Israel has demanded a change in British law

#1
#2
Sad state of affairs and bordering on the ridiculous, IMHO. I wonder how many other country's staff could be in the same boat?

I take it US have immunity?

Any lawyers out there who could comment?
 
#3
Bliar's government has failed to do anything about Israel's many contraventions of UN resolutions; he does not criticise the IDF when they shoot children, launch rockets at residential areas or bulldoze homes; he does not criticise the way Israel restricts some of its citizens access to education or healthcare, or its policy of detention without trial.

In the matter of an IDF officer visiting, Bliar will no doubt take advice from Lord Levy, his special adviser on the area, and from Lord Cronysmith, his adviser on putting soldiers before courts. I doubt the Brigadier need lose any sleep over the possibility of being nicked.

In any case, if he's innocent he has nothing to fear, has he?
 
#4
The Israeli defence minister is deliberatly twisting fact with fiction as part of a PR stunt. Look here:
Daily telegraph said:
He [Israel's defence minister, Shaul Mofaz] also called on "countries that suffer from terrorism at home" not to take legal action against "soldiers and officers who acted legally against vicious and atrocious terror".
Is the UK, that's to say the state, taking legal action, or threatening legal action, against these people? NO!

So, Shaul Mofaz, you're talking bollaaaarkksss!!!

However, private individuals, or groups, are bringing cases that the UK legal system (supposedly independant of the government) is obliged to look into. That seems to me to be perfectly right and proper. If the Israeli Government thinks it and it's armed forces have acted quite properly, morally and legally (as in international legal terms not their own), then let them come to the UK and make a case in front of a independant judiciary that will (I trust) base their judgment on purely legal not political terms.

If you're not confident of this, then discourage your personel from visiting the UK and do your best to make a PR song-and-dance of the problem and create a political storm.

Open offer/suggestion to Shaul Mofaz: If you think you're doing the right, just and legal thing, come and prove it in court!
 
#5
US citizens do not have blanket immunity. Certain government officials have diplomatic immunity, as do many officials of the Israeli government. Lecturers and students at the Royal College of Defence Studies do not have diplomatic immunity.

Edited in deepest shame. :oops:
 
#6
Daily telegraph said:
He [Israel's defence minister, Shaul Mofaz] also called on "countries that suffer from terrorism at home" not to take legal action against "soldiers and officers who acted legally against vicious and atrocious terror".
It's a quandary, isn't it. If the UK is minded to prosecute soldiers who rough up some youths for lobbing grenades at them, what could happen to an officer whose army routinely uses live rounds against stone throwing children (though this could, of course, be ok in the IDF's ROE)?
 
#7
Open offer/suggestion to Shaul Mofaz: If you think you're doing the right, just and legal thing, come and prove it in court!
.....and be held for the period in nick until you do with passport removed? B0ll0x to that. Think I can see his point in not coming.

And of course UK personnel aren't ever going to be placed in the same position by some sm@rtarrse policitical posturing in another country, are we? :roll:

we need to be careful here
 
#8
in_the_cheapseats said:
Open offer/suggestion to Shaul Mofaz: If you think you're doing the right, just and legal thing, come and prove it in court!
.....and be held for the period in nick until you do with passport removed? B0ll0x to that. Think I can see his point in not coming.
Get real!

The legal action taken was based on international law that our Dear Leader has been very keen to promote - the prosecution of war criminals. Presented with prima facae evidence, UK courts are obliged to issue an arrest warrent. Now, and this is an important factor which old Shaul seems to conveniently forget, is that in the UK, you are innocent until proven guilty. So, it is inconceivable that anybody arrested would not be granted bail, and it is almost certain that, given Israeli Government guarantees, any individual would also be permitted to sit out their bail term in the Israel if they so choose. So forget about all that nonsense about spending lengthy periods in the nick. Don't forget, the ICTY has allowed just such a thing with alleged Serbian war criminals!

