Internationella domstolen (ICJ) har gett ett uttalande om Israels krigsföring i Gaza och speciellt i Rafah.
En del har tolkat deras uttalande som att Israel inte har rätt att utföra krigsoperationer i Rafah, andra säger att Israel kan fortsätta med sina operationer.
Två av domstolens 15 domare röstade mot uttalandet och fyra av de fem domare som uttalat sig om domstolens beslut säger att Israel kan fortsätta med krigsoperationer i Rafah.
Tyvärr är nog inte domstolen trots namnet en riktig domstol utan den gör mer eller mindre politiska beslut.
Den som vill veta mera kan läsa analysen:
Confused by the ICJ’s decision on Gaza? Blame the judges’ deliberate ambiguity
The key sentence in the court’s ruling is a non-definitive three-clause construct. And the judges themselves don’t agree on what it is they are requiring Israel to do...
...This order was supported by 13 judges against two, but the full decision did not offer clarity on what the order actually means. Whatever their reasons, the judges chose not to formulate a single, short, non-ambiguous sentence stating precisely what Israel was being required to do.
Most of the headlines in Israel and around the world proclaimed that the court had ordered Israel to immediately stop its military operation in Rafah. Ongoing coverage since then has largely maintained this definitive interpretation.
But after the court published the minority opinion documents – by Justice Barak and the court vice president, Julia Sebutinde of Uganda – along with the opinions written by three of the majority judges, it became clear that four of the five judges who addressed this issue consider that Israel is allowed to continue its military action in Rafah, as long as this action does not put the Palestinian population at risk of annihilation, either in full or in part...
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar