Internationella brottmålsdomstolen förklarar krig mot Israel

ICC förklarar krig mot Israel skriver professorn i juridik Avi Bell.
ICC har nu tydligt visat att den egentligen inte är någon domstol utan en politisk organisation som likt många andra politiska organisationer förklarat krig mot Israel.
ICC har med rösterna 2-1 röstat för att åklagaren Fatou Bensouda skall återuppta undersökningarna angående Israels krigsförbrytelser i samband med  Mavi Marmara incidenten 2010.
Fatou Bensouda hade redan för sju månader sedan lagt ner fallet och det är unikt i ICC:s historia att hon får order att återuppta fallet.
Det ser nu ut som om ICC likt FN:s råd för mänskliga rättigheter börjar specialbehandla Israel och tillämpa regler för Israel som inte tillämpas i några andra situationer. Därmed har ICC förlorat sin trovärdighet som en oberoende domstol som förtjänar respekt.
Ifall ICC skulle tillämpa samma regler på andra än Israel skulle domstolen översvämmas av tusentals fall som egentligen inte har någonting med domstolens verksamhet att göra.
Det finns tydligen väldigt få institutioner som man längre kan ha någon respekt för men en av domarna, Péter Kovács, verkar att vara en riktig domare med sinne för rättvisa.

Domaren Péter Kovács som röstade mot beslutet att återuppta fallet säger såhär (The Times of Israel):

"There is a strong dissent to the Pre-Trial Chamber’s ruling by Judge Péter Kovács that addresses the issues far more persuasively. First, Judge Kovács points out, it requires serious distortion of both the facts and the law to come to the conclusion that Israel committed any crimes at all. As Kovács noted, “The injuries sustained by the individuals on board the Mavi Marmara were apparently incidental to lawful action taken in conjunction with protection of the blockade.” Kovács observes, “a ship that is non-violent and not resisting may nonetheless be captured because of its attempting to breach a blockade. It is clear that not only was it the Mavi Marmara’s intention to breach the blockade, but this was its main purpose, as an act of protest. With this in mind, Israeli forces had a right to capture the vessel in protection of their blockade. … Faced with a potential breach of the blockade, the IDF acted out of necessity.”

Moreover even if Israeli actions in stopping the flotilla were criminal, they are outside the jurisdiction of the court, because they are of insufficient “gravity.” The “gravity” rule states that the Court should only pursue the largest and most serious international crimes. It is clear that if there were any Israeli crimes here, they were not of that magnitude.

As Kovács writes, “Upon comparison, for instance, between the number of deaths in the flotilla incident with the number of murders and serious injuries which prompted [the] Pre-Trial Chamber [] to authorize, by majority, the Prosecutor to open an investigation into the situation in the Republic of Kenya, one may observe a huge discrepancy. The violence in the Kenya situation resulted in the death of about 1,220 and the serious injury of 3,561 persons in six out of the eight Kenyan provinces.” Kovacs concludes that it is doubtful that “the death of ten persons and the injury of 55 others in the context described in the Prosecutor’s report and the Comoros submission is sufficiently grave to warrant the opening of an investigation into this situation.”

ICC orders its prosecutor to consider 'Mavi Marmara' war crimes allegations against IDF

The ICC declares war on Israel