Mark Clark MBE. W.S. FRSA.’s Post

The last few British Tory Governments repeatedly ignored, sought to diminish, and fought tooth & nail against both British and International law across a wide variety of policy areas. In their UK - Israel bilateral treaty of 21 March 2023 they formally committed the British State to side with Israel against the international community, specifically the United Nations and World Courts ICJ & ICC. Specifically to deny the mountain of independent evidence that Israel rules over the Palestinian people through an illegal & immoral system of apartheid, both inside Israel and the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories. Specifically with the purpose of promoting Israeli rights and thereby diminishing Palestinian rights to exist. Abhorrent policy and subsequent actions played out by the UK Government through abstaining from ceasefire votes at the UN Security Council, challenging ICC jurisdiction over the illegally Occupied Palestinian Territories and the occupier Israel. All underpinned by full UK Government direct military, financial, intelligence and propaganda support to the genocidal Netanyahu regime and IOF war criminals. The key question of Sir Kid Starver's Keir Starmer entire Prime Ministership has already arrived through the ICJ non-binding advisory opinion. Will he now reverse the UK policy towards the illegally occupying Zionist entity formally known as the State of Israel? Will he tare up the UK - Israel bilateral treaty which has and continues to have a grave enabling consequence on the Gaza Genocide? Will he apologise for his failure to PROTECT the innocent Palestinian civilians from the GENOCIDE and wider Apartheid System persecution, by abstaining and / or his Labour Party voting against the proposed King's Speech Amendment 8 CEASEFIRE call of 15 November 2023? Noting the courageous and morally upstanding 58 Labour Members of Parliament who voted in accordance with their legal obligations for the immediate CEASEFIRE and release of hostages. Will he now acknowledge that it was wrongful for him personally to publicly support the genocidal Netanyahu regime siege of Gaza denying the Palestinian civilian population provision of water, electricity, food, and fuel? Will the British Prime Minister, an expert practitioner of the law, now demonstrate UK Government commitment to the Rule of Law on both domestic matters and international commitments? Or will he now show his true colours? https://lnkd.in/e9Y87HG2

"Judgment challenges allies such as UK and US, which for years soft-pedalled on occupation of Palestinian territories The ICJ declared Israel’s long-term occupation of Palestinian territory “unlawful” and said it amounted to de facto annexation. The court called for Israel to rapidly quit the occupied territories and ruled Palestinians were due reparations for the harm of 57 years of an occupation that systematically discriminates against them. And in its many parts, the judgment represents a devastating defeat for Israel in the world court. While numerous UN reports and resolutions in the general assembly have made the same point, the ICJ ruling, by virtue of being made in reference to treaty and individual laws, represents a judgment that will be hard to ignore. The ruling also stood as a rebuke to Israel’s argument that the ICJ had no standing to consider the issue on the grounds that UN resolutions, as well as bilateral Israeli-Palestinian agreements, had established that the correct framework for resolving the conflict should be political, not legal. Effectively rejecting that argument, the court asserted that international law applies regardless of the decades of failed political efforts to reach a lasting peace agreement, not least as Israel has continued with its settlement-building. Taking half an hour to read, the ruling gathered together multiple strands of international law from the Geneva conventions to the Hague convention to make a case that has been obvious to Palestinians and to critics of Israeli policy in the international community for years. In summary it said that years of Israel’s own officially and self-described ambitions to build and settle in the occupied territories amounted to an intent to effectively annex territory against international law; that those policies were designed to benefit settlers and Israel, not the Palestinians living under military administration. Perhaps the most significant section was the judgment that “the transfer by Israel of settlers to the West Bank and Jerusalem as well as Israel’s maintenance of their presence, is contrary to article 49 of the 4th Geneva convention”. https://lnkd.in/gXuPsAVj #israel #gaza #palestine #icj

"The ICJ’s ruling that the occupation of Palestinian territory is unlawful is a sign of increasing Israeli isolation." A subheading from Al Jazeera Media Network. And I've got to say I agree, but I'm skeptical of change after watching Netanyahu receive multiple standing ovations from US Congress yesterday 🫣 For context: 💡 This is a ruling on a case that was brought to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2022. It IS NOT a ruling on the current action Israel is taking against Palestinians indiscriminately in Gaza and the West Bank. It was to determine whether the building and expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, the use of the area’s natural resources, the annexation and imposition of permanent control over lands and discriminatory policies against Palestinians violate international law. (SPOILER ALERT: they ruled that Israel is violating MULTIPLE international laws 🔥) SO, just what did the ICJ say? Well, too much to go over in this post, and there are better networks to go and view those points, but the headlines: 1️⃣ Israel has no right to sovereignty of the territories it occupies 2️⃣ Israel is violating international laws against acquiring territory by force 3️⃣ Israel is impeding Palestinians’ right to self-determination 4️⃣ Israel must end settlement construction immediately and existing settlements must be removed All-in-all? This is a very similar ruling to apartheid on the face of it. And the world should listen. But what does this mean for Israel's allies like the US 🇺🇸, UK 🇬🇧, and Germany 🇩🇪? The ICJ made it very clear that other nations were obliged not to “render aid or assistance in maintaining” Israel’s presence in the territory. Because these countries continue to export weapons to Israel and provide funding to various Israeli entities, they are also rendered complicit in the violations of international law. 🎉 This is a huge moment for Palestinian rights on the international stage. Having the most important world court rule in favour of Palestine and its peoples, and rule against the apartheid regime of zionist Israel, should be a catalyst for huge systemic change. 🤔 But, will it change anything? Well, the ruling itself is non-binding. And now the United Nations Security Council must come to a decision as to what action, if any, to take. 🤮 And seeing as Netanyahu was welcomed into US Congress with open arms yesterday, I think it's highly unlikely we're going to see rapid change on this matter. But... 👂🏻 The people have heard. 📣 The people have spoken. 👨🏼⚖️ International law is with them. Interesting times we live in when the oppressed become the oppressors. #Apartheid #InternationalLaw #GlobalPolitics #GeoPolitics #Politics Sources: International Court of Justice (ICJ) / Al Jazeera Media Network / BBC News / Financial Times