Is it not obvious, that the Israeli Government is not so much concerned about a General missing a dinner date, or a semester studying at KCL, it's worried about having to defend and justify its own policy in the Occupied Territories and elsewhere.

in_the_cheapseats said:
And of course UK personnel aren't ever going to be placed in the same position by some sm@rtarrse policitical posturing in another country, are we? :roll:

we need to be careful here
We do indeed. Under these very same international provisions a Spanish (for example) court could issue an arrest warrent and pick up any Tom getting off a plane on his way to hols on the Costa Blanka!
 
#9
A country is much more than its government Merkator. Moreover, is what General Mofaz said a translation from Hebrew or did he speak in English, not his first language? So he may not be talking boIIocks.

As for proving his innocence, Brigadier Aviv Kochavi may not fancy spending an unspecified part of his life under house arrest waiting to do so, or not. He certainly won't have any American Generals who use sledgehammers to crack nuts in Iraq (or command troops who do so) keeping him company. Nor any other 'nasty' police or army General from (excuse me if I don't compile a list) States a tad more brutal than Israel. ( As suggested by in the cheap seats )

I would like to see the IDF/State of Israel be less nonch about running their troops that deliberately shoot children and I'd like to see Bliar say so. Killing the innocent on purpose is the opposite of the stated IDF code of ethics.

Philosopher wrote.

Lectures and students at the Royal Collage of Defence Studies do not have diplomatic immunity.
Is there anywhere that lectures do have diplomatic immunity and is this Royal Collage of Defence Studies in line for a Turner Prize?
 
#10
Oops. Some of my points are being posted by others while I compose.

Merkator roared

So, it is inconceivable that anybody arrested would not be granted bail,
General Pinochet.
 
#11
Seadog said:
A country is much more than its government Merkator. Moreover, is what General Mofaz said a translation from Hebrew or did he speak in English, not his first language? So he may not be talking boIIocks.
True. It could be that a translator has done Shaul an injustice. But I doubt it.

But let me reiterate. These cases are being sought by pro-Palestinian groups - NOT HMG. In fact, because of the nature of it, they would actually like them NOT to be brought. However, the UK still has a relatively free and independant judiciary, and when presented with primae facae evidence of wrong doing it is obliged to act. It's called 'the law'.


Seadog said:
As for proving his innocence, Brigadier Aviv Kochavi may not fancy spending an unspecified part of his life under house arrest waiting to do so, or not.
Who says he will be under house arrest? Some ICTY indictees are roaming quite freely in their own country under licence. They presented themselves at the Hague voluntarily, sought bail, and after guarantees from their Government, were realsed on bail to reappear at time XYZ. Please don't confuse the European justice system with that prevalent in the Middle East or, for example, Gitmo!


Seadog said:
He certainly won't have any American Generals who use sledgehammers to crack nuts in Iraq (or command troops who do so) keeping him company. Nor any other 'nasty' police or army General from (excuse me if I don't compile a list) States a tad more brutal than Israel. ( As suggested by in the cheap seats )
Haven't got the slightest idea what you're rambling on about here. Can only assume you're trying to go off at a tangent to avoid discussing the question.


Seadog said:
General Pinochet.
Errrmmm! I think you'll find that he did received bail, was NOT under house arrest, but was unable to return to Chile because thee then Chilean Gvt did NOT offer the guarantees. And so, for both legal and medical reasons, decided to fight his case from the UK. Which, as you are I'm sure aware, he effectively won and went home and not to Spain. So, good attempt, but not the best example.


Seadog said:
I would like to see the IDF/State of Israel be less nonch about running their troops that deliberately shoot children and I'd like to see Bliar say so. Killing the innocent on purpose is the opposite of the stated IDF code of ethics.
I do NOT have an opinion on whether these Generals are guilty or not of anything, domestic, international or ???. I am also not voicing any opinion on whether Israel as a state is, or is not, pursuing a correct, moral, just or legal policy. I am simply suggesting that they come and test their beliefs in a court of law - and let the law decide - instead of playing a PR/political game to avoid it.
 
