http://www.normanfinkelstein.
http://www.newstatesman.com/
http://www.newstatesman.com/
Where now for the Goldstone report?
04.06.2011 | New Statements
Posted by John Dugard - 06 April 2011 09:47
In short, there are no new facts that could possibly have led Richard
Goldstone to change his mind about the UN-backed investigation into
Israel and the conflict in Gaza.
In short, there are no new facts that could possibly have led Richard
Goldstone to change his mind about the UN-backed investigation into
Israel and the conflict in Gaza.
In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Richard Goldstone, the former
South African constitutional court judge and prosecutor of the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, expresses
misgivings about the central finding of the UN Human Rights Council
fact-finding mission report on the Gaza conflict of 2008-2009 (named,
after its chairman, “the Goldstone report”) that Israel’s
indiscriminate attacks on civilians in Gaza were intentional.
South African constitutional court judge and prosecutor of the
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, expresses
misgivings about the central finding of the UN Human Rights Council
fact-finding mission report on the Gaza conflict of 2008-2009 (named,
after its chairman, “the Goldstone report”) that Israel’s
indiscriminate attacks on civilians in Gaza were intentional.
The op-ed makes strange reading.
It states that the Goldstone report would have been a different
document “had I known then what I know now”, but fails to disclose any
information that seriously challenges the findings of the Goldstone
Report.
document “had I known then what I know now”, but fails to disclose any
information that seriously challenges the findings of the Goldstone
Report.
It claims that investigations published by the Israeli military and
recognised by a follow-up UN committee report chaired by Judge Mary
McGowan Davis, which appeared in March, “indicate that civilians were
not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy”. But the McGowan
Davis report contains absolutely no such “indication” and instead
seriously questions Israel’s investigations, finding them to be
lacking in impartiality, promptness and transparency.
recognised by a follow-up UN committee report chaired by Judge Mary
McGowan Davis, which appeared in March, “indicate that civilians were
not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy”. But the McGowan
Davis report contains absolutely no such “indication” and instead
seriously questions Israel’s investigations, finding them to be
lacking in impartiality, promptness and transparency.
Goldstone expresses “confidence” that the officer responsible for
perhaps the gravest atrocity of Operation Cast Lead (Israel’s code
name for its assault on Gaza) – the killing of 29 members of the al-
Samouni family – will be punished properly by Israel, even though the
McGowan Davis report provides a critical assessment of Israel’s
handling of the investigation into this killing.
perhaps the gravest atrocity of Operation Cast Lead (Israel’s code
name for its assault on Gaza) – the killing of 29 members of the al-
Samouni family – will be punished properly by Israel, even though the
McGowan Davis report provides a critical assessment of Israel’s
handling of the investigation into this killing.
Finally he claims that the McGowan Davis report finds that Israel has
carried out investigations “to a significant degree”, but in fact this
report paints a very different picture of Israel’s investigations of
400 incidents, which have resulted in two convictions, one for theft
of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months’
imprisonment, and another for using a Palestinian child as a human
shield, which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months. Cold,
calculated and deliberate
carried out investigations “to a significant degree”, but in fact this
report paints a very different picture of Israel’s investigations of
400 incidents, which have resulted in two convictions, one for theft
of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months’
imprisonment, and another for using a Palestinian child as a human
shield, which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months. Cold,
calculated and deliberate
In short, there are no new facts that exonerate Israel and that could
possibly have led Goldstone to change his mind. What made him change
his mind therefore remains a closely guarded secret.
possibly have led Goldstone to change his mind. What made him change
his mind therefore remains a closely guarded secret.
The Goldstone report was not the only fact-finding report on Operation
Cast Lead. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the League of
Arab States (whose mission I chaired) all produced thorough reports on
the conflict.
Cast Lead. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the League of
Arab States (whose mission I chaired) all produced thorough reports on
the conflict.
In all the reports, including the Goldstone report, there were
accounts of the killings of civilians by Israel Defence Forces (IDF)
in a cold, calculated and deliberate manner. But the principal
accusation levelled at Israel was that during its assault on Gaza, it
used force indiscriminately in densely populated areas and was
reckless about the foreseeable consequences of its actions, which
resulted in at least 900 civilian deaths and 5,000 wounded.
accounts of the killings of civilians by Israel Defence Forces (IDF)
in a cold, calculated and deliberate manner. But the principal
accusation levelled at Israel was that during its assault on Gaza, it
used force indiscriminately in densely populated areas and was
reckless about the foreseeable consequences of its actions, which
resulted in at least 900 civilian deaths and 5,000 wounded.
In terms of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, it
is a war crime t direct attackso intentionally against a civilian
population (Article 8(2)(b)(i)). Such an intention need not be
premeditated: it suffices if the person engaging in such action meant
to cause the consequence of his action, or “is aware that it will
occur in the ordinary course of events” (Article 30).
is a war crime t direct attackso intentionally against a civilian
population (Article 8(2)(b)(i)). Such an intention need not be
premeditated: it suffices if the person engaging in such action meant
to cause the consequence of his action, or “is aware that it will
occur in the ordinary course of events” (Article 30).
Goldstone’s op-ed may be interpreted to mean that he is now satisfied
(though there is no evidence to support this) that Israel did not as a
matter of policy deliberately and in a premeditated manner target
civilians, and that where the calculated killing of civilians occurred
this was without the blessing of the Israeli military and political
leadership.
(though there is no evidence to support this) that Israel did not as a
matter of policy deliberately and in a premeditated manner target
civilians, and that where the calculated killing of civilians occurred
this was without the blessing of the Israeli military and political
leadership.
But he could not possibly have meant that Israel did not
“intentionally target civilians as a matter of policy” in the legal
sense of intention. That Israel’s assault was conducted in an
indiscriminate manner with full knowledge that its consequences would
be the killing and wounding of civilians is a matter of public record
fully substantiated by the Goldstone report and other, equally
credible findings.
“intentionally target civilians as a matter of policy” in the legal
sense of intention. That Israel’s assault was conducted in an
indiscriminate manner with full knowledge that its consequences would
be the killing and wounding of civilians is a matter of public record
fully substantiated by the Goldstone report and other, equally
credible findings.
In his op-ed, Goldstone declares that Hamas’s indiscriminate firing of
rockets into Israel, which resulted in the killing of four civilians,
was an “intentional” targeting of civilians and consequently a war
crime. But it is a mystery how he can suggest that the indiscriminate
bombing and shooting of Palestinians in Gaza by the IDF, which
resulted in nearly a thousand civilian deaths, was not “intentional”.
rockets into Israel, which resulted in the killing of four civilians,
was an “intentional” targeting of civilians and consequently a war
crime. But it is a mystery how he can suggest that the indiscriminate
bombing and shooting of Palestinians in Gaza by the IDF, which
resulted in nearly a thousand civilian deaths, was not “intentional”.
Goldstone does not, like his critics, describe his op-ed piece as a
retraction of the Goldstone report. This is not surprising. Richard
Goldstone is a former judge and he knows full well that a fact-finding
report by four persons, of whom he was only one, like the judgment of
a court of law, cannot be changed by the subsequent reflections of a
single member of the committee.
retraction of the Goldstone report. This is not surprising. Richard
Goldstone is a former judge and he knows full well that a fact-finding
report by four persons, of whom he was only one, like the judgment of
a court of law, cannot be changed by the subsequent reflections of a
single member of the committee.
This can be done only by the full committee itself with the approval
of the body that established the fact-finding mission – the UN Human
Rights Council. And this is highly unlikely, in view of the fact that
the three other members of the committee – Professor Christine Chinkin
of the London School of Economics, Ms Hina Jilani, an advocate of the
Supreme Court of Pakistan, and Colonel Desmond Travers, formerly an
officer in the Irish Defence Forces – have indicated that they do not
share Goldstone’s misgivings about the report.
Fight for accountability . . . from Israel and Hamas
Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly
of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request
that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council, and that
the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the
International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur
and Libya.
of the body that established the fact-finding mission – the UN Human
Rights Council. And this is highly unlikely, in view of the fact that
the three other members of the committee – Professor Christine Chinkin
of the London School of Economics, Ms Hina Jilani, an advocate of the
Supreme Court of Pakistan, and Colonel Desmond Travers, formerly an
officer in the Irish Defence Forces – have indicated that they do not
share Goldstone’s misgivings about the report.
Fight for accountability . . . from Israel and Hamas
Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly
of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request
that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council, and that
the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the
International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur
and Libya.
Doubtless the General Assembly will refer the report to the Security
Council, despite Goldstone’s op-ed, but it will end there as the
customary United States veto will ensure that Israel remains
unaccountable.
Council, despite Goldstone’s op-ed, but it will end there as the
customary United States veto will ensure that Israel remains
unaccountable.