🙌The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Occupation of Palestinian Territories:🙌 Key Takeaways🙌 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has delivered a significant advisory opinion concerning Israel's occupation of the Palestinian Territory, declaring it illegal and mandating an end to this occupation. Key Conclusions: 1. Unlawful Occupation: Israel’s 57-year occupation of Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem, is illegal. 2. Immediate Actions Required: Israel must end its occupation and halt new settlement activities, evacuating all settlers. 3. Reparations: Israel is obligated to make reparations for damages caused to affected individuals. 4. Global Obligations:States and international organizations must not recognize or support the legality of the occupation. 5. Further UN Actions: The UNGA and UNSC should consider additional measures to end Israel’s occupation promptly. Issues Addressed: - The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. - The impact of Israel’s prolonged occupation and discriminatory policies. ICJ’s Observations: - Occupation should be temporary and cannot transfer sovereignty. - Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem violate international law. - Israel's annexation attempts are illegal under international law. - Discriminatory legislation by Israel against Palestinians violates multiple international conventions. - Israel's actions undermine Palestinians’ right to self-determination. Implications: - States and international bodies must act against the illegal occupation. - The UNGA and UNSC should take decisive steps to end the occupation. Dissenting Opinion: Vice President Julia Sebutinde expressed that while the ICJ had jurisdiction, it should have refrained from rendering the opinion to maintain judicial integrity. This landmark opinion reinforces the international legal stance against prolonged occupation and calls for immediate and concerted efforts to address the situation. #InternationalLaw #ICJ #Palestine #Israel #HumanRights #SelfDetermination #UN #GlobalJustice

🇪🇺 🇮🇱 🇵🇸 ⚖ Article of Tovima English Edition on our action: "EC Pres. Von Der Leyen Sued for Complicity in War Crimes in Israel by GIPRI" The complaint was filed by the GIPRI against the EC head at the International Criminal Court (ICC) on May 22. The Geneva International Peace Research Institute - GIPRI has accused the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen of complicity in war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. The complaint was filed by the GIPRI against the EC head at the International Criminal Court (ICC) on May 22. The announcement, supported by various human rights groups and prominent scholars and experts in international criminal law, urges the ICC Prosecutor to initiate investigations based on the information provided against von der Leyen. Complicity in War Crimes The complaint reads: “Reasonable grounds exist to believe that the unconditional support of the President of the European Commission to Israel – military, economic, diplomatic and political – has enabled war crimes and the ongoing genocide in Gaza” Support for Israel According to the complaint, the President of the European Commission has become complicit through a series of actions and omissions. “Mrs. Ursula von der Leyen has become complicit in violations of articles 6, 7, and 8 of the Rome Statute through a range of positive acts as well as omissions, in her official capacity as president of the European Commission. Positive acts include the following: − Military support to Israel: Mrs. von der Leyen, in her official capacity as president of the European Commission, has been instrumental in securing the provision of means, under the form of military support, to the IDF. During the period 2019-23, Israel has been the 3rd main recipient of weapons provided by an EU Member State, Germany, itself the 5th largest exporter of major arms in the world. 📰 Read more... / Source - Tovima English Edition : https://lnkd.in/eKgQ59N5 #europeancommisson #EuropeanUnion #EUCommission #UrsulavonderLeyen #InternationalLaw #humanrights #InternationalCriminalCourt #ICC #CPI #Gaza #Palestine

I wrote an article in Eurasia Review last week to answer questions on how filing an ICC arrest warrant could affect Min Aung Haling and how it could benefit the revolution. I was also asked to translate it into Burmese. I rewrote it because literal translations don't read well in Burmese. Irrawaddy published it. Understanding the Implications ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan has requested an arrest warrant for MAH, but it has not yet been issued. The charges relate to crimes against humanity, specifically deportation and persecution of the Rohingya population between August and December 2017. Even if granted, its immediate impact may be limited due to Myanmar’s non-member status in the ICC and the current power dynamics. However, potential consequences could still be significant: Travel Restrictions: If issued, MAH’s international travel may be restricted to non-ICC member states like China and Russia. Note, though, that Cambodia is the only current member of ICC in ASEAN. Asset Freezes: Countries may consider freezing assets belonging to MAH and his associates. Diplomatic Isolation: This request could further isolate MAH from international forums and negotiations. Increased Scrutiny: MAH’s inner circle, including his family, may face heightened scrutiny regarding their financial transactions and travel.

