WARNING: This is a high volume ping list
Posted on 03/04/2004 2:48:04 PM PST by Alouette
The three days of hearings in the Hague on Israel's security barrier closed after the 15 judges in black robes heard a professor from France defend suicide bombings and question Israel's right to exist. The judges did not react to her testimony.
Representing the Islamic nations, Professor Monique Chamilar Janou, a leading figure in antisemitic circles in France, delivered the most extreme address of the trial. Janou claimed the suicide attacks are a legitimate part of the Palestinian battle against "the bloody Israeli terror against the Palestinians" and therefore, she argued, the fence is illegal.
The judges sitting on the bench are not professional jurists but diplomats unaccustomed to legal polemics. Janou's argument was well-suited to the International Court of Justice, which resembles courts in dictatorial nations.
Janou belongs to French circles that deny Israel's right to exist, support Palestinian terrorism and fan the flames of neo-antisemitism and hostility toward Jews. All of the European Arab-sponsored prosecutors are known as pro- Palestinian enemies of Israel. "Israel has imposed terror on the Palestinians since its founding," said Janou. "Even if the wall is moved to the Israeli border it would not be legal, since the partition decision from 1948 is not a complete legal document. It lacks the Palestinian people's consent to the existence of Israel." She asked the judges to issue an opinion against the fence, and "by doing so they would contribute to peace."
Following Janou's remarks, which uncovered the Arabs' goal of denying the legality of the State of Israel itself, the Chinese judge announced the hearings were over without saying a word about when the opinion would be announced before being submitted to the UN General Assembly. According to estimates, the judges' opinion will be made public within a few weeks.
European experts say there is no doubt the majority of the judges will declare the fence illegal. Two or three of them might support the fence and the absence of a unanimous decision would make it easier for Israel not to honor it. Most of the judges are known to be anti-Israel United Nations members, as impervious to Israeli suffering from terrorism as the Arabs themselves.
Experts say the judges could take advantage of the opportunity to depart from the question of the fence and determine the fence is situated on territory occupied in violation of the Geneva Convention. From a legal standpoint this would cause complications for Israel, but this is not a legal dispute but a political-military wrangle.
Legal experts note the case in the Israeli High Court is still pending, and based on its reputation the court could also rule the fence is illegal, further tangling the government and justifying Arab claims.
During the second and third days of the proceedings, the world media lost interest in the trial. The demonstrations by Israelis and other Jews outside the palace where the hearings were taking place did not help rehabilitate Israel's standing but did prevent Palestinian propaganda from conquering the streets of the Hague and dominating the media. Reporters relieved the tedium by showing images of the blown-up bus and photographs of the victims of suicide attacks. Generally the world press covers suicide attacks by rushing to interview the family of the suicide bomber and writing up his life story, so this was a welcome change.
WARNING: This is a high volume ping list
At least she's forthright in her antisemitism instead of cloaking it behind the lie of "Palestinian Nationalism".
If they judge the wall to be illegal, I wonder who they think they will get to force its removal? Kofi and his keystone cops at the UN?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.