The Goldstone report is a historical milestone. It is a credible,
reasoned, comprehensive and thoroughly researched account of
atrocities – war crimes and crimes against humanity – committed by
Israel in the course of Operation Cast Lead, and of war crimes
committed by Hamas in the indiscriminate firing of rockets into
Israel. It is a serious attempt to secure the accountability of a
state that has for too long been allowed by the west to behave in a
lawless manner.
reasoned, comprehensive and thoroughly researched account of
atrocities – war crimes and crimes against humanity – committed by
Israel in the course of Operation Cast Lead, and of war crimes
committed by Hamas in the indiscriminate firing of rockets into
Israel. It is a serious attempt to secure the accountability of a
state that has for too long been allowed by the west to behave in a
lawless manner.
That the credibility of the Goldstone report has been undermined by
Goldstone’s strange op-ed in the Washington Post cannot be denied.
Goldstone’s strange op-ed in the Washington Post cannot be denied.
Although the report was authored by four experts with the backing of a
team from the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, it has
undoubtedly come to be associated with the name of Richard Goldstone.
Inevitably the misgivings he has expressed about his own role in the
report will weaken its impact as an historical record of Operation
Cast Lead.
team from the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, it has
undoubtedly come to be associated with the name of Richard Goldstone.
Inevitably the misgivings he has expressed about his own role in the
report will weaken its impact as an historical record of Operation
Cast Lead.
Already, the Israeli government has expressed delight at what it
construes to be a retraction of the report, and demanded both a
contrite apology from Goldstone and a refutation of the report by the
United Nations. Predictably the US department of state has welcomed
Goldstone`s op-ed, and one fears that European governments will find
in it an excuse to justify their continued support for Israel.
construes to be a retraction of the report, and demanded both a
contrite apology from Goldstone and a refutation of the report by the
United Nations. Predictably the US department of state has welcomed
Goldstone`s op-ed, and one fears that European governments will find
in it an excuse to justify their continued support for Israel.
Richard Goldstone has devoted much of his life to the cause of
accountability for international crimes. It is sad that this champion
of accountability and international criminal justice should abandon
the cause in such an ill-considered but nevertheless extremely harmful
op-ed.
accountability for international crimes. It is sad that this champion
of accountability and international criminal justice should abandon
the cause in such an ill-considered but nevertheless extremely harmful
op-ed.
------------------------------
John Dugard is professor of law at the University of Pretoria,
emeritus professor of the University of Leiden and former UN special
rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory.
John Dugard is professor of law at the University of Pretoria,
emeritus professor of the University of Leiden and former UN special
rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory.
http://www.normanfinkelstein.
http://www.newstatesman.com/
http://www.newstatesman.com/
Click here to Reply
 |
"Morrissey Breen" <morriss...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:06580902-
f9f6-4832-8b33-5a44da8272e8@
news:06580902-
f9f6-4832-8b33-5a44da8272e8@
- show quoted text -
Hamas' firing of rockets into Israeli cities may
have been inaccurate, it was hardly indiscriminate.
Every target was civilian.
But why does professor Dugard claim Israeli
bombing and shooting was indiscriminate?
What does he know about this kind of warfare?
have been inaccurate, it was hardly indiscriminate.
Every target was civilian.
But why does professor Dugard claim Israeli
bombing and shooting was indiscriminate?
What does he know about this kind of warfare?
> Goldstone does not, like his critics, describe his op-ed piece as a
> retraction of the Goldstone report. This is not surprising. Richard
> Goldstone is a former judge and he knows full well that a fact-finding
> report by four persons, of whom he was only one, like the judgment of
> a court of law, cannot be changed by the subsequent reflections of a
> single member of the committee.
>
> This can be done only by the full committee itself with the approval
> of the body that established the fact-finding mission – the UN Human
> Rights Council. And this is highly unlikely, in view of the fact that
> the three other members of the committee – Professor Christine Chinkin
> of the London School of Economics, Ms Hina Jilani, an advocate of the
> Supreme Court of Pakistan, and Colonel Desmond Travers, formerly an
> officer in the Irish Defence Forces – have indicated that they do not
> share Goldstone’s misgivings about the report.
> Fight for accountability . . . from Israel and Hamas
> Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly
> of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request
> that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council, and that
> the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the
> International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur
> and Libya.
> retraction of the Goldstone report. This is not surprising. Richard
> Goldstone is a former judge and he knows full well that a fact-finding
> report by four persons, of whom he was only one, like the judgment of
> a court of law, cannot be changed by the subsequent reflections of a
> single member of the committee.
