18 sept 2019
|
This video shows part of Ziada’s statement in court:
|
Ismail Ziada is suing two Israeli generals for the deaths of six relatives during Israel’s 2014 attack on Gaza
As Israelis went to the polls on Tuesday, one of the leading candidates for prime minister was fending off war crimes accusations in a court in The Hague. Palestinian-Dutch citizen Ismail Ziada is seeking justice for Israel’s killing of six members of his family during its 2014 assault on Gaza. Ziada holds Benny Gantz, the Israeli army chief at the time, and Amir Eshel, then the air force chief, responsible for the decision to bomb his family’s home in al-Bureij refugee camp. |
The 20 July bombing that year reduced the three-floor building to rubble, killing Ziada’s 70-year-old mother Muftia Ziada, his brothers Jamil, Yousif and Omar, sister-in-law Bayan, and 12-year-old nephew Shaban.
A seventh person visiting the family was also killed.
Ziada is suing the Israeli generals for more than $600,000 in damages plus court costs.
Gantz is now leader of Israel’s Blue and White coalition. After this week’s inconclusive election result, he is seeking the support of other parties to put together a government.
In Tuesday’s session, the Dutch court heard arguments about whether it has jurisdiction over the case.
Lawyers for Gantz and Eshel tried to frame Ziada’s legal action as part of “an anti-Israel campaign.”
Earlier this year, Israel urged the Dutch court to dismiss the war crimes case against Gantz.
Pressure
In the run-up to the hearing, Ziada’s family faced tremendous pressure.
The brakes of the family car were sabotaged last December, but a police investigation provided no leads.
A few months later, Ziada’s wife Angélique Eijpe was publicly attacked by the Israel lobby organization CIDI.
She was falsely accused of seeking to “end Jewish democracy” in her work for the One State Foundation.
CIDI also parroted Israeli claims that the bombing of the Ziada family house was justified.
Shortly before the hearing, Twitter suspended the account of the Palestine Justice Campaign, which supports Ziada’s legal action.
The social media company alleged an unspecified “breach of rules.”
Twitter did not respond to requests for clarification from the campaign.
Bragging about killing
Many journalists, friends and supporters of Ziada attended the court hearing. The Israeli generals were not present, but were represented by lawyers.
The Ziada house was attacked during Israel’s 51-day assault on Gaza which killed 2,251 Palestinians, including 1,462 civilians, among them 551 children, according to an independent investigation commissioned by the UN Human Rights Council .
More than 11,000 Palestinians were injured, the majority women and children.
Ziada’s lawyers, human rights and war crimes experts Liesbeth Zegveld and Lisa-Marie Komp, argue that the attack on the Ziada home was part of Israel’s “policy to bomb civilian residential buildings” in “breach of international humanitarian law.”
Gantz and Eshel were among the top leaders who “designed the policy of bombing residential buildings” and are “fully responsible for the decision to bomb the Ziada family residence,” they allege in the complaint.
The independent UN investigation supports Zegveld and Komp’s view.
On Tuesday, Ziada’s lawyers showed the court Gantz’s election campaign video bragging about how much killing and destruction he perpetrated in Gaza.
The court must decide whether Ziada’s case is admissible after the generals’ lawyers claimed last November that their clients enjoy immunity.
They also assert that the Dutch court has no jurisdiction because they claim that Ziada could seek justice in Israel.
Israeli retaliation?
Gantz and Eshel were represented by a team by five lawyers, an indication that Israel will spare no expense trying to shield its generals from accountability.
While the Israeli government is paying the generals’ legal fees, Ziada’s supporters donated money via a crowdfunding campaign to support his case.
The generals’ brief argues that Ziada’s case is an effort to put Israel’s judicial system in the “suspect’s bench.”
They assert that the case “seems to be primarily a means of creating a stage for an anti-Israel campaign” – a standard Israeli government talking point.
But Ziada’s lawyers provided many examples to support their claim that the Dutch court has jurisdiction over the case.
The law in the Netherlands [pdf] allows the country’s courts to exercise universal jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes perpetrated elsewhere when a Dutch national cannot obtain justice in the country where the crimes were committed.
Gantz and Eshel’s lawyers dismissed the evidence offered by Zegveld about how Israel’s legal system discriminates against Palestinians.
They asserted that UN investigations should be taken with “a pinch of salt.”
Rather than address substance, they blasted the UN Human Rights Council as “notoriously anti-Israel.”
The lawyers also warned the court that acceptance of jurisdiction may have “diplomatic consequences” – likely a warning of Israeli retaliation.
But Dutch courts are independent and should not take political considerations and attempts at intimidation into account.
No accountability, no justice
In his statement [pdf] to the court, Ziada provided the context of his quest for justice.
He emphasized the lack of accountability for Israel’s crimes.
Ziada told the court that his experience with Israeli violence started long before 2014.
While still a child he was shot in the head at close range with a rubber-coated metal bullet and in the leg with live ammunition.
He also witnessed another child being shot dead with a bullet to his head.
“Enemy subjects”
Hussein Abu Hussein, a Palestinian lawyer who has defended many Palestinians in Israeli courts, testified at the hearing.