#12
ViroBono said:
Bliar's government has failed to do anything about Israel's many contraventions of UN resolutions; he does not criticise the IDF when they shoot children, launch rockets at residential areas or bulldoze homes; he does not criticise the way Israel restricts some of its citizens access to education or healthcare, or its policy of detention without trial.

In the matter of an IDF officer visiting, Bliar will no doubt take advice from Lord Levy, his special adviser on the area, and from Lord Cronysmith, his adviser on putting soldiers before courts. I doubt the Brigadier need lose any sleep over the possibility of being nicked.

In any case, if he's innocent he has nothing to fear, has he?
Blairs government has actually repeatedly critisised the IDF and Israel, whilst treading a tightrope of trying to maintain relations with the country to help push the peace process that has lead to Israel moving out of areas of the gaza strip. The IDF is not firing missiles into buildings for no reason, their tactics, even though they are over the top, too indiscriminate and involve too much collateral damage (intention or otherwise :p) are actually less severe than what they are on the end of from the Palestinians.
Mr brigadier should only be worried if he personally broke ROE and commited what would be classed as a war crime or he was directly in charge of and either condoned or ordered a war crime.
I'm not condoning blair or israel but you've failed to see any type of context or the other side (hopefully we'd arrest a Palestinian if he hadn't blown himself up).

p.s You lot on arrse are turning me into a bloody blair sympathiser with your narrow mindedness!!
 
#13
Merkator wrote

Who says he will be under house arrest?
Who says he won't? I didn't say he would. I said;

Brigadier Aviv Kochavi may not fancy spending an unspecified part of his life under house arrest waiting to do so, or not.
If I was him I'd stay at home and not take the chance.

Some ICTY indictees are roaming quite freely in their own country under licence
.

Some? And the rest? If I was him I'd stay at home and not take the chance.

Haven't got the slightest idea what you're rambling on about here. Can only assume you're trying to go off at a tangent to avoid discussing the question.
But; you managed to engage me on 'the question' with two post tangent quotes of mine and your ripostes (right or wrong). I referenced in the cheap seats, another poster. Read his posts without the red mist in your eyes and you may get my drift.

I do NOT have an opinion on whether these Generals are guilty or not of anything, domestic, international or ???. I am also not voicing any opinion on whether Israel as a state is, or is not, pursuing a correct, moral, just or legal policy. I am simply suggesting that they come and test their beliefs in a court of law - and let the law decide - instead of playing a PR/political game to avoid it.
You are giving me a contrary impression.

Haven't got the slightest idea what you're rambling on about here. Can only assume you're trying to go off at a tangent to avoid discussing the question.
If you have no idea, it isn't appropriate to make assumptions. Brigadier Kochavi will be really screwed if a juror with no idea makes an assumption.
 
#14
[/quote]Please don't confuse the European justice system with that prevalent in the Middle East or, for example, Gitmo!
So one of my questions stand. Could it happen to visiting US staff? Any likelyhood of "primae facae" evidence being presented against any of them in the UK courts in regard to ROE direction/use in Iraq or anywhere else? The US position is clear - "I will never second guess a man on the ground" - 3* in charge when I was there....interesting view I thought at the time and perhaps open to interpretation in a UK court of law.
 
#15
Who is this Aviv Kochavi?

http://www.counterpunch.org/nevegordon1.html

I was a platoon sergeant in the corporals company; you were a young platoon officer.
...
March 1, 2002 I once again saw you... You were on the news program: the commander of the troops that entered Balata refugee camp
...
you imposed a curfew on the camp, blew up the electric transmission lines, cutting off electricity to 20,000 civilian inhabitants; bulldozers ruined the water supply pipe lines. Your soldiers, Aviv, then moved from house to house by smashing holes in the interior walls; they destroyed furniture and other property, and riddled bullets in water tanks on roof tops. The soldiers spread terror on the inhabitants, most of whom were women, elderly, and children.
...
your soldiers also used inhabitants as human shields. Also, in the first few hours of the incursion the Palestinians had 120 wounded, and that you, Aviv, refused to allow ambulances to enter and leave the camp.
 
