←back to thread

ICC Judge Guillou loses all US IT accounts after MAGA sanctions [FR]

(www.franceinfo.fr)
89 points henearkr | 1 comments | 25 Oct 25 18:43 UTC | HN request time: 0.243s | source
Show context
nabla9 ◴[25 Oct 25 19:02 UTC] No.45706177[source]▶
The arrest warrants are as solid as humanly possible.

Before the arrest warrant by the Judge, before the ICC prosecutor even attempted to ask for arrest, they asked second opinion from a Panel of Experts in International Law that included top experts, including Theodor Meron; Hebrew University (M.J.), Harvard Law School (LL.M., J.S.D.) and Cambridge University (Diploma in Public International Law) who was once was a legal adviser of the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, then Israeli Ambassador in Canada, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and so on.

The panel unanimously agreed with the prosecutor.

replies(2): >>45706200 #>>45706201 #
YZF[dead post] ◴[25 Oct 25 19:06 UTC] No.45706201[source]▶
[flagged]
wtfwhateven ◴[25 Oct 25 20:00 UTC] No.45706544[source]▶
>The court has no jurisdiction.

It does have jurisdiction.

>So no, they were not solid.

They were and are solid.

>but that is through some incredibly weird legal gymnastics

No it isn't.

>by which somehow the non-existent state of Palestine

It definitely does exist.

>is a member giving the court authority

Yes, it joined the ICC in 2015.

> over its non-existent territory.

Its territory does in fact exist.

replies(1): >>45708518 #
1. dlubarov ◴[26 Oct 25 02:00 UTC] No.45708518[source]▶
> It does have jurisdiction.

Under its own rules and its own interpretation of Gaza governance. That doesn't make it some sort of legal or practical reality - I can make up a set of rules under which I'm the world leader, but it would have no effect.

> It definitely does exist.

This is a bit of a semantic question, but it doesn't really meet the criteria set out in the Montevideo Convention.

> Yes, it joined the ICC in 2015.

Not Hamas, which is the actual government of the territory in question (Gaza). The idea that an entity which never governed a territory, and has never been popular there, can grant a foreign court jurisdiction there is a bit absurd.