He told [pdf] the court that practical and legal obstacles make it impossible for Ziada to seek justice in Israel.
In 2014, Israel declared the Gaza Strip “enemy territory” and its residents “enemy subjects.”
As a result, Israel denies liability for harm it causes to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, Abu Hussein explained.
If Ziada tried to claim damages in an Israeli court, he would be seen as a representative of the family in Gaza and thus as an “enemy subject” despite his Dutch nationality, Abu Hussein added.
Amendments to Israeli law also expand the immunity Israel claims for damages caused during “wartime action.”
Ziada told the court that he compares his fight for justice with the parable of David and Goliath.
“Those on the other end representing Goliath, and me, David – holding my head high and convinced of doing the right thing.”
The court will announce its ruling on whether the case can proceed in January.
In the meantime, Ziada and his supporters will be hoping that the Netherlands provides a path to justice that has so far been denied.
A seventh person visiting the family was also killed.
Ziada is suing the Israeli generals for more than $600,000 in damages plus court costs.
Gantz is now leader of Israel’s Blue and White coalition. After this week’s inconclusive election result, he is seeking the support of other parties to put together a government.
In Tuesday’s session, the Dutch court heard arguments about whether it has jurisdiction over the case.
Lawyers for Gantz and Eshel tried to frame Ziada’s legal action as part of “an anti-Israel campaign.”
Earlier this year, Israel urged the Dutch court to dismiss the war crimes case against Gantz.
Pressure
In the run-up to the hearing, Ziada’s family faced tremendous pressure.
The brakes of the family car were sabotaged last December, but a police investigation provided no leads.
A few months later, Ziada’s wife Angélique Eijpe was publicly attacked by the Israel lobby organization CIDI.
She was falsely accused of seeking to “end Jewish democracy” in her work for the One State Foundation.
CIDI also parroted Israeli claims that the bombing of the Ziada family house was justified.
Shortly before the hearing, Twitter suspended the account of the Palestine Justice Campaign, which supports Ziada’s legal action.
The social media company alleged an unspecified “breach of rules.”
Twitter did not respond to requests for clarification from the campaign.
Bragging about killing
Many journalists, friends and supporters of Ziada attended the court hearing. The Israeli generals were not present, but were represented by lawyers.
The Ziada house was attacked during Israel’s 51-day assault on Gaza which killed 2,251 Palestinians, including 1,462 civilians, among them 551 children, according to an independent investigation commissioned by the UN Human Rights Council .
More than 11,000 Palestinians were injured, the majority women and children.
Ziada’s lawyers, human rights and war crimes experts Liesbeth Zegveld and Lisa-Marie Komp, argue that the attack on the Ziada home was part of Israel’s “policy to bomb civilian residential buildings” in “breach of international humanitarian law.”
Gantz and Eshel were among the top leaders who “designed the policy of bombing residential buildings” and are “fully responsible for the decision to bomb the Ziada family residence,” they allege in the complaint.
The independent UN investigation supports Zegveld and Komp’s view.
On Tuesday, Ziada’s lawyers showed the court Gantz’s election campaign video bragging about how much killing and destruction he perpetrated in Gaza.
The court must decide whether Ziada’s case is admissible after the generals’ lawyers claimed last November that their clients enjoy immunity.
They also assert that the Dutch court has no jurisdiction because they claim that Ziada could seek justice in Israel.
Israeli retaliation?
Gantz and Eshel were represented by a team by five lawyers, an indication that Israel will spare no expense trying to shield its generals from accountability.
While the Israeli government is paying the generals’ legal fees, Ziada’s supporters donated money via a crowdfunding campaign to support his case.
The generals’ brief argues that Ziada’s case is an effort to put Israel’s judicial system in the “suspect’s bench.”
They assert that the case “seems to be primarily a means of creating a stage for an anti-Israel campaign” – a standard Israeli government talking point.
But Ziada’s lawyers provided many examples to support their claim that the Dutch court has jurisdiction over the case.
The law in the Netherlands [pdf] allows the country’s courts to exercise universal jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes perpetrated elsewhere when a Dutch national cannot obtain justice in the country where the crimes were committed.
Gantz and Eshel’s lawyers dismissed the evidence offered by Zegveld about how Israel’s legal system discriminates against Palestinians.
They asserted that UN investigations should be taken with “a pinch of salt.”
Rather than address substance, they blasted the UN Human Rights Council as “notoriously anti-Israel.”
The lawyers also warned the court that acceptance of jurisdiction may have “diplomatic consequences” – likely a warning of Israeli retaliation.
But Dutch courts are independent and should not take political considerations and attempts at intimidation into account.
No accountability, no justice
In his statement [pdf] to the court, Ziada provided the context of his quest for justice.
He emphasized the lack of accountability for Israel’s crimes.
Ziada told the court that his experience with Israeli violence started long before 2014.
While still a child he was shot in the head at close range with a rubber-coated metal bullet and in the leg with live ammunition.
He also witnessed another child being shot dead with a bullet to his head.