#16
in_the_cheapseats said:
So one of my questions stand. Could it happen to visiting US staff? Any likelyhood of "primae facae" evidence being presented against any of them in the UK courts in regard to ROE direction/use in Iraq or anywhere else? The US position is clear - "I will never second guess a man on the ground" - 3* in charge when I was there....interesting view I thought at the time and perhaps open to interpretation in a UK court of law.
Why are you asking this when if you bother to do a little research yourself, you'd get an answer...???

Here's a tip. Click on Sergey's orignal link to the Telegraph story. Read the article. You will also notice that that article mentions another case concerning another General in September last year. It also provides a link for you to click on to read that story too. Then read the 2nd paragraph and the very last, and hej presto! you have your answer.

Of course, I could post it right here for you, but I thought, why should I do all the donkey work?

Moreover, if Seadog had bothered to read that article too he would have had an opportunity to stitch me up. But he missed it. :wink:
 
#17
in_the_cheapseats said:
Sad state of affairs and bordering on the ridiculous, IMHO. I wonder how many other country's staff could be in the same boat?

I take it US have immunity?

Any lawyers out there who could comment?
I am not a lawyer but I know that the UK has agreed never to prosecute any US citizen in the International Criminal Court.
 
#18
From the Jerusalem Post:

British Foreign Minister Jack Straw apologized to Israel on September 19 for the brouhaha in which IDF Maj.-Gen. (res.) Doron Almog was unable to land in London because of an arrest warrant issued for alleged war crimes, according to the Foreign Ministry.

...

During the closed meeting between the two ministers, Straw reassured Shalom that he had wanted to call the Israeli government about the episode. He refrained from phoning, he explained, because his legal staff advised him it would appear that he was speaking out against British law.
Now I'm not a legal expert, however it seems strange to me that speaking out against British law is not advisable on the telephone, but OK in conference. Those buggers!
 
#19
minime33 said:
in_the_cheapseats said:
Sad state of affairs and bordering on the ridiculous, IMHO. I wonder how many other country's staff could be in the same boat?

I take it US have immunity?

Any lawyers out there who could comment?
I am not a lawyer but I know that the UK has agreed never to prosecute any US citizen in the International Criminal Court.
OK - you know it, but I don't . I'm not a lawyer either - could you post a reference please?

M_C
 
#20
KGB_resident said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/28/wisr28.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/28/ixworld.html

Israel yesterday demanded a change in British law after a senior Israeli army officer cancelled a trip to the UK fearing he would be charged with war crimes.

Brigadier-General Aviv Kochavi, who headed army units in the Gaza Strip until Israel ended its occupation of the territory in August, had been due to spend the summer at the Royal College of Defence Studies in London.

WTF? How dare they event suggest that we change OUR law, no about DEMAND it. And from a country that totally ignores UN Mandates laid against it.

Plus the UK is a soverign state with hundreds of years experience forming our laws, legal systems and democratic parliment. NOT a 'recent' newcomer to the world formed with and from a pretty dismal history of terrorism...... (how many of our Prime Ministers have been terroist leaders?)

A short, sharp answer needed here, one word, two letters ..... NO.

And as other posters have stated, if the General in question is innocent of all charges come on over and have your day in court, come to that come on over any way and have your day..... No doubt the 'frog' already has a good defence set up. Of course.... if he doesen't then doesent that scream guilt and duplicity on the part of the Isrealie Goverment as well as the individual in question?.
 

Latest Threads

Top