It said the Israeli leader was covered by immunity rules that apply to states which are not a party to the ICC. Israel is not an ICC member.
“A state cannot be held to act in a way that is incompatible with its obligations in terms of international law with regards to immunities granted to states which are not party to the ICC,” the French statement said.
While this technicality may be true, it still seems like there should be a mechanism to hold people accountable for genocide that they don’t have to agree to beforehand. Saying “oh we can’t arrest him for crimes against humanity because he didn’t already agree to be arrested for them should he ever commit them” is a diplomatic copout and a moral failure of the international framework.
I’m sure this defense was used at Nuremberg after the second world war - unsuccessfully.
It isnt even technically true. The ICC has already clarified that this does not refer to the arrests of individual heads of states, but rather seizing states assets and the like.
Let me play devil’s advocate: who gets to say what is a human rights violation? And I am not talking about what happens on the ground, so put your pitchforks away. I’m talking about how it is defined in international law–what happens when a country like Russia and puppets defines gay rights as a human rights violation.
Point is, there is absolutely no way to get states to agree on any of this and if it was binding, then it is a power that can and will be abused for geopolitical points.
I think principles of law are only enforceable at a state level. Almost by definition of sovereignty. Above the state level, there can only be treaties and geopolitics.
You seem to misunderstand the concept of international law.
I’m talking about how it is defined in international law
There are various widely adopted treaties that give specific definitions for crimes against humanity. In this case, the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
Point is, there is absolutely no way to get states to agree on any of this
And yet 196 states, including France and Israel, have ratified these conventions (fully or in part). 125 states, including France but not Israel, have ratified the Rome statute and thus accept the ICC jurisdiction. States agree to these treaties because of diplomacy: you get taken less seriously if you don’t ratify these.
Of course, this system of international law breaks down when states flagrantly break it without repercussions, like Israel and France in this case.
I think when it comes to moves as flagrantly anti humanitarian as this it’s important to name names instead of letting the particular spineless cowards hide behind the name of their country.
Thanks… What did this guy do? Did he get to unilaterally make this call? (Serious, I have no idea how France works).
Dude what are you even smoking? What is “anti humanitarian” about respecting your democratically elected ally in your mind exactly?
The French have been very involved in the region, and part of the reason the current state of the Middle East is what it is.
Lay off the kush.
Of course, What is more humanitarian than defending the head of a genocidal colonial regime? It is common knowledge that the most moral way to deal with undesirables is to kill them. Democracies are so great that they get at least three free genocide passes.
...
/s
Maybe you should try smoking more kush if your head is so far up your ass you can’t see the forest for the trees.
The ayatollahs Middle East is a shit hole and incapable of self governance. Well stop when the Islamists cease.
You sound like a real peach.
“No my hero is immune to that attack!”
It’s almost as if international law doesn’t really exist. There is no enforcement mechanism.
The ICC is an inept antisemitic organization with clear goals towards harming the only liberal democratic nation in the Middle East.
Liberte, egalite, fraternite
What a fucking disgusting joke
“A state cannot be held to act in a way that is incompatible with its obligations in terms of international law with regards to immunities granted to states which are not party to the ICC,” the French statement said.
Anyone want to take a guess what percentage of ICC warrants are issued for people from countries like that? I suppose, this being France, that they actually will protect some random African warlord as well.
All the fashy euros going mask off for fellow fash zios.