“Enemy subjects”
Hussein Abu Hussein, a Palestinian lawyer who has defended many Palestinians in Israeli courts, testified at the hearing.
He told [pdf] the court that practical and legal obstacles make it impossible for Ziada to seek justice in Israel.
In 2014, Israel declared the Gaza Strip “enemy territory” and its residents “enemy subjects.”
As a result, Israel denies liability for harm it causes to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, Abu Hussein explained.
If Ziada tried to claim damages in an Israeli court, he would be seen as a representative of the family in Gaza and thus as an “enemy subject” despite his Dutch nationality, Abu Hussein added.
Amendments to Israeli law also expand the immunity Israel claims for damages caused during “wartime action.”
Ziada told the court that he compares his fight for justice with the parable of David and Goliath.
“Those on the other end representing Goliath, and me, David – holding my head high and convinced of doing the right thing.”
The court will announce its ruling on whether the case can proceed in January.
In the meantime, Ziada and his supporters will be hoping that the Netherlands provides a path to justice that has so far been denied.
Attention will now focus on President, Reuven Rivlin, who will choose the candidate he believes has the best chance of forming a stable coalition, but if that doesn’t work, new elections would be triggered yet again
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fell short of securing a parliamentary majority with his natural religious and nationalist allies in national elections Tuesday, partial results indicated, setting the stage for a period of coalition negotiations that could threaten his political future and even clear the way for him to be tried on corruption charges.
Initial partial results showed challenger Benny Gantz’s centrist Blue and White party tied with Netanyahu’s Likud.
While the results do not guarantee that Gantz will be the next prime minister, they signaled that Netanyahu, who has led the country for over 10 years, could have trouble holding on to the job.
Addressing his supporters early Wednesday, Netanyahu refused to concede defeat and vowed to work to form a new government that excludes Arab parties.
His campaign focused heavily on attacking and questioning the loyalty of the country’s Arab minority — a strategy that drew accusations of racism and incitement from Arab leaders.
“In the coming days we will convene negotiations to assemble a strong Zionist government and to prevent a dangerous anti-Zionist government,” he said. He claimed that Arab parties “negate the existence of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state” and “glorify bloodthirsty murderers.”
Final results are expected Wednesday and could still swing in Netanyahu’s favor.
According to the partial results, the parties of Gantz and Netanyahu received 32 seats each in the 120-member parliament. Likud with its natural allies of religious and ultra-nationalist parties mustered 56 seats — or five short of the needed majority.
This means both Likud and Blue and White will have difficulty setting up a governing coalition without the support of Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party.
That put Liberman, a former protege of Netanyahu’s who has become one of the prime minister’s fiercest rivals, in the position of kingmaker.
Arab parties, which have never before sat in an Israeli government, also finished strong, and exit polls predicted they would form the third-largest party in parliament.
Addressing his supporters late Tuesday, a jubilant Liberman said he saw only “one option”: a broad, secular coalition with both Blue and White and Likud.
“We’ve always said that a unity government is only possible in emergency situations" Liberman said and added "I tell every citizen today watching us on television: the situation, both security-wise and economically, are emergency situations,”concluding. “The country, therefore, requires a broad government.”
Early Wednesday, Gantz told a cheering rally of supporters that while it was too soon to declare victory, he had begun speaking to potential partners and hoped to form a unity government.
“Starting tonight we will work to form a broad unity government that will express the will of the people,” he said.
Attention will now focus on President, Reuven Rivlin, who is to choose the candidate he believes has the best chance of forming a stable coalition. Rivlin is to consult with all parties in the coming days before making his decision.
After that, the prime minister designate would have up to six weeks to form a coalition. If that fails, Rivlin could give another candidate for prime minister 28 days to form a coalition.
And if that doesn’t work, new elections would be triggered yet again. Rivlin has said he will do everything possible to avoid such a scenario.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fell short of securing a parliamentary majority with his natural religious and nationalist allies in national elections Tuesday, partial results indicated, setting the stage for a period of coalition negotiations that could threaten his political future and even clear the way for him to be tried on corruption charges.
Initial partial results showed challenger Benny Gantz’s centrist Blue and White party tied with Netanyahu’s Likud.
While the results do not guarantee that Gantz will be the next prime minister, they signaled that Netanyahu, who has led the country for over 10 years, could have trouble holding on to the job.
Addressing his supporters early Wednesday, Netanyahu refused to concede defeat and vowed to work to form a new government that excludes Arab parties.
His campaign focused heavily on attacking and questioning the loyalty of the country’s Arab minority — a strategy that drew accusations of racism and incitement from Arab leaders.
“In the coming days we will convene negotiations to assemble a strong Zionist government and to prevent a dangerous anti-Zionist government,” he said. He claimed that Arab parties “negate the existence of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state” and “glorify bloodthirsty murderers.”
Final results are expected Wednesday and could still swing in Netanyahu’s favor.
According to the partial results, the parties of Gantz and Netanyahu received 32 seats each in the 120-member parliament. Likud with its natural allies of religious and ultra-nationalist parties mustered 56 seats — or five short of the needed majority.
This means both Likud and Blue and White will have difficulty setting up a governing coalition without the support of Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party.
