Dr. Rachel George’s Post

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is conducting a landmark investigation into the military-led atrocities against Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslim minority, focusing on allegations of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Beginning in 2017, the Myanmar military’s brutal crackdown led to the displacement of over 700,000 Rohingya, many of whom fled to neighboring Bangladesh. Reports of mass killings, sexual violence, and destruction of villages have horrified the international community and brought the Rohingya crisis to the forefront of human rights concerns. However, Myanmar’s refusal to cooperate with the ICC presents significant challenges to the investigation. As Myanmar is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the court’s jurisdiction stems from the fact that part of the alleged crimes occurred in Bangladesh, a member state. This has sparked debates on the limits of international justice, particularly in situations where the targeted state refuses to acknowledge the court’s authority. The investigation also raises questions about the effectiveness of international law in protecting vulnerable populations. With limited enforcement mechanisms and reliance on state cooperation, the ICC faces obstacles in holding perpetrators accountable. Despite these challenges, the investigation into Myanmar is crucial, as it highlights the ongoing struggle to achieve justice for the Rohingya people and the broader issue of accountability for mass atrocities https://lnkd.in/gEeUxRiy

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is conducting a landmark investigation into the military-led atrocities against Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslim minority, focusing on allegations of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Beginning in 2017, the Myanmar military’s brutal crackdown led to the displacement of over 700,000 Rohingya, many of whom fled to neighboring Bangladesh. Reports of mass killings, sexual violence, and destruction of villages have horrified the international community and brought the Rohingya crisis to the forefront of human rights concerns. However, Myanmar’s refusal to cooperate with the ICC presents significant challenges to the investigation. As Myanmar is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the court’s jurisdiction stems from the fact that part of the alleged crimes occurred in Bangladesh, a member state. This has sparked debates on the limits of international justice, particularly in situations where the targeted state refuses to acknowledge the court’s authority. The investigation also raises questions about the effectiveness of international law in protecting vulnerable populations. With limited enforcement mechanisms and reliance on state cooperation, the ICC faces obstacles in holding perpetrators accountable.

It is trite to say that international law and respect for the rule of law are important. But word is cheap. Ultimately, what counts is action. In a recent ruling, the world's top court, the International Court of Justice, took a clear stand on Israel’s activities in Palestinian lands it has controlled since 1967. From the forced displacement and demolition of the homes of Palestinians, the building of settlements, the imposition of restrictions on the free movement of Palestinians, the annexation of large swathes of territory, and more, the ICJ ruled that Israeli conduct contravened international law. Alas, the ruling is non-binding and lacks enforcement power. Israel has also not faced sanctions or punitive actions from any of its allies, beyond nominal words of criticism, exposing the latter to charges of hypocrisy and double standards. If we want to see lasting and meaningful peace and justice in the Middle East, and the world writ large, meaningful actions must be taken to backstop and enforce international law. Taking a long-term enlightened approach, this is also the only feasible way to turn a loser in an international court judgment into a winner, as it too will reap the dividend that comes from peaceful development. #internationallaw #ruleoflaw #publicpolicy (Image: AFP via Getty Images)

The ruling of the International Court of Justice on Israel's practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, issued in July 2024, forces the European Union to rethink its passive two-state policy, Senior Research Fellow Timo R. Stewart says in the latest FIIA Briefing Paper. 🔎 Stewart discusses the significance of the ICJ ruling for the Israel-Palestine conflict and the now non-existent Middle East Peace Process, also addressing the ruling's current standing among EU member states. While the Gaza war has shifted member states towards affirming Palestinian rights, divisions remain, precluding joint positions on the matter. The EU's basic choice lies between rallying to apply meaningful pressure on Israel in the face of member state divisions, or attempting to avoid the immediate political stalemate by playing for time, Stewart writes. However, the latter option risks jeopardizing the two-state solution itself, as well as the credibility of the EU’s commitment to international law. ➡ Read the full publication: https://lnkd.in/gPegx36Q #FIIApublication #ICJ #InternationalCourtofJustice #Israel #Palestine #EuropeanUnion #internationalaffairs #internationallaw

⚖ 📣 International Criminal Court Issues Arrest Warrants for Hamas and Israeli Leaders. Insights by Alice Delhaye! 📣 🌐 In a significant development, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan has applied for arrest warrants against both Hamas and Israeli leaders for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed since October 2023. Khan's dual arrest warrant aims to demonstrate the ICC's commitment to impartiality in international humanitarian law, despite the intertwined dynamics of religion and politics in the Middle East. 🌐 📌 Key Takeaways: • Impartiality Effort: The ICC aims to apply international humanitarian law impartially, focusing on evidence and legal standards, despite accusations of bias. • Religion and Politics: The reactions from Hamas and Israel illustrate how religion and politics can be leveraged to challenge legal decisions. • Criticism from Both Sides: Both Hamas and Israel have criticised the ICC's decision, accusing it of religious bias. Hamas uses the narrative of jihad and martyrdom, while Israeli officials claim antisemitism. • Maintaining Legitimacy: The ICC's challenge is to uphold its legitimacy and effectiveness amid accusations of bias. 🔗 Read more about this unfolding situation and its implications for international law at the following link: https://lnkd.in/dtgdE8me 👉 Join the conversation! What’s your take on the ICC’s approach to handling these complex cases? #ICC #InternationalLaw #KarimKhan #Religion #Politcs #Law #Legitimacy #Hamas #Israel #ArrestWarrant #MiddleEastConflict #WarCrimes #CrimesAgainstHumanity

