|
Update: WAR CRIMES SUIT AGAINST ARIEL SHARON Lawyers representing victims in the Sabra and Shatila case welcome the Belgian Supreme Court's decision to quash Court of Appeals' ruling in precedent-setting Yerodia case (E/65/02) BADIL Resource Center Today marks the 55th anniversary of the UN recommendation (UNGA 181/1947) to partition Palestine into two states. It also marks the 25th anniversary of the UN Day in Solidarity with the Palestinian People and their right to self-determination. The two anniversaries are significant not only as historical events; they also shed some light on the requirements for a comprehensive, just, and durable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The first anniversary is a sober reminder of what happens when those responsible for facilitating durable solutions to political conflicts stray from universal guidelines set forth in international law. Officials responsible for the UN partition plan not only acknowledged that ethno-national separation in mandatory Palestine was not practical; they admitted that it was not entirely clear that the UN General Assembly had the legal authority to recommend partition. Despite these doubts, however, the Assembly voted against repeated requests by various member states to obtain an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The second anniversary is no less significant. While the UN has subsequently reaffirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, and the right of refugees to return to their homes of origin, the annual UN Day in Solidarity with the Palestinian People is a sober reminder of what happens when the international community affirms but fails to uphold universal principles of international law, and bring to justice those responsible for violations and grave breaches. The current situation in Palestine/Israel is a tragic consequence of both: failure to place international human rights, humanitarian and refugee law at the center of the political process; and, failure to hold responsible those who violate and commit grave breaches of international law. The case against Ariel Sharon and Amos Yaron, currently before the Belgian Court of Cassation (Supreme Court for criminal cases) is important, not only because it seeks to hold accountable those responsible for the 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre and seek redress for the survivors; it is also important because it endeavors to reinsert universal principles of international law back into the process of finding a comprehensive, just and durable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. A decision by the Court to quash an earlier (June 2002) decision by the Belgian Court of Appeals that dismissed the case against Sharon on narrow, technical grounds, would be an achievement, not only for the victims of Sabra and Shatila, but for all those who seek a just and durable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Palestinian refugees based on universal principles set forth in international law. The case against Ariel Sharon is equally significant in light of ongoing violations and grave breaches of international law in the 1967 occupied Palestinian territories, the fact that no one has been held accountable for these violations and grave breaches – including crimes against humanity and war crimes – and the likelihood that Sharon, re-elected as leaders of Likud party, will emerge as the winner of the upcoming (January 2003) elections in Israel. ------------------
|