That put Liberman, a former protege of Netanyahu’s who has become one of the prime minister’s fiercest rivals, in the position of kingmaker.
Arab parties, which have never before sat in an Israeli government, also finished strong, and exit polls predicted they would form the third-largest party in parliament.
Addressing his supporters late Tuesday, a jubilant Liberman said he saw only “one option”: a broad, secular coalition with both Blue and White and Likud.
“We’ve always said that a unity government is only possible in emergency situations" Liberman said and added "I tell every citizen today watching us on television: the situation, both security-wise and economically, are emergency situations,”concluding. “The country, therefore, requires a broad government.”
Early Wednesday, Gantz told a cheering rally of supporters that while it was too soon to declare victory, he had begun speaking to potential partners and hoped to form a unity government.
“Starting tonight we will work to form a broad unity government that will express the will of the people,” he said.
Attention will now focus on President, Reuven Rivlin, who is to choose the candidate he believes has the best chance of forming a stable coalition. Rivlin is to consult with all parties in the coming days before making his decision.
After that, the prime minister designate would have up to six weeks to form a coalition. If that fails, Rivlin could give another candidate for prime minister 28 days to form a coalition.
And if that doesn’t work, new elections would be triggered yet again. Rivlin has said he will do everything possible to avoid such a scenario.
Unofficial results of the 22nd Knesset elections showed that the Likud party of incumbent prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the centrist White and Blue party, of opposer Benny Gantz, won 32 seats each, while the joint list received 13.
At this time, 92% of the votes have been counted.
Netanyahu, who is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister since July, is seeking a record fifth term in office. However, the first round of exit polls show that Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition bloc could not secure the 61-seat majority they needed.
The results indicate a draw between the right-wing camp with 56 seats and the center-left camp with 55 seats, without the Yisrael Beiteinu party which won 9 seats, PNN reports.
These results make it difficult for Netanyahu and his opponent Gantz to form a government separately. Avigdor Lieberman is calling for a unity government in order to avoid the possibility of a third election.
Gantz said, to his supporters, on Wednesday morning, that “it is necessary to wait for the official results”, according to Al Jazeera. “Netanyahu has not been successful in what he set out to do. We have proved that the idea is Blue and White; that we established a little over a year ago was successful and is here to stay.”
The results came after counting 4055,141 votes, while the Israeli Election Commission postponed the announcement of the official preliminary results, which was scheduled on Wednesday noon, due to the change in the way the data is checked and entered into the website of the Commission.
At this time, 92% of the votes have been counted.
Netanyahu, who is Israel’s longest-serving prime minister since July, is seeking a record fifth term in office. However, the first round of exit polls show that Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition bloc could not secure the 61-seat majority they needed.
The results indicate a draw between the right-wing camp with 56 seats and the center-left camp with 55 seats, without the Yisrael Beiteinu party which won 9 seats, PNN reports.
These results make it difficult for Netanyahu and his opponent Gantz to form a government separately. Avigdor Lieberman is calling for a unity government in order to avoid the possibility of a third election.
Gantz said, to his supporters, on Wednesday morning, that “it is necessary to wait for the official results”, according to Al Jazeera. “Netanyahu has not been successful in what he set out to do. We have proved that the idea is Blue and White; that we established a little over a year ago was successful and is here to stay.”
The results came after counting 4055,141 votes, while the Israeli Election Commission postponed the announcement of the official preliminary results, which was scheduled on Wednesday noon, due to the change in the way the data is checked and entered into the website of the Commission.
17 sept 2019
On Tuesday 17th September, the District Court of The Hague will hold a hearing on the admissibility of a case brought by Dutch citizen Ismail Ziada against the former Chief of General Staff of the Israeli Defence Force (IDF), Benny Gantz and former Commander of the IDF Air Force, Amir Eshel for the bombing of the Ziada family home in Gaza.
The attack resulted in the death of six members of Mr Ziada’s immediate family.
Mr Ziada, who is of Palestinian origin, contends that he is unable to gain access to justice in Israel due to the discriminatory practices faced by Palestinians seeking accountability for war crimes. The case is being pursued in accordance with Dutch law which upholds the principle of universal jurisdiction in civil proceedings for citizens who are unable to gain access to justice elsewhere.
It is a unique case and the first time a Palestinian has been able to make use of civil litigation on the basis of universal jurisdiction to gain access to justice for war crimes. Mr Ziada is represented by Liesbeth Zegveld, a prominent human rights lawyer from Amsterdam.
The bombing of the Ziada family home in the Bureij refugee camp, Gaza, took place on July 20th, 2014. It was a targeted IDF attack that resulted in the death of Ismail Ziada’s 75-year-old mother, three brothers, his sister-in-law, a 12-year-old nephew and a visiting friend. Mr Ziada contends that the attack on the family home was a violation of international humanitarian law and constituted a gross violation of internationally recognised human rights principles.
During the Israeli attacks on Gaza in 2014, approximately 2000 Palestinians, including 500 children, were killed. The Israeli military operation, codenamed “Protective Edge”, was a widespread and systematic attack on civilian targets with the vast majority of casualties being non-combatants.