>
> This can be done only by the full committee itself with the approval
> of the body that established the fact-finding mission – the UN Human
> Rights Council. And this is highly unlikely, in view of the fact that
> the three other members of the committee – Professor Christine Chinkin
> of the London School of Economics, Ms Hina Jilani, an advocate of the
> Supreme Court of Pakistan, and Colonel Desmond Travers, formerly an
> officer in the Irish Defence Forces – have indicated that they do not
> share Goldstone’s misgivings about the report.
> Fight for accountability . . . from Israel and Hamas
> Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly
> of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request
> that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council, and that
> the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the
> International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur
> and Libya.
As if they care.
Isn't there something wrong with a system
which threatens only the respectable?
Isn't there something wrong with a system
which threatens only the respectable?
- show quoted text -
Is it safe to assume that he mostly ignores Hamas and PLO?
> http://www.normanfinkelstein.
> http://www.newstatesman.com/
> http://www.newstatesman.com/
|
On Apr 15, 9:45 pm, Zev <zev_h...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:06580902-
> f9f6-4832-8b33-5a44da827...@
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://www.normanfinkelstein.
> >http://www.newstatesman.com/
> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:06580902-
> f9f6-4832-8b33-5a44da827...@
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://www.normanfinkelstein.
> >http://www.newstatesman.com/
- show quoted text -
No, Zev, as you well, know, he does not ignore Hamas or the PLO.
>
>
>
> >http://www.normanfinkelstein.
> >http://www.newstatesman.com/
>
>
>
> >http://www.normanfinkelstein.
> >http://www.newstatesman.com/
|
"Mo" <morriss...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d78a4a3c-eead-4c72-
ada7-6663dc44a29d@34g2000pru.
> On Apr 15, 9:45 pm, Zev <zev_h...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:06580902-
>> f9f6-4832-8b33-5a44da827...@
>> > rockets into Israel, which resulted in the killing of four civilians,
>> > was an “intentional” targeting of civilians and consequently a war
>> > crime. But it is a mystery how he can suggest that the indiscriminate
>> > bombing and shooting of Palestinians in Gaza by the IDF, which
>> > resulted in nearly a thousand civilian deaths, was not “intentional”.
>>
>> Hamas' firing of rockets into Israeli cities may
>> have been inaccurate, it was hardly indiscriminate.
>> Every target was civilian.
>> But why does professor Dugard claim Israeli
>> bombing and shooting was indiscriminate?
>> What does he know about this kind of warfare?
>> > Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly
>> > of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request
>> > that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council, and that
>> > the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the
>> > International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur
>> > and Libya.
>>
>> As if they care.
>> Isn't there something wrong with a system
>> which threatens only the respectable?
>> > John Dugard is professor of law at the University of Pretoria,
>> > emeritus professor of the University of Leiden and former UN special
>> > rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory.
>>
>> Is it safe to assume that he mostly ignores Hamas and PLO?
>
> No, Zev, as you well, know, he does not ignore Hamas or the PLO.
news:d78a4a3c-eead-4c72-
ada7-6663dc44a29d@34g2000pru.
> On Apr 15, 9:45 pm, Zev <zev_h...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "Morrissey Breen" <morrisseybr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:06580902-
>> f9f6-4832-8b33-5a44da827...@
>> > In his op-ed, Goldstone declares that Hamas’s indiscriminate firing of
>> > rockets into Israel, which resulted in the killing of four civilians,
>> > was an “intentional” targeting of civilians and consequently a war
>> > crime. But it is a mystery how he can suggest that the indiscriminate
>> > bombing and shooting of Palestinians in Gaza by the IDF, which
>> > resulted in nearly a thousand civilian deaths, was not “intentional”.
>>
>> Hamas' firing of rockets into Israeli cities may
>> have been inaccurate, it was hardly indiscriminate.
>> Every target was civilian.
>> But why does professor Dugard claim Israeli
>> bombing and shooting was indiscriminate?
>> What does he know about this kind of warfare?
>> > Fight for accountability . . . from Israel and Hamas
>> > Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly
>> > of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request
>> > that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council, and that
>> > the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the
>> > International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur
>> > and Libya.
>>
>> As if they care.
>> Isn't there something wrong with a system
>> which threatens only the respectable?
>> > ------------------------------
>> > John Dugard is professor of law at the University of Pretoria,
>> > emeritus professor of the University of Leiden and former UN special
>> > rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory.
>>
>> Is it safe to assume that he mostly ignores Hamas and PLO?
>
> No, Zev, as you well, know, he does not ignore Hamas or the PLO.
No, I don't know that. I've never heard of him.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment