UN chief says Palestine will join int'l court on April 1

[webfact]

UN chief says Palestine will join int'l court on April 1
By EDITH M. LEDERER

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said late Tuesday that the state of Palestine will join the International Criminal Court on April 1, a high-stakes move that will enable the Palestinians to pursue war-crimes charges against Israel.

The Palestinians submitted the documents ratifying the Rome Statute that established the court last Friday, the last formal step to accepting the jurisdiction of the world's permanent war crimes tribunal. The U.N. said the secretary-general would review the paperwork.

In a statement posted on the U.N.'s treaty website, the secretary-general announced his acceptance of the documents saying "the statute will enter into force for the State of Palestine on April 1, 2015" in accordance with the court's procedures. He said he was "acting in his capacity as depositary" for the documents of ratification.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed documents to join the ICC a day after the U.N. Security Council rejected a resolution on Dec. 30 that would have set a three-year deadline for the establishment of a Palestinian state on lands occupied by Israel.

Joining the ICC is part of a broader Palestinian strategy to pressure Israel into withdrawing from the territories and agreeing to Palestinian statehood. Abbas has been under heavy domestic pressure to take stronger action against Israel after a 50-day war between the Jewish state and militants in Gaza over the summer, tensions over holy sites in Jerusalem, and the failure of the last round of U.S.-led peace talks.

The Palestinian decision to join the ICC has already sparked retaliation from Israel which froze the transfer of more than $100 million in tax funds collected for the Palestinians on Saturday. It promised tougher action on Sunday.

The United States also opposed the move, calling it an obstacle to reaching a permanent peace agreementl that would give the Palestinians an independent state. The Obama administration said Monday it was reviewing its annual $440 million aid package to the Palestinians because of the decision to join the ICC.

While Palestinian membership in the ICC doesn't automatically incur U.S. punishment, any Palestinian case against Israel at the court would trigger an immediate cutoff of U.S. financial support under American law.

Palestinian Ambassador Riyad Mansour said last week that the Palestinians are seeking to raise alleged crimes committed by Israel, including during last summer's war in Gaza. He said the Palestinians will also seek justice for Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory, which he said constitute "a war crime" under the Rome statute.

An ICC investigation could also lead to possible war crimes charges against Palestinians, but Mansour said the Palestinians don't fear any possible action by the court.

The ICC said the Palestinians submitted a document to the court's registrar, Herman von Hebel, in The Hague, Netherlands on Jan. 1 stating that Palestine accepts the jurisdiction of the ICC starting June 13 — about a month before the Gaza war started.

The International Criminal Court was created to prosecute individual perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Palestine will become the 123rd member.

But in Monday's press release, the court stressed that accepting the jurisdiction of the ICC "does not automatically trigger an investigation." ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda must determine whether the criteria under the statute for opening an investigation have been met, it said.

The secretary-general also approved Palestinian documents joining 16 other international treaties, conventions and agreements on Tuesday night.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-01-08

[webfact]

U.S. says Palestinians not "eligible" to join ICC
English.news.cn

WASHINGTON, Jan. 8 (Xinhua) -- The United States insisted on Wednesday that the Palestinians are not "eligible" to join the International Criminal Court (ICC), even as the Palestinians' admission is slated for April 1.

"The United States does not believe that the state of Palestine qualifies as a sovereign state and does not recognize it as such, and does not believe that it is eligible to accede to the Rome Statute," State Department spokeswoman Jennifer Psaki said at a daily news briefing.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed on joining 20 treaties and agencies on Dec. 31, including the Rome Statute under which the ICC was set up, after the UN Security Council rejected a draft resolution on ending the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has accepted the ICC request and the admission will take effect on April 1, a move that could lead to possible war crime complaints against Israel.

The Palestinians have asked the ICC to investigate war crimes committed by Israel during the 50-day Gaza War in July and August last year, in which nearly 2,200 Palestinians were killed, including more than 400 children, according to UN information.

