big players, including China’s, Qatar’s, and Malaysia’s state oil companies—further triggering Venezuela’s economic jealousy.

Venezuela, which was once a major oil producer, now pumps half as much as the U.S. state of New Mexico. It has long struggled with debilitating hyperinflation and low public approval. According to the International Monetary Fund, Caracas suffered the world’s highest consumer price increase this year, with inflation reaching 360 percent. Corruption continues to roil Maduro’s autocratic regime, and efforts to crack down on the country’s opposition, including barring favored presidential candidate María Corina Machado from holding office, have done little to elevate his chances of winning reelection next year.

Maduro hopes that establishing control over Esequibo would give him a claim to big oil, bolster support for his United Socialist Party, and pigeonhole the opposition into appearing anti-patriotic at a time when his regime is looking more and more like a “tin-pot dictatorship,” Sabatini said.

So, what happened with this referendum?

Depends on whom you ask. According to Maduro, millions of Venezuelans took to the polls in the nation’s highest election turnout in history. But without evidence to back his claim, rights groups estimate that only around 2 million people went to the ballot boxes.

According to the government, more than 95 percent of voters approved all five questions on the referendum, which called for the creation of a new so-called Guayana Esequiba state as well as granting its residents Venezuelan citizenship, providing the population with identity cards, incorporating Esequibo onto Venezuela’s map, and rejecting the 1899 ruling.

“A new era in the fight for our Guayana Esequiba has begun,” Maduro said in celebration of the results. “Now we will recover Venezuela’s historical rights.”

In an aggressive speech on Tuesday, Maduro proposed a new law that bans all Venezuelan companies from collaborating with Guyana, and on Wednesday, he appointed Maj. Gen. Alexis Rodríguez Cabello to oversee the newly established state. Military intelligence suggests that Caracas is also building an airstrip at La Camorra, near its border with Guyana, to support logistical operations for annexing Esequibo. And Maduro has threatened foreign firms, including ExxonMobil, from working with the Guyanese government.

One thing: Venezuela has more oil reserves than any country on Earth. What’s it need more for?

That’s a good question, especially since Venezuela has enough trouble getting its own oil out of the ground as is—let alone wading into tricky offshore drilling that requires technological expertise, good management, and plentiful capital, none of which has been on display in Caracas for years.

If anything, Maduro hopes that redressing a century-old wrong, with oil to boot, will boost public confidence in his increasingly unpopular administration. But the probability of that making a large dent in polling for next year’s election is unlikely.

How is the rest of the region responding?

Guyana immediately placed its own defense forces on high alert and called on the U.N. Security Council and ICJ to take immediate action to bar Venezuela from further encroaching on its soil. Brazil’s defense ministry “intensified its defense actions” and boosted its military presence near the disputed border. And the U.S. Southern Command conducted military exercises with Guyana on Thursday to demonstrate its strong bilateral commitments to Georgetown.

Interstate war would be “suicidal” for Maduro’s political ambitions, a Venezuelan energy expert said, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of government retaliation. “Maduro might be emboldened by the fact that the conflict in Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East makes it harder for the U.S. to have another front or potential conflict in this region,” the expert added. “And so, people read this as a dangerous situation because it opens up Maduro’s perception that he might get away with doing something.”

Maduro initially promised not to invade Venezuela’s eastern neighbor. But escalating tensions, including Caracas accusing ExxonMobil on Wednesday of working in tandem with Guyana and Venezuelan dissidents to undermine the government, are worrying regional leaders that annexation may be in the cards after all. If that’s the case, then Latin America may impose a multilateral peacemaking force to diffuse the situation—which would likely hurt Venezuela in the long run.

Caracas looks weak, Sabatini said. “As it sort of hurtles toward an uncertain outcome on this, it also puts its own survival at risk. I would say in some ways, quite frankly, what it’s doing to Guyana is probably far more dangerous to its survival, its instability, than the prospect of an election in 2024.”

[catarmyartblog]

Call to action. Please email the judges to stop war crimes of the IDF.

1. Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed:

a.yusuf@icj-cij.org

2. Judge Mohamed Bennouna :

M.bennouna@icj-cij.org

3. Judge Ronny Abraham:

r.abraham@icj-cij.org

4. Judge P. Tomka:

P.tomka@icj-cij.org

5. Judge Leonardo Nemer Caldeira Brant:

L.brant@icj-cij.org

6. Judge Hilary Charlesworth:

h.charlesworth@icj-cij.org

7. Judge Georg Norte :

g.nolte@icj-cij.org

8. Judge Iwasawa Yuji:

y.iwasawa@icj-cij.org

9. Judge Nawaf Salam:

n.salam@icj-cij.org

10. Judge Patrick Lipton Robinson :

p.robinson@icj-cij.org

11. Judge Dalveer Bhandari:

d.bhandari@icj-cij.org

12. Judge Julia Sebutinde:

j.sebutinde@icj-cij.org

13. Judge Xue Hanqin:

h.xue@icj-cij.org

14. Judge Vice President Kirill Gevorgian :

k.gevorgian@icj-cij.org

15. Judge President Joan E. Donoghue:

j.donoghue@icj-cij.org

[arrahmahcom]

ICJ Tuntut “Israel” Cegah Genosida, tapi Tidak Perintahkan Gencatan Senjata

DEN HAAG (Arrahmah.id) – Mahkamah Internasional (ICJ) telah meminta Israel untuk mengambil segala tindakan sesuai dengan kewenangannya untuk mencegah genosida dan hasutan untuk melakukan genosida, namun Mahkamah Internasional menahan diri untuk tidak menyerukan gencatan senjata dan memerintahkan “Israel” untuk menghentikan serangannya di Gaza. Joan Donoghue, presiden ICJ, mengatakan: “Pengadilan…

[catdotjpeg]

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ordered Israel to take all measures to prevent genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, in a ruling on Friday that stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire but otherwise marked a momentous acknowledgment of the plausibility of South Africa’s claims of genocide against Israel. ICJ President Joan Donoghue read out the decision, which stated that the court had jurisdiction to rule in this case – likely paving the way for a longer-term case – and issued provisional measures ordering Israel to report back within one month to show it had taken measures to protect Palestinians, punish incitement to genocide, and allow in humanitarian aid in Gaza.  South Africa, which brought the case in front of the court, will be allowed to respond to Israel’s report in front of the ICJ, and potentially challenge its claims if it believes Tel Aviv is not abiding by the court’s order. Mondoweiss will be delving more in-depth into the ruling and its ramifications. Israel has repeatedly made clear since the initial hearings on the case earlier this month that it would not abide by the ICJ ruling – but the decision will likely make it more difficult for Tel Aviv to argue its case on the international stage, and put its staunchest ally, the United States, which is also a signatory to the Genocide Convention, in an even more uncomfortable position. Controversial American lawyer Alan Dershowitz, who had initially been considered to help represent Israel in front of the ICJ, had said earlier this week that Israel had made a mistake in recognizing the court’s legitimacy in the first place.

“It is not a real court. It’s a court whose judges are picked by their countries, it reflects foreign policy, not rule of law, not judiciary,” Dershowitz told Ynet on Wednesday. “I think that Israel made a mistake in submitting to the jurisdiction of the court, and it would make a mistake in complying with any ruling of the court. This is one of the most absurd abuses of the judicial process in modern history.”

“If the decision is in favour of provisional measures, there will be an implementation crisis and there will be a tug of war as to whether this ruling will be implemented and enforced and complied with by Israel,” Richard Falk, former UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, told Al Jazeera ahead of the ruling, as he called the situation in Gaza “the most transparent genocide in human history.” On Friday, the Palestinian Authority welcomed the ruling.

“The ICJ judges assessed the facts and the law. They ruled in favor of humanity and international law,” the P.A. Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement. “The ICJ order is an important reminder that no state is above the law. It should serve as a wake-up call for Israel and actors who enabled its entrenched impunity.” “Palestine reaffirms its eternal gratitude to the people and government of South Africa for taking this bold step of active solidarity and will continue to work closely with South Africa and other countries to ensure that justice is served,” the statement added. Hamas also welcomed the decision, with senior official Sami Abu Zuhri telling Reuters that it was isolating Israel and exposing its crimes in Gaza. “We call for forcing the occupation to implement the court’s decisions,” he adds. South Africa meanwhile welcomed Friday’s news as a “decisive victory.” 

“Today marks a decisive victory for the international rule of law and a significant milestone in the search for justice for the Palestinian people,” its government said in a statement.  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a video statement that his country was fighting a “just war like no other,” while continuing to claim Israel was abiding by international law. The Israeli Foreign Ministry repeated its claims that the case at the ICJ was “baseless.”