Mr Gantz and Mr Eshel claim immunity from the Dutch court and contend that Mr Ziada should have presented his claim in an Israeli court.
Neither Mr Gantz nor Mr Eshel are expected to be present on the day of the hearing. They will be represented by the law firms Florent and Jahea Raymakers.
Since his retirement, Mr Gantz has formed a new political party “Hosen Le-Yisrael” (Israel Resilience Party). On the day of the hearing, Mr Gantz will be running for office against Benjamin Netanyahu in the Israeli national elections.
For further information please contact the Palestine Justice Campaign spokesperson by email at palestinejusticecampaign@gmail.com or by telephone at +31 619895090.
The Palestinian Justice Campaign is an international, single-issue group of concerned citizens, trade unionists and human rights workers who volunteer to assist the Ziada family in their pursuit for justice.
Via Al Mezan Center for Human Rights.
The attack resulted in the death of six members of Mr Ziada’s immediate family.
Mr Ziada, who is of Palestinian origin, contends that he is unable to gain access to justice in Israel due to the discriminatory practices faced by Palestinians seeking accountability for war crimes. The case is being pursued in accordance with Dutch law which upholds the principle of universal jurisdiction in civil proceedings for citizens who are unable to gain access to justice elsewhere.
It is a unique case and the first time a Palestinian has been able to make use of civil litigation on the basis of universal jurisdiction to gain access to justice for war crimes. Mr Ziada is represented by Liesbeth Zegveld, a prominent human rights lawyer from Amsterdam.
The bombing of the Ziada family home in the Bureij refugee camp, Gaza, took place on July 20th, 2014. It was a targeted IDF attack that resulted in the death of Ismail Ziada’s 75-year-old mother, three brothers, his sister-in-law, a 12-year-old nephew and a visiting friend. Mr Ziada contends that the attack on the family home was a violation of international humanitarian law and constituted a gross violation of internationally recognised human rights principles.
During the Israeli attacks on Gaza in 2014, approximately 2000 Palestinians, including 500 children, were killed. The Israeli military operation, codenamed “Protective Edge”, was a widespread and systematic attack on civilian targets with the vast majority of casualties being non-combatants.
Mr Gantz and Mr Eshel claim immunity from the Dutch court and contend that Mr Ziada should have presented his claim in an Israeli court.
Neither Mr Gantz nor Mr Eshel are expected to be present on the day of the hearing. They will be represented by the law firms Florent and Jahea Raymakers.
Since his retirement, Mr Gantz has formed a new political party “Hosen Le-Yisrael” (Israel Resilience Party). On the day of the hearing, Mr Gantz will be running for office against Benjamin Netanyahu in the Israeli national elections.
For further information please contact the Palestine Justice Campaign spokesperson by email at palestinejusticecampaign@gmail.com or by telephone at +31 619895090.
The Palestinian Justice Campaign is an international, single-issue group of concerned citizens, trade unionists and human rights workers who volunteer to assist the Ziada family in their pursuit for justice.
Via Al Mezan Center for Human Rights.
10 sept 2019
Haaretz Israeli newspaper reported that the Dutch Central Court in The Hague will discuss, next Tuesday — which coincides with Israeli elections — whether it is within its competence to try Israeli politician Benny Gantz for war crimes committed during the 2014 Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip.
A civil lawsuit was filed last year, against the former Israeli Chief of Staff Gantz and former Commander of the Air Force Amir Eichel, by Dutch citizen Ismail Ziada, a resident of Gaza’s al-Bureij refugee camp and whose home was bombed by Israeli forces on July 20th, 2014. At the time, Gantz served as the 20th Chief of General Staff of the Israeli army.
In the bombing, Ziada lost his mother, three of his brothers, his sister-in-law, a nephew, and a friend who was visiting the family. Because of the Egyptian-backed Israeli blockade on Gaza, Ziada, who was in the Netherlands at the time, was unable to attend the funeral.
Ziada said, in his case, that Israeli courts do not allow a fair and genuine trial for war crimes, and, so, the case was filed under Dutch law, which upholds the principle of universal trial, in cases of citizens who have been denied access to justice elsewhere.
This is the first time that a Palestinian has been able to use civil prosecution for war crimes.
PNN further reports that Gantz and Eichel have asked the court to dismiss the case once and for all. Their lawyers claimed that, as officials in Israel, they could claim immunity unless they acted with intent to cause harm or disregard the possibility of harm.
They rejected the allegation that they had committed a war crime, and claim that Ziada had not filed a lawsuit before the Israeli court, so his claims of inaccessibility to Israeli courts were only hypothetical.
In a lawsuit filed against Gantz and Eichel, by attorney Liesbeth Zegveld, it was stated that the bombing of residential houses was disproportionate and done without taking the necessary precautions, and reflected a pattern of actions taken by senior Israeli officials, during the last military aggression on the Gaza Strip — therefore, these actions are to be classified as war crimes.
The Israeli army described the bombing of Ziada’s house as an air strike on a “building used as a war room” by Hamas, in Bureij.