Full story: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2015-01/08/c_133903679.htm

-- Xinhua 2015-01-08

[MikeOboe57]

If this means that we will finally see the masterminds behind 40 years of Palestinian terror against western civilians brought to trial (Munich 1972, "Landshut", "Achille Lauro", just to name a few), then I am all for it.

[billd766]

*OP edited out -- There is no need to quote the entire OP*

Under what "rights" does the US claim theat the Palestinians are not a sovereign state?

Many other sovereign states in the UN have accepted them.

Neither the USA nor Israel are signatories of the ICC so who are they to make the statement?

Why are they "afraid" of joining the ICC?

[Credo]

So, you don't even have to be a country to join?

They might want to be careful. I can't wait for the Kurds to decide they want to join. There was Kurdistan at one point in time.

I am sure there are others that will be happy to join as well.

[Jay Sata]

The only people who fear a court are the guilty.

[oneday]

This is probably going to end up being one hell of a mess.

[bangon04]

Did they choose the date of April 1st after full consultation with the Israelis?

[Asiantravel]

Israel Prepares to Cut Electricity to Palestinians

http://wtfrly.com/2015/01/07/israel-prepares-to-cut-electricity-to-palestinians/#.VK5T6iwxW1I

[Ulysses G.]

The only people who fear a court are the guilty.

Then the Palestinians are not smart enough to realize that shooting rockets at civilians, sponsoring suicide bombers and using your own people as human shields are all war crimes.

[Morch]

If this means that we will finally see the masterminds behind 40 years of Palestinian terror against western civilians brought to trial (Munich 1972, "Landshut", "Achille Lauro", just to name a few), then I am all for it.

From the OP:

The ICC said the Palestinians submitted a document to the court's registrar, Herman von Hebel, in The Hague, Netherlands on Jan. 1 stating that Palestine accepts the jurisdiction of the ICC starting June 13 — about a month before the Gaza war started.

[Asiantravel]

Geoffrey Robertson Q.C.

Gaza: how international law could work to punish war crimes

Obviously it is “disproportionate” if 1,400 (mainly civilians) are killed on one side, as against 50 soldiers on the other. But in law the issue is defined as whether “collateral damage” to civilians by an attack on a military target (for example a school where rockets are stored) is “excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. This allows commanders to think they can get away with shelling the school because the destruction of the rockets gives their side a concrete advantage. A court conviction would bring home to them that no “military advantage” can ever justify the mass murder of children.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/01/gaza-international-law-war-crimes-security-council

Edited January 8, 2015 by Asiantravel

[Morch]

*OP edited out -- There is no need to quote the entire OP*

Under what "rights" does the US claim theat the Palestinians are not a sovereign state?

Many other sovereign states in the UN have accepted them.

Neither the USA nor Israel are signatories of the ICC so who are they to make the statement?

Why are they "afraid" of joining the ICC?

Being accepted as a full member in the UN entails passing the vote by the UNSC first. The Palestinians currently have non-member observer state status only, with their first attempt at passing a resolution in the UNSC being unsuccessful. They may give it another go, as composition of the UNSC changed in their favor. Any of the five permanent members may use its veto right to block this, though. Being individually recognized by full-membership countries does not replace this process.

Not sure how you define sovereign, but both due to the Israeli occupation and the Fatah-Hamas split, the ability of the PA to rule its supposed territory is rather limited.

There can be objections raised as to the legitimacy of the Palestinian application even without parties complaining being members themselves. Such objections may carry less moral or public opinion weight, but are still legitimate, if they are based on UN procedures and rules. Not an expert on all the legal details, I'm afraid, but as far as I understand, there is enough diplomatic space to maneuver either way.

The USA got a long history of not placing itself under submission to foreign bodies such as the ICC. Judging from the way some UN bodies conduct themselves, fears that the ICC could be used as a biased tool cannot be totally discounted. Worth mentioning that both Russia and China are not members as well.

