< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://bokertov.typepad.com/ btb/" >

Sunday, July 11, 2004

The Only World Court Judge to Rule for Israel was the American

The other judges were from

Sierra Leone
the Netherlands
THE HAGUE (al Reuters) - Judge Thomas Buergenthal acknowledged in his dissenting opinion that some or even all of Israel's barrier might violate international law, but said the court ruling would have had more credibility if it had taken more account of Israel's security.

"The court did not have before it the requisite factual bases for its sweeping findings," he wrote.

Buergenthal, who was the only one of the 15 World Court judges not to support a ruling that the barrier Israel is building contravenes international law, hinted that he thought Israel should have provided more evidence to support its case.

"To reach that conclusion ... without having before it or seeking to ascertain all relevant facts bearing directly on Israel's legitimate right of self-defense, military necessity and security needs ... cannot be justified," he said.

"The nature of these ... attacks and their impact on Israel and its population are never really seriously examined by the court," Buergenthal wrote. "Without this examination the findings made are not legally well founded."

I am cynical enough to believe that had Israel provided evidence of the terror war against her civilians, the vote would have been the same.

Do you think recitation of the names of dead Jewish children would have changed the mind of Egyptian judge Nabil Elaraby? I don't.
Egyptian judge Nabil Elaraby, whom Israel failed to have remove from the case after accusing the former diplomat of being "actively engaged in opposition to Israel," also appended an individual written opinion to the World Court ruling.
"The finding by the court reflects a lofty objective that has eluded the international community for a very long time," Elaraby wrote. "The advisory opinion should herald a new era as the first concrete manifestation of a meaningful administration of justice related to Palestine."

It breaks my heart that the one judge who did not support the racist, hypocritical, indifferent posture of the Court, blames the Jews for the fact that it went the way it did.

It was a farce. Just read Meryl Yourish's Humpty Dumpty meanings, and even more importantly, her Israel vs. the world, continued
[From 1947 to 1989]

Requests:The Arabs were "called upon" to "comply," "desist," "refrain" etc. 4 times. Israel was "demanded," "ordered" etc. to do General Assembly bidding 305 times.

The Assembly expressed its "concern," "grave concern," "anxiety" etc. about Israeli policies or actions 179 times. The General Assembly expressed itself in similar terms about Arab policies or actions 0 times.

Israel was "condemned," "vigorously condemned," "strongly condemned," "deplored," "strongly deplored", "censured," "denounced" by the General Assembly 321 times. The Arabs were condemned 0 times.

Cumulative Number of Votes cast with/for Israel: 7,938.

Cumulative Number of Votes cast against Israel: 55,642.


It is enough to know that the world has not given up on trying to solve The Jewish Problem . . . I have the funniest feeling that is what Judge Elaraby was referrring to when he mentioned the "lofty objective that has eluded the international community for a very long time."

This article by Alan Dershowitz, via Smooth Stone, points out that the International Court of Justice in The Hague is of "questionable status."
No Israeli judge may serve on that court as a permanent member, while sworn enemies of Israel serve among its judges, several of whom represent countries that do not abide by the rule of law....

A judicial decision can have no legitimacy when rendered against a nation that is willfully excluded from the court's membership by bigotry.

Just as the world should have disregarded any decision against blacks rendered by a Mississippi court in the 1930s, so too should all decent people contemptuously disregard the bigoted decisions of the International Court of Justice when it comes to Israel.
Prof. Dershowitz wrote this article the day before the International Court rendered this opinion because he was certain -- based on the composition of the court -- that its verdict would be against Israel. Following the decision he did not have to change a single word.