A civil lawsuit was filed last year, against the former Israeli Chief of Staff Gantz and former Commander of the Air Force Amir Eichel, by Dutch citizen Ismail Ziada, a resident of Gaza’s al-Bureij refugee camp and whose home was bombed by Israeli forces on July 20th, 2014. At the time, Gantz served as the 20th Chief of General Staff of the Israeli army.
In the bombing, Ziada lost his mother, three of his brothers, his sister-in-law, a nephew, and a friend who was visiting the family. Because of the Egyptian-backed Israeli blockade on Gaza, Ziada, who was in the Netherlands at the time, was unable to attend the funeral.
Ziada said, in his case, that Israeli courts do not allow a fair and genuine trial for war crimes, and, so, the case was filed under Dutch law, which upholds the principle of universal trial, in cases of citizens who have been denied access to justice elsewhere.
This is the first time that a Palestinian has been able to use civil prosecution for war crimes.
PNN further reports that Gantz and Eichel have asked the court to dismiss the case once and for all. Their lawyers claimed that, as officials in Israel, they could claim immunity unless they acted with intent to cause harm or disregard the possibility of harm.
They rejected the allegation that they had committed a war crime, and claim that Ziada had not filed a lawsuit before the Israeli court, so his claims of inaccessibility to Israeli courts were only hypothetical.
In a lawsuit filed against Gantz and Eichel, by attorney Liesbeth Zegveld, it was stated that the bombing of residential houses was disproportionate and done without taking the necessary precautions, and reflected a pattern of actions taken by senior Israeli officials, during the last military aggression on the Gaza Strip — therefore, these actions are to be classified as war crimes.
The Israeli army described the bombing of Ziada’s house as an air strike on a “building used as a war room” by Hamas, in Bureij.
5 sept 2019
The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor called on the Swiss federal parliament not to bow to Israeli pressure to suspend Swiss criminal legislation authorizing the country's courts to prosecute Israeli politicians and military figures involved in war crimes against Palestinians.
The Euro-Med said in a statement that it views the visit with a great concern the Israeli delegation’s visit to Switzerland, headed by Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz and accompanied by a legal team to pressure the authorities to suspend a criminal legislation allowing bringing lawsuits against Israeli commanders and soldiers involved in violations of human rights in the Palestinian territories.
According to the Monitor, Switzerland was one of the first countries to include in its domestic legislation legal provisions allowing for the prosecution of perpetrators of major crimes if they were not tried by the International Criminal Court.
The law, passed by the Swiss National Council in 2009, aims to strengthen the exercise of universal jurisdiction in the country by making the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court a national law. The step, by then, aimed to strengthen the fight against impunity of perpetrators of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.
The Swiss law is based on the principle of universal jurisdiction, which is the most flexible of judicial principles, since it does not require the existence of a close link between the suspect and the state in order to initiate the investigation. If a person violates the legal rules of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, they will prosecuted.
The Swiss domestic law allows the arrest of any suspect once entering the Swiss territory even if this person is not a resident or does not own property there.
Mohammed Imad, a legal researcher at the Euro-Med Monitor, said the visit of the Israeli delegation aims to face the rising human voices within a number of European countries calling for including in their countries' legislation legal provisions that allow domestic courts to prosecute leaders and soldiers of the Israeli army involved in violations that may amount to war crimes, which were committed during attacks in the Palestinian Territories.
Imad urged the Swiss authorities to uphold their humanitarian legal stance against the Israeli violations targeting Palestinians and to reject any pressure that would affect the principle of criminal prosecution applied in the country.
Euro-Med pointed to several examples initiated by the Swiss judiciary, on the basis of its law that is based on universal jurisdiction. For instance, several human rights organizations concerned with the rights of Palestinians in Switzerland filed a lawsuit against former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert for war crimes during the 2008-2009 Israeli attack on the Gaza Strip.
As a result, Olmert canceled his trip to Switzerland, which was scheduled in July after warnings received from the Israeli attorney general that he might be arrested because of lawsuits against him.
In another example, a federal criminal court decided to detain the former Gambian interior minister, Osman Sonko, who sought refuge in Switzerland in 2017. He was believed to have personally supervised the torture of citizens during his tenure as interior minister between 2006 and 2016. He was arrested on the pretext of a report by an international organization accusing him of forming a torture group in the Gambia.
Sonko is still being held to this moment in the Swiss prisons after rejecting claims that he had no links to torture in the Gambia.
Euro-Med called on the Swiss authorities to uphold their position regarding the prosecution of Israeli war criminals and urged the legislative authorities in the country to not bow to Israeli pressure.
The Euro-Med called on all European countries to follow the footsteps of Switzerland and include in their domestic legislation provisions that allow the prosecution of those involved in violations in conflict areas in contravention of international law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
The Euro-Med said in a statement that it views the visit with a great concern the Israeli delegation’s visit to Switzerland, headed by Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz and accompanied by a legal team to pressure the authorities to suspend a criminal legislation allowing bringing lawsuits against Israeli commanders and soldiers involved in violations of human rights in the Palestinian territories.
According to the Monitor, Switzerland was one of the first countries to include in its domestic legislation legal provisions allowing for the prosecution of perpetrators of major crimes if they were not tried by the International Criminal Court.