[Morch]

The only people who fear a court are the guilty.

Or those who suspect that the court may not be even-handed.

[notmyself]

The only people who fear a court are the guilty.

Then the Palestinians are not smart enough to realize that shooting rockets at civilians, sponsoring suicide bombers and using your own people as human shields are all war crimes.

The Palestinians are being systematically destroyed so why not take Israel who is equally culpable with them? Israel wishes to deny to the Palestinians the very same method they used to become Israel and if anyone complains they are accuses of anti-Semitism.

Edited January 8, 2015 by notmyself

[up-country_sinclair]

Another step on the road to justice.

By the way, it's very interesting to witness the reactions of those who support the occupiers now that there will be consequences for the myriad barbarous crimes committed by Israel.

Edited January 8, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[Morch]

Geoffrey Robertson Q.C.

Gaza: how international law could work to punish war crimes

Obviously it is “disproportionate” if 1,400 (mainly civilians) are killed on one side, as against 50 soldiers on the other. But in law the issue is defined as whether “collateral damage” to civilians by an attack on a military target (for example a school where rockets are stored) is “excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. This allows commanders to think they can get away with shelling the school because the destruction of the rockets gives their side a concrete advantage. A court conviction would bring home to them that no “military advantage” can ever justify the mass murder of children.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/01/gaza-international-law-war-crimes-security-council

The article ignores the distinct possibility that not all instances will be viewed as meriting investigation, or that even then, not all will end with clear convictions.

While it is certainly an interesting question whether Israeli will cooperate with an ICC investigation/proceedings (which is a wee bit different than not cooperating with the likes of the UNHCR "investigations"), one got to wonder how the Palestinians might react if things do not go decisively their way at court. Another possible issue would be Hamas's cooperation and reaction if it comes under the spotlight and/or found to be bearing guilt.

[Mosha]

April Fools Day, how appropriate.

[Ulysses G.]

The only people who fear a court are the guilty.

Then the Palestinians are not smart enough to realize that shooting rockets at civilians, sponsoring suicide bombers and using your own people as human shields are all war crimes.

The Palestinians are being systematically destroyed so why not take Israel who is equally culpable with them? Israel wishes to deny to the Palestinians the very same method they used to become Israel and if anyone complains they are accuses of anti-Semitism.

Wrong. The Palestinians agreed to the Oslo accords which means that they can not bypass negotiations with Israel and go to the UN directly. If they do so, they negate agreements that benefit them. By the way, the Palestinians were offered the same deal that Israel was by the UN. They turned it down, declared war on Israel and LOST. That is why they are in the pickle that they are today.

[Asiantravel]

At the very least as the rest will be able to tune in to watch and listen to the proceedings live on television and as more and more facts are exposed it will further contribute to educating people around the world regarding Israel's horrific and callous attitude and actions.

[rickirs]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

*OP edited out -- There is no need to quote the entire OP*

Under what "rights" does the US claim theat the Palestinians are not a sovereign state?

Many other sovereign states in the UN have accepted them.

Neither the USA nor Israel are signatories of the ICC so who are they to make the statement?

Why are they "afraid" of joining the ICC?

Maybe the USA thinks it has 440 million "rights" to say no.

[rickirs]

"An ICC investigation could also lead to possible war crimes charges against Palestinians, but Mansour said the Palestinians don't fear any possible action by the court."

Correct. If there are successful war crimes charges against the Palestinians, THEN they'll claim they are not a State.

[samuibruno]

what about the Palestinians horrific and callous attitude and actions?

[ggt]

This will certainly usher in a new set of complications to an already convoluted mess in that area...

[Lissos]

what about the Palestinians horrific and callous attitude and actions?

It too will be illuminated by this spotlight, much to their horror.

It appears they are still gambling that they will be able to dictate the direction the lamp shines.

Wrong!

