This event came in parallel with the 55-regular session of the Human Rights Council
This event came in parallel with the 55-regular session of the Human Rights Council, and aimed to clarify the legal obligations of third states that ratified the Convention, in preventing genocide and implementing the International Court of Justice's orders on this matter.
The main participants were the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, and the Arab Network for National Human Rights Institutions.
The Secretary-General of the network, Mr. Sultan Al-Jamali, emphasized the importance of working to implement the orders of the International Court of Justice and to hold states accountable as third parties under international law, to prevent genocide in Gaza, stop aggression, unify efforts to open safe corridors for aid and relief agencies, and cooperate in holding Israeli war criminals and their accomplices accountable. He emphasized the continuous support of the network to the Independent Commission for Human Rights ( ICHR) in defending human rights in Palestine.
Ola Adawi, Head of International Relations at ICHR, stressed that holding this meeting is taking place at a critical moment where civilians in Gaza face harsh conditions, struggling to survive every second. She pointed out that even when the Security Council issued an immediate ceasefire resolution, the Israeli army continues its attacks on civilians and hospitals and added: “this ongoing aggression underscores the urgent need for our unity and the necessity for immediate and decisive international action.”
Adawi added that the Genocide Convention defines the obligations that must be fulfilled towards the international community as a whole, known as “erga omnes” obligations ( rights and obligations are owed towards all ) and to fulfill this principle, some countries, such as South Africa and Nicaragua, have gone beyond mere condemnation and voting in the General Assembly, calling on all countries to take similar steps, as all Court actions are binding based on the Court's own judgment conditions and according to the language in the United Nations Charter. However, as with many decisions issued by international bodies, implementation is always a challenge since implementation falls into the willingness of individual state.
Julia Benazouti, an expert in international criminal law and international courts at Leiden University, pointed out that there are two ways for states to intervene in proceedings under Article 63 of the Statute. States may seek to influence the Court's interpretation of a specific treaty such as the Genocide Convention in this case, but with this type of intervention, intervening states can only present arguments on the interpretation of the Genocide Convention and cannot present evidence before the Court to initiate claims against Israel, therefore the intervening state is bound by the interpretation that the Court will provide on the Genocide Convention and this is globally tested mechanism for intervention. The second type of intervention is provided by Article 62. This is what Nicaragua did in the case of South Africa. She added that under Article 62, intervention is not limited to presenting arguments on the interpretation of the Genocide Convention, but has a broader scope since the Court decides on the request, and it can be said to have wide authority
Omar Shaker, Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch for the Middle East and North Africa, stated that the monitoring and research conducted indicated that the Israeli government uses starvation as a means of war against civilians. He mentioned that according to a report issued by the organization in December, based on a policy set by Israeli officials and implemented by Israeli forces, the Israeli government deliberately obstructs the entry of humanitarian aid, withholding food, water, and fuel. These are separate war crimes consisting of collective punishment and deliberate obstruction, in addition to the deliberate destruction of agricultural land, as well as targeting bakeries, wheat mills, and water infrastructure, all of which are done according to statements from officials in the Israeli government, indicating that they do so as a strategy to achieve their goals during hostilities.
Rula Shadid, a human rights advocate in Palestine within the Justice and Accountability Initiative for Palestine, addressed the problem of Israeli perpetrators impunity, for example, Palestinians do not have jurisdiction over any Israeli who commits any crime in the occupied Palestinian territories. So if an Israeli identity holder commits a crime within the territories of 67, he cannot be trialed by Palestinian local courts, therefore we are left with only one judicial system which is the Israeli civil or military courts.
Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories since 1967, addressed the states, stating that the Genocide Convention emphasizes a commitment to prevention, not just to punish the crime of genocide. She added that: “we have already failed to prevent the crime, you have already failed to prevent it, lets it be clear.” It will be up to national courts to determine, or to the International Criminal Court to determine which member states that have provided military, financial, and political support to Israel while it was committing genocide at least since January 26th. Exactly, two months ago, the International Court of Justice notified all of you, so you cannot say you did not know!
A representative of the Luxembourg Diplomacy emphasized that the failure to stop human rights violations is the responsibility of states, not the law or institutions. The states do not do what they should do under the Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and under the obligations stated in different treaties.
28/3/2024