The law, passed by the Swiss National Council in 2009, aims to strengthen the exercise of universal jurisdiction in the country by making the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court a national law. The step, by then, aimed to strengthen the fight against impunity of perpetrators of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.
The Swiss law is based on the principle of universal jurisdiction, which is the most flexible of judicial principles, since it does not require the existence of a close link between the suspect and the state in order to initiate the investigation. If a person violates the legal rules of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, they will prosecuted.
The Swiss domestic law allows the arrest of any suspect once entering the Swiss territory even if this person is not a resident or does not own property there.
Mohammed Imad, a legal researcher at the Euro-Med Monitor, said the visit of the Israeli delegation aims to face the rising human voices within a number of European countries calling for including in their countries' legislation legal provisions that allow domestic courts to prosecute leaders and soldiers of the Israeli army involved in violations that may amount to war crimes, which were committed during attacks in the Palestinian Territories.
Imad urged the Swiss authorities to uphold their humanitarian legal stance against the Israeli violations targeting Palestinians and to reject any pressure that would affect the principle of criminal prosecution applied in the country.
Euro-Med pointed to several examples initiated by the Swiss judiciary, on the basis of its law that is based on universal jurisdiction. For instance, several human rights organizations concerned with the rights of Palestinians in Switzerland filed a lawsuit against former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert for war crimes during the 2008-2009 Israeli attack on the Gaza Strip.
As a result, Olmert canceled his trip to Switzerland, which was scheduled in July after warnings received from the Israeli attorney general that he might be arrested because of lawsuits against him.
In another example, a federal criminal court decided to detain the former Gambian interior minister, Osman Sonko, who sought refuge in Switzerland in 2017. He was believed to have personally supervised the torture of citizens during his tenure as interior minister between 2006 and 2016. He was arrested on the pretext of a report by an international organization accusing him of forming a torture group in the Gambia.
Sonko is still being held to this moment in the Swiss prisons after rejecting claims that he had no links to torture in the Gambia.
Euro-Med called on the Swiss authorities to uphold their position regarding the prosecution of Israeli war criminals and urged the legislative authorities in the country to not bow to Israeli pressure.
The Euro-Med called on all European countries to follow the footsteps of Switzerland and include in their domestic legislation provisions that allow the prosecution of those involved in violations in conflict areas in contravention of international law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
3 sept 2019
Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz and his Swiss counterpart Ignazio Cassis in Lucerne
FM and team of jurists embark on round of talks in Switzerland to find solution to law that would allow Israeli diplomats and military officers to be hauled in for questioning over allegations of war crimes
Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz emabrked on an official visit to Switzerland on Monday accompanied by a legal team in an effort to find a solution to existing Swiss legislation that allows Israeli political and military officials to be arrested and interrogated for alleged war crimes.
Katz held talks with his counterpart Ignazio Cassis in Lucerne and was to meet President Ueli Maurer on Tuesday. Katz was to clarify that the State of Israel will not tolerate any form of denial of its right to self-defense against radical Islamist terror threats or threats to prosecute past or present Israeli leaders and military personnel.
Katz's visit also brings together senior Israeli jurists with their counterparts in Switzerland to find a suitable solution to the problematic legislation and to ensure Israeli representatives could visit the country peacefully.
Former prime minister Ehud Olmert canceled a planned visit to Switzerland last month after he was notified that he is liable to be arrested in the Alpine country for alleged war crimes.
The trip was canceled after the Foreign Ministry and the Justice Ministry received a statement from the Swiss authorities saying that Olmert would be taken in for questioning on suspicion of war crimes committed during the 2008 IDF campaign in Gaza, during which he served as prime minister.
FM and team of jurists embark on round of talks in Switzerland to find solution to law that would allow Israeli diplomats and military officers to be hauled in for questioning over allegations of war crimes
Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz emabrked on an official visit to Switzerland on Monday accompanied by a legal team in an effort to find a solution to existing Swiss legislation that allows Israeli political and military officials to be arrested and interrogated for alleged war crimes.
Katz held talks with his counterpart Ignazio Cassis in Lucerne and was to meet President Ueli Maurer on Tuesday. Katz was to clarify that the State of Israel will not tolerate any form of denial of its right to self-defense against radical Islamist terror threats or threats to prosecute past or present Israeli leaders and military personnel.
Katz's visit also brings together senior Israeli jurists with their counterparts in Switzerland to find a suitable solution to the problematic legislation and to ensure Israeli representatives could visit the country peacefully.
Former prime minister Ehud Olmert canceled a planned visit to Switzerland last month after he was notified that he is liable to be arrested in the Alpine country for alleged war crimes.
The trip was canceled after the Foreign Ministry and the Justice Ministry received a statement from the Swiss authorities saying that Olmert would be taken in for questioning on suspicion of war crimes committed during the 2008 IDF campaign in Gaza, during which he served as prime minister.
War criminals Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert
Olmert initially insisted on traveling normally, but after consultations between the Justice and Foreign Ministries, it was decided that he should stay in Israel.
A similar war crime complaint was submitted against former foreign minister Tzipi Livni. The complaint was filed by a pro-Palestinian group after Livni's 2017 visit to the country.
However, this complaint did not stop Livni from visiting Switzerland again and even participating in this year's World Economic Forum in Davos.
Olmert initially insisted on traveling normally, but after consultations between the Justice and Foreign Ministries, it was decided that he should stay in Israel.
A similar war crime complaint was submitted against former foreign minister Tzipi Livni. The complaint was filed by a pro-Palestinian group after Livni's 2017 visit to the country.
However, this complaint did not stop Livni from visiting Switzerland again and even participating in this year's World Economic Forum in Davos.
2 sept 2019
The photo, taken from the Free Gaza Movement website on May 28, 2010, shows the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara taking part in the Freedom Flotilla heading towards the Gaza Strip
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has ordered its chief prosecutor to reopen an official probe into a 2010 Israeli attack on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla that killed nine Turkish activists on board.
Appeals judges in The Hague-based tribunal ordered Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda for a second time on Monday to reconsider her refusal to open a formal investigation into the deadly raid.
"The prosecutor is directed to reconsider her decision by December 2, 2019," presiding appeals Judge Solomy Balungi Bossa told the court, adding that a majority of judges had backed the move.
The Monday ruling by the ICC’s appeals chamber was the latest step in a long legal battle to bring the case before the court.
Bensouda said in 2014 that she would not prosecute Israel over the incident, claiming that the case was "not of sufficient gravity."
The chief prosecutor again affirmed the decision in 2017 after judges said she must take another look at the case.
Israel is not a member of the court but Israeli individuals could face charges if Bensouda opens an investigation.
On May 31, 2010, Israeli commandos attacked the Freedom Flotilla in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea, killing nine Turkish citizens, including a teenager with dual Turkish-US citizenship, on board the Turkish-flagged Mavi Marmara and injuring about 50 other people who were part of the team on the six-ship convoy.
The flotilla was attempting to break the Israeli naval blockade of the Gaza Strip, carrying aid to Palestinians in the enclave.
Israel’s military raid against the civilian flotilla was met with global condemnation at the time, with the United Nations Security Council calling for a prompt investigation into the incident and the United Nations Human Rights Council describing the attack as “outrageous.”
A large number of human rights groups also slammed the raid, while dozens of protests were held in support of the victims’ cause in several countries, including Turkey, Indonesia, Lebanon, and Sweden.
In September 2010, Turkey suspended its military ties with Israel and expelled the Israeli envoy from Ankara over Tel Aviv’s refusal to apologize for the killing.
Back in 2014, a criminal court in Turkey issued arrest warrants for four Israeli military officers, deemed by Ankara as the main culprits in the case, and turned over the warrants to Interpol to arrest the suspects, but to no avail.
Turkey and Israel, however, normalized relations in June 2016 after a series of not very public negotiations. An agreement to normalize the ties entailed the payment of $20 million in compensation for the families of the victims.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has ordered its chief prosecutor to reopen an official probe into a 2010 Israeli attack on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla that killed nine Turkish activists on board.
Appeals judges in The Hague-based tribunal ordered Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda for a second time on Monday to reconsider her refusal to open a formal investigation into the deadly raid.
"The prosecutor is directed to reconsider her decision by December 2, 2019," presiding appeals Judge Solomy Balungi Bossa told the court, adding that a majority of judges had backed the move.
The Monday ruling by the ICC’s appeals chamber was the latest step in a long legal battle to bring the case before the court.
Bensouda said in 2014 that she would not prosecute Israel over the incident, claiming that the case was "not of sufficient gravity."
The chief prosecutor again affirmed the decision in 2017 after judges said she must take another look at the case.
Israel is not a member of the court but Israeli individuals could face charges if Bensouda opens an investigation.
On May 31, 2010, Israeli commandos attacked the Freedom Flotilla in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea, killing nine Turkish citizens, including a teenager with dual Turkish-US citizenship, on board the Turkish-flagged Mavi Marmara and injuring about 50 other people who were part of the team on the six-ship convoy.
The flotilla was attempting to break the Israeli naval blockade of the Gaza Strip, carrying aid to Palestinians in the enclave.
Israel’s military raid against the civilian flotilla was met with global condemnation at the time, with the United Nations Security Council calling for a prompt investigation into the incident and the United Nations Human Rights Council describing the attack as “outrageous.”
A large number of human rights groups also slammed the raid, while dozens of protests were held in support of the victims’ cause in several countries, including Turkey, Indonesia, Lebanon, and Sweden.
In September 2010, Turkey suspended its military ties with Israel and expelled the Israeli envoy from Ankara over Tel Aviv’s refusal to apologize for the killing.
Back in 2014, a criminal court in Turkey issued arrest warrants for four Israeli military officers, deemed by Ankara as the main culprits in the case, and turned over the warrants to Interpol to arrest the suspects, but to no avail.
Turkey and Israel, however, normalized relations in June 2016 after a series of not very public negotiations. An agreement to normalize the ties entailed the payment of $20 million in compensation for the families of the victims.