[arjunadawn]

*OP edited out -- There is no need to quote the entire OP*

Under what "rights" does the US claim theat the Palestinians are not a sovereign state?

Many other sovereign states in the UN have accepted them.

Neither the USA nor Israel are signatories of the ICC so who are they to make the statement?

Why are they "afraid" of joining the ICC?

There may be an emotional imperative to allow the Palestinians in, but as a state they lack a key component which I believe is required under international law- occupation of lands, and control of lands. They do not have control; they are not a state.

[Morch]

At the very least as the rest will be able to tune in to watch and listen to the proceedings live on television and as more and more facts are exposed it will further contribute to educating people around the world regarding Israel's horrific and callous attitude and actions.

Only if one believes that all of the Palestinian appeals will be investigated and brought to a trial. Only if one believes that the details presented will actually support the Palestinian version of events.

Of course, for some it is important to celebrate what may come to pass as a forgone conclusion. Then there can be the fake indignation show and allegations court is biased when things fail to go exactly as touted.

[Morch]

what about the Palestinians horrific and callous attitude and actions?

It too will be illuminated by this spotlight, much to their horror.

It appears they are still gambling that they will be able to dictate the direction the lamp shines.

Wrong!

No, they could be actually be spot on. Depends on who are "they".

The ones handling the application to join the ICC and will handle future interactions, if any, are the Fatah, wearing the hat of the PA. As they were not directly involved in the fighting, any court ruling against either Israel or the Hamas would be beneficial for them, each in a different way.

Relatively non-partisan legal interpretations seem to indicate that pining the PA with the responsibility (or partial responsibility) for the Hamas's actions could be tricky. Not a legal expert though, and obviously there are different interpretations. Quite clear that it isn't as straightforward as sometimes claimed.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Morch

[ggold]

Geoffrey Robertson Q.C.

Gaza: how international law could work to punish war crimes

Obviously it is “disproportionate” if 1,400 (mainly civilians) are killed on one side, as against 50 soldiers on the other. But in law the issue is defined as whether “collateral damage” to civilians by an attack on a military target (for example a school where rockets are stored) is “excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”. This allows commanders to think they can get away with shelling the school because the destruction of the rockets gives their side a concrete advantage. A court conviction would bring home to them that no “military advantage” can ever justify the mass murder of children.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/01/gaza-international-law-war-crimes-security-council

The article ignores the distinct possibility that not all instances will be viewed as meriting investigation, or that even then, not all will end with clear convictions.

While it is certainly an interesting question whether Israeli will cooperate with an ICC investigation/proceedings (which is a wee bit different than not cooperating with the likes of the UNHCR "investigations"), one got to wonder how the Palestinians might react if things do not go decisively their way at court. Another possible issue would be Hamas's cooperation and reaction if it comes under the spotlight and/or found to be bearing guilt.

I doubt Hamas will be lodging any complaints at the ICC, But I wonder if the PA are hoping to bring claims against Israel over "protective edge" on behalf of Hamas. The fact that there was a unity government between Hamas and the PA since April 2014. In my view that makes the PA as responsible as Hamas for their Hamas' actions.

I also think that there is a possibility that the ICC will be discredited. If it allows itself to be dragged into what is really a political move by the PA which is not necessarily designed to bring Israel up on war crimes, But just to possibly make it harder for Israeli politicians to travel freely, depending on whether the PA can actually get something to stick.

What it does for any future peace deal is anyone's guess. In that regard I can't help think Abbas is banging nails into the coffin that was Palestine. Because one thing is for sure Israel won't be forced into giving up land Just because Abbas wants it.

[englishoak]

The only people who fear a court are the guilty.

Then the Palestinians are not smart enough to realize that shooting rockets at civilians, sponsoring suicide bombers and using your own people as human shields are all war crimes.

Yes and thats excellent but it works two ways and its high time Israel was held to account for its atrocities as well.

It'll become a mess very quickly no doubt but its a move in vaguely the right direction, at least in principle