ICC's Request for Arrest Warrants: A Test for International Law and Accountability Dr. Turki Faisal Al Rasheed comments at #TheTimes 1 I am pleased to learn about Britain's new Labour-led government's decision not to question the ICC's jurisdiction in issuing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Galant. The International Criminal Court's request for these warrants marks a significant milestone in international criminal law, aiming to protect civilians and promote sustainable peace. However, the credibility of international law hinges not only on the ICC's ruling but also on the enforcement and compliance with the order. Israel should be concerned about potential impacts on investors and face ethical and legal considerations. Additionally, it remains to be seen whether European countries will enact legislation regarding the denial of the Palestinian genocide. The ICC's request and subsequent legal proceedings serve as a critical test for the credibility of international law, calling on all parties involved to uphold justice and ensure accountability. Labour worked hard for Jewish support. It should not take it for granted https://lnkd.in/dJ7CTSrR

Have a look at my most recent report for the Bloomsbury Intelligence and Security Insitute!

The ICJ judgement is clear. There is no future for Israel based on the narrative of its radicals.... anyone who claimed or wants to claim new territory exclusively for themselves will only find eternal war, violence and destruction, whereas the moderates at both sides hold the key to peace by non-violent interaction and dialog. The only way out of the conflict is thus to learn to live together as equals and to share the country as one union. Practically, it means in my opinion to go back to the times of Canaan and establish (democratic) autonomous local communities and flexibly spread them over the entire territory of Canaan. These autonomous communities can coexist and come together in two confederations of communities (nations), an Israeli and a Palestinian one, both sharing the country as a union, this is a hybrid outcome with elements of both a two- and a one-state solution. There is space for all cultural identities this way without any minority versus majority issues. Currently, such scenario seems very far fetched, but, the Israelis and Palestinians belong to Canaan and nobody outside is waiting for an(other) exodus of any of the two. www.canaan.community & www.pax.ngo & www.convergence.ngo

The Geneva International Peace Research Institute (GIPRI) has called on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate EU Commissioner Ursula von der Leyen for alleged complicity in war crimes in occupied Palestine, including Gaza. On May 22, GIPRI submitted a communication to the ICC, co-signed by Professor Richard Falk and TFF director Jan Oberg from the Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research (TFF). The communication urged the ICC to investigate the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, for her role in supporting war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories, including Gaza. GIPRI asserted that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Von der Leyen’s unconditional support for Israel—militarily, economically, diplomatically, and politically—has facilitated the commission of war crimes and the ongoing genocide in Gaza. They emphasized that prominent human rights organizations, along with respected academics and experts in international criminal law, endorse this call for an investigation. According to GIPRI, Von der Leyen is personally criminally responsible and liable for punishment for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed by the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) in the occupied Palestinian territories. The institute highlighted that she has "aided, abetted, and otherwise assisted in the commission or attempted commission of such crimes" by providing the means for these actions, in accordance with Article 25(3)(c) of the Rome Statute of the ICC. #InternationalJustice #HumanRights #OccupiedTerritories #IsraelPalestine #Accountability #FreePalestine #GazaUnderAttack #StoptheGenocide #BreaktheSilence #PalestinianLivesMatter #EndIsraeliApartheid #IsraelApartheidState #IsraeliWarCrimes #IsraelisTerroristState #InternationalCriminalCourt #UnitedNations #OIC

This time feels different? Today's 80-page judgement by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) #ICJ (the supreme court of the UN system) states that "Israel’s unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory" violates "the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people" and that "Israel has an obligation to put an end to those unlawful acts" and "an obligation to provide full reparation for the damage caused by its internationally wrongful acts to all natural or legal persons concerned" over the last 57 years of occupation. The ICJ has ruled against Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories before, but this feels different for two reasons: ➡  The judgement also makes crystal clear the obligations of all other countries: "In view of the character and importance of the rights and obligations involved, all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory." ➡  The timing, with the international community increasingly isolating Israel due to its conduct of the war in Gaza, and the court's assertion that international law applies regardless of the decades of failed political efforts to reach a lasting peace agreement: a clear rejection of the argument that the ICJ had no standing to consider the issue on the grounds that UN resolutions and bilateral Israeli-Palestinian agreements had established that the only valid framework for conflict resolution should be political, not legal. Does this open the way for sanctions now to be applied to Israeli ministers and institutions supporting continued occupation and settlements? Will it mean the closure of the US Embassy and other embassies in Jerusalem? https://lnkd.in/ei3sHsDa