Israel and the U.S. Ruling On War Crimes [could have an immediate impact on Israelis]

Haaretz.com ^ | 14:04 16.06.10 | Haggai Carmon

[fight_truth_decay]

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, not all former foreign officials living in the United States can claim immunity from prosecution in U.S. Courts. Its decision could have an immediate impact on Israelis.

In recent years there have been two failed attempts to prosecute Israeli officials in the U.S. In 2007, Palestinians filed a lawsuit against former Shin Bet chief Avi Dichter, claiming he was responsible for the deaths of their relatives after an Israeli plane dropped a one-ton bomb on their Gaza home. A federal court said Dichter had functioned within his official duties, ruling him immune.

Another 2007 lawsuit accused former Israel Defense Forces chief Moshe Ya'alon of war crimes over the 1996 bombing of a United Nations camp in the Lebanese town of Kfar Kana, in which a number of civilians wer killed. But Ya'alon too was ruled immune from litigation, with appeals at federal level also rejected.

This week's ruling could now result in a wave of lawsuits against foreign officials.

More:

[fight_truth_decay]

Ad placed in The New York Review of Books-May 13, 2010

"The WCT (War Crimes Times) has resolved to see that Bush, Cheney, & Co. are prosecuted for war crimes no matter how long it takes. There is no statute of limitations on war crimes."

[Alberta's Child]

Israeli officials could conceivably defend themselves from civil lawsuits in the U.S. by claiming their actions should be considered a "sovereign act" - a defense relying on the principle that each country may handle affairs within its jurisdiction without intervention from foreign states.

Maybe I'm being naive about this, but wouldn't it be far easier for a former foreign government official (from any country) to defend themselves from civil lawsuits in the U.S. simply by moving back to their home country -- or to some other country with far fewer lawyers than we have here?

[verity]

Shovel ready jobs for lawyers. :-(

[heiss]

People are traveling (vacations, business trips etc) in the US and besides, forced to leave a new home country because of some BS lawsuit is horrible.

This would also increase the likelyhood that any (at least GOP) member even remotely attached to any government cannot travel abroad, as any country (say France) could simple detain some mid-level former Pentagon advisor or ex marine who was based in Iraq.

[Alberta's Child]

I think your points aren't relevant to this specific discussion here. This court decision involves the exposure of foreign officials to civil lawsuits here in the U.S., not criminal prosecution. If someone were simply traveling here on vacation or on business, a prospective plaintiff who wants to file suit in civil court against a foreign government official would have a hard time demonstrating that a U.S. court had any jurisdiction in the matter.

[Crim]

“The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, not all former foreign officials living in the United States can claim immunity from prosecution in U.S. Courts.

Key word...prosecution.

[Alberta's Child]

This week's ruling could now result in a wave of lawsuits against foreign officials.

Key word . . . lawsuits.

LOL. I'm thinking this article may not have been written very well, since it appears that the author is blurring the distinction between the two.

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure it's damned near impossible for a U.S. prosecutor to bring criminal charges against someone for an alleged crime that occurred in a foreign country and involved an accused foreign perpetrator and foreign victims.

Heck -- the U.S. doesn't even prosecute cases involving alleged Nazi war criminals. That "Ivan the Terrible" guy in Ohio, for example, was only subject to deportation from the U.S., not a criminal trial here.

[Crim]

“I’m not a lawyer, but I’m pretty sure it’s damned near impossible for a U.S. prosecutor to bring criminal charges against someone for an alleged crime that occurred in a foreign country and involved an accused foreign perpetrator and foreign victims.”

Oh they will just add a charge or two...the name Noriega comes to mind...

Lets nt forget rachal corry of the assclown just killed on the flotilla....a ‘so-called” american citizen...

yeah...I have no doubt the jew haters will worm a way to do it with this ruling..

I’ll also remind you that interpol now has immunity as well....they are even helping Hamas track down the isreali patriots who off a terrorist.

They could simply swoop in and snag whomever they want...

[SunkenCiv]

...not all former foreign officials living in the United States can claim immunity from prosecution in U.S. Courts.

So, Obama can't be prosecuted until he's *out* of office?

[SJackson]

Middle East and terrorism, occasional political and Jewish issues Ping List. High Volume

If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.

..................

An odd ruling, that immunity doesn't apply to specific government officials. I recognize this ruling is specific to the issue of torture, but the implication is that foreign immunity exists only for the state, not individuals. Not tradition, but maybe NYC can start collecting on UN parking tickets. And something that can be cured legislatively.

[Quix]

May the evil doers fall in the pits they have dug for others.

Let God arise and His enemies be scattered.