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)

📣 Ukraine must ratify the Rome Statute NOW – JOIN THE STATEMENT In its 2023 Ukraine Report , the European Commission in recommendation 140 emphasises the need to work towards the ratification of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and related documents. Although the Rome Statute is mentioned in various sections of the document, the recommendation only appears in the end, section “external affairs”. At the same time, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine in its decree No. 133 specifies the deadline for implementing this recommendation as “within one year after the termination or cancellation of the martial law”. (although it is recommended by the Commission to work on it “in the coming year”) We, representatives of non-governmental and human rights organisations, believe such a delay to be unjustified due to the absence of any statutory obstacles to ratification in Ukraine’s legislation. Ukraine’s reservations regarding the risks of holding Ukrainian military leadership accountable through the ICC mechanism should not be a reason for delay, as ratification does not affect decisions as to the prosecution of the perpetrators of the most serious international crimes. Each day of delay in ratification puts victims of war in an even more vulnerable position, as Ukraine becomes one day further away from: ❎ allowing the Rome Statute to become a catalyst for harmonisation of Ukrainian law with international criminal and humanitarian law (EU Commission considers it a matter of urgency in the Ukraine Report 2023) ❎ solidifying #Ukraine-ICC cooperation (not only with regards to the situation in Ukraine), making it resilient towards political fluctuations, as it happened in many other countries. ❎ becoming a proactive actor in strengthening international justice system, particularly when it comes to ensuring accountability for crime of aggression ❗ 2024 must become the year when Ukraine joins the #RomeStatute family, but only if all of us, particularly international partners, and even more so – the European Union, actually push Ukrainian authorities to walk the walk. The statement by Ukraine 5 AM Coalition, that unites 40+ Ukrainian #NGOs and individual experts, is open for signing and is already supported by some of the most prominent Ukrainian and international organisatons. 👉 Join the statement: https://lnkd.in/e_YXt-kU

Double standards on Palestine or pressure on Israel: ICJ ruling forces EU to rethink its passive two-state policy In July 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an Advisory Opinion on the legal consequences of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. It declared the occupation unlawful and called for its immediate end. The ICJ emphasized that all states are under an obligation not to assist in maintaining Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). Building on this Advisory Opinion, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution in September 2024 demanding that Israel end its unlawful presence in the OPT within 12 months. Israel is opposed to ending its illegal occupation. It also opposes the two-state solution. There is not even a pretence of a peace process. This new lack of ambiguity will unavoidably put Israel’s non-compliance in the spotlight. EU member states again split into three groups: those sympathetic to Palestinian rights, those supporting Israel, and those regularly abstaining on votes on the matter. During the Gaza war, the number of states sympathetic to Palestinian rights has increased. The basic choice for the EU is between rallying to apply meaningful pressure on Israel in the face of member state divisions, or playing for time. The latter risks jeopardizing the two-state solution as well as the credibility of the EU’s commitment to international law. International Court of Justice (ICJ) Finnish Institute of International Affairs - FIIA United Nations #israel #palestine #gaze #europe https://lnkd.in/eZskgWhe

Sobering read. 🚨 New ICJ Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Policies in the Occupied Palestinian Territory 🚨 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued a landmark advisory opinion addressing the legal consequences of Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. This opinion underscores the prolonged occupation, illegal settlement activities, de facto annexation, and discriminatory practices against Palestinians, all of which contravene international law. Key Highlights: 1. Prolonged Occupation: The occupation must benefit the local population and remain temporary. Israel’s extended control breaches international norms. 2. Settlement Policy: Settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem violate the Fourth Geneva Convention and alter the region’s demographics. 3. Annexation: De facto annexation of occupied territories defies the prohibition on acquiring territory by force. 4. Discrimination: Policies restricting movement, property demolition, and residence permits discriminate against Palestinians, violating human rights treaties. 5. Self-Determination: Israel’s actions impede Palestinian self-determination, a fundamental right under international law. Legal Consequences: • For Israel: Cease illegal activities, dismantle settlements, repeal discriminatory laws, and make reparations. • For Other States: Do not recognize the illegal situation; distinguish between Israeli and occupied territories in dealings. • For the UN: Continue addressing the legal status of the occupation and ensure compliance with international law. This advisory opinion, while non-binding, carries significant geopolitical implications. It reinforces international legal frameworks and highlights the need for a resolution that respects the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians. The global response will shape the future of peace efforts in the Middle East. 🌍 #Geopolitics #InternationalLaw #MiddleEast #ICJ #PeaceProcess #HumanRights #SelfDetermination