“The charge of genocide levelled against Israel at the International Court of Justice is false and outrageous. It constitutes a shameful exploitation of the Genocide Convention that is not only wholly unfounded in fact and law, but morally repugnant,” spokesman Lior Haiat wrote. Far-right Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir issued his own eloquent response to serious allegations of genocide.

“Hague-schmague,” he wrote on X.

-- From "‘Operation Al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 112" from Mondoweiss, 26 Jan 2024

[sheakspeare]

Judge Joan E. Donoghue is quoting World Health Organization (WHO) reports on the destruction of Gaza and the impact of Palestinians in the Strip.

She's also acknowledging dehumanizing rhetoric used by a number of senior Israeli officials, including defence minister Yoav Gallant's order of a complete siege of Gaza City, saying 'we are fighting human animals'.

[nsomniacsdream]

Full text

U.N. court says Gaza genocide is 'plausible,' but does not order cease-fire

Updated January 26, 202410:23 AM ET

By

Fatima Al-Kassab

President Joan Donoghue speaks at the International Court of Justice prior to the verdict announcement in the genocide case against Israel, brought by South Africa, in The Hague on Friday.

Remko De Waal/ANP/AFP via Getty Images

LONDON — The International Court of Justice has found it is "plausible" that Israel has committed acts that violate the Genocide Convention. In a provisional order delivered by President Joan Donoghue, the court said Israel must ensure "with immediate effect" that its forces not commit any of the acts prohibited by the convention.

Donoghue said the court cannot now make a final determination on whether Israel is guilty of genocide. But she said given the deteriorating situation in Gaza the court has jurisdiction to order measures to protect Gaza's population from further risk of genocide.

Donoghue outlined the provisional measures and how each judge voted. The court voted 15 votes to two on the order that Israel must take all measures in its power to stop anything in relation to genocide in Gaza. By 16 votes to 1, the court voted that Israel needs to take all measures within its powers to prevent and punish those involved with inciting genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

Also by a vote of 16 to 1, the court said that Israel must take "immediate and effective" measures to ensure the provision of urgently needed humanitarian aid and basic services.

The court also ordered Israel to take effective measures to prevent destruction and ensure preservation of any evidence related to the charge of genocide. The court gave Israel 30 days to report back on measures taken.

In a video released by his office after the court's decision, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, "Like every country, Israel has an inherent right to defend itself. The vile attempt to deny Israel this fundamental right is blatant discrimination against the Jewish state, and it was justly rejected. ... We will continue to do what is necessary to defend our country and defend our people."

Before delivering the decision, Donoghue read statements from Israeli officials which she said made South Africa's case plausible. She also gave a bleak assessment of the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.

"In the Court's view, the facts and circumstances mentioned above are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible. This is the case with respect to the right of the Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts identified in Article III, and the right of South Africa to seek Israel's compliance with the latter's obligations under the Convention," the court decision said.

The Palestinian Authority's Foreign Ministry issued a statement welcoming the ruling, thanking South Africa and saying, "The ICJ judges assessed the facts and the law. They ruled in favor of humanity and international law. ... No state is above the law."

3 things to know about the genocide case against Israel in The Hague

Middle East crisis — explained

3 things to know about the genocide case against Israel in The Hague

In response to the decision, the South African government said, the ICJ "has determined that Israel's actions in Gaza are plausibly genocidal and has indicated provisional measures on that basis. For the implementation of the international rule of law, the decision is a momentous one."

South Africa brought the genocide complaint to the International Court of Justice in The Hague in December. During two days of hearings from both sides this month, South Africa asked the court to issue provisional measures which would require Israel to immediately halt its assault on Gaza.

Friday's provisional order from the ICJ is not a verdict on South Africa's allegation of genocide — that judgment is not expected for years. Israel strongly denies the accusation of genocide and has called it "baseless."

Although the court's ruling is legally binding, it is not enforceable. In comments made after the ICJ held two days of hearings on South Africa's allegations, Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said in a speech, "No one will stop us, not The Hague."

However, this order may put pressure on Israel's allies and military backers — including the U.S., which had previously described South Africa's case as "meritless."

This is only the second time a state has tried to litigate a charge of genocide against another. In 2019, The Gambia took Myanmar to the ICJ, accusing it of a genocide against the Rohingya. In that case, the court approved emergency measures to protect Myanmar's Muslim Rohingya minority, which Myanmar ignored.

South Africa's charge against Israel

Palestinians inspect destruction after an Israeli bombing of Omar bin Abdul-Aziz Mosque in Rafah, Gaza Strip, on Thursday.

Abed Rahim Khatib/Anadolu via Getty Images

Two weeks ago, in nearly three hours of testimony, lawyers and experts on behalf of South Africa presented evidence arguing that Israel's bombardment of the Gaza strip — which has now continued for more than 100 days — has now gone beyond a war on Hamas and become a war on all 2 million Palestinians besieged in the Gaza strip.

Israel's bombardment of the Gaza strip has so far killed more than 26,000 people — approximately 1% of the prewar population — according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Israel's offensive is in response to the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, in which 1,200 people were killed and more than 240 taken hostage, according to Israeli officials.

"This killing is nothing short of destruction of Palestinian life," South African lawyer Adila Hassim told the court.

Hassim presented a list of "genocidal acts" that she accused Israel of perpetrating against Palestinians in Gaza. This included what she called the "mass" and indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians, food blockades and the wholesale destruction of Gaza's healthcare system and infrastructure.

Hassim said the Israeli military dropped 2,000-pound bombs onto areas declared safe by Israel, including refugee camps.

As a result, she said, more than 1,800 families in Gaza have lost multiple family members, and 85% of all Palestinians in Gaza have been forced to flee their homes.

"It is inflicted deliberately. No one is spared. Not even newborn babies. The scale of Palestinian child killings in Gaza is such that U.N. chiefs have described it as a 'graveyard for children,'" Hassim said.

"Entire multi-generational families will be obliterated," Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh, an Irish lawyer who is supporting South Africa's legal team, told the court. She warned that yet more children would be orphaned by what she called "Israel's genocidal assault on the Palestinian population in Gaza."

She said that Israel's actions in Gaza had led to the need for a new acronym, "WCNSF - Wounded Child No Surviving Family."

Hassim told the court that "genocides are never declared in advance," but that Israel's actions over the past three months showed a "systematic pattern of conduct" that she argued was enough proof of genocidal intent.

The South African legal team also argued that genocidal intent is shown not only in the way in which Israel has conducted its campaign in Gaza, but also in comments made by Israeli officials and leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Another lawyer in the South Africa delegation, Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, pointed to a comment from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from late October, when he urged Israeli soldiers to "remember what Amalek has done to you." Ngcukaitobi said that this was a reference to a biblical command calling for the destruction of an entire group.

"The destruction of Palestinian life is articulated state policy," Ngcukaitobi added.

Israel's defense

Israel in turn accused South Africa of presenting a "profound distorted" view of hostilities, arguing that it was "barely distinguishable" from that of Hamas.

Israel presented its defense at the ICJ a day after the court heard South Africa's case. In Israel's opening arguments, lawyer Tal Becker said that Hamas was to blame — directly or indirectly — for Palestinian civilian deaths.

Becker called South Africa's application to the court to issue a provisional measure ordering a cease-fire an "unconscionable request" that "seeks to thwart Israel's inherent right to defend itself."

The Israeli presentation acknowledged the suffering of civilians in Gaza but insisted it had no genocidal intent. The high civilian death toll, Israel argued, was the consequence of Hamas waging war among non-combatants.

Becker told the court that it was "impossible to understand the armed conflict in Gaza without appreciating the nature of the threat that Israel is facing."

"If there have been acts that may be characterized as genocidal, then they have been perpetrated against Israel," he said, referring to the stated goal of Hamas to destroy the Jewish state.

none of us expected much from the icj and all of us know israel would never abide by international law even if the ruling was more decisive anyway but really it's so fucking aggravating that these motherfuckers just said "we can't say it's a genocide, but israel has committed several acts that fall under article 2 of the genocide convention, with overwhelming evidence of genocidal intent which we have READ ALOUD IN THIS RULING but yeah let's wait a month from now and see what israel's report is like hopefully they've stopped slaughtering people to extinction or exile by then🤗🥰" and if they don't, which they definitely won't? would it be considered a genocide a month from now, after israel prove to us for the millionth time how little of consequence international law is to them? will you finally say it's a genocide when another couple thousand palestinian children starve to death or get obliterated by airstrikes? if so, what gives? what changed? the genocidal acts, the genocidal intent was there from the beginning and you said it with your own tongues