the position given to you by well, does have those you've described that is better than is that at any thoughts provided? hang on my question to you. all that good cooks, i think, is the most difficult press than our part to answer facing realities. usb to in the security council, this is, it may just something book, is it exit or to hear the story on told to how does the air is low and pressure to hold as well to account for one does the move countries of a phone and gets to the us top court and as president is facing the criminal complaint, switzerland. so can international justice johnson as well. this is inside story, the

hello and welcome to the program. i'm elizabeth put on him. it's been more than 3 months since israel launched it's devastating war on gaza in the wake of the 7th of toilet attacks. nearly 25000 palestinians have now been killed in tens of thousands more interested. but israel doesn't seem any closer to its station goal of illumination come off and freeing the captive while the humanitarian catastrophe. it gets worse by the day. many countries have rejected as well as actions and south africa has taken it to the international court of justice. choosing it of commission genocide, israel now if he has more isolated than ever, it's president ties, it could. so even became the subject of a criminal complaint in switzerland while mexico and should i have referred as well to the international criminal court. but wouldn't any of this make a difference and what can be done and the palestinians suffering and gaza will get to our guest for the moment. but 1st, this report from poor gig, it is earl's will drag zoning, dasa with food and medical supplies,

nearly exhausted to humanitarian condition has become dia, doctors, accounting out amputations without any anesthetic with growing outraged. and perhaps crucially legal proceedings, ramping up these really presidents isaac could, so it's facing criminal complaint in switzerland. it happened during his recent trip to the world economic form in davos statement, from swiss. prosecutors said the plaintive seeking a criminal prosecution in power though to case brought by south africa at the international court of justice, accusing israel of genocide in gaza as the destruction escalates on the ground, mexico and she likes and of now with the both israel and time us to the international criminal code, citing consent about war crimes. while the, you and i, c, j come some traits on disputes between countries. the icpc is a criminal tribunal which can prosecute the individuals. during hood soaks

appearance in davos, he put forward his rails position on the war in cancer, while with rejecting the challenges of genocide twisting. and i'm not shy away from the human tragedy in gaza. and you want to know something. we care. we care the boys, if it is paint for us. that's all neighbors. i was suffering so much. but how else can we defend ourselves in an infrastructure of the old unbelievable size? and i call upon the entire international community to stand with these running or reject this plane. of many countries around the world have expressed concerns about the disproportionality of israel's war on godsa and the human costs. there were legal proceedings on more than one front, yet it's not clear was effect this could have extra sales actions. and what consequences that could be,

especially with allies like the united states publicly stating that unwavering support. poking out you 0 for insight story, the spring and i guess in paris, laura l bono, an international lawyer and human rights advocate to co host. the weekly pod cost the palestine pod and toronto. william shave is professor of international know at middlesex university in the u. k, a previously served as the chairperson of the commission of inquiry on the 2014 gauze, a conflict, and in dublin. jennifer cassidy. electra and diplomacy and international law at the university of oxford and a former u. n. and e u diplomat. valuable and welcome to each of you, mr. shavers. how stop with you in toronto and start with that criminal complaint against this really president isaac hit song in switzerland, mountain theory. i know that suited countries don't have criminal jurisdiction,

or the heads of state government and the foreign ministers of any other countries. but can that immunity be lifted in certain circumstances such as cases of alleged crimes against humanity? not as the international law stands today, there is a quite a clear judgement of the international court of justice from about 20 years ago. that said, is that the, the national court simply cannot exercise jurisdiction in criminal matters over a for in the head of state or for administer. so i think it's pretty clear there, and i think that's probably the, the, the fatal fact of the complaint that was made against the president of israel in switzerland a few days ago. okay. was cassidy. there has been a lot of activity in western countries recently using universal jurisdiction targeting people in so don and sylvia are these countries such as germany, which found

a theory and kind of guilty of crimes against humanity in 2022. they now under pressure to treat is really officials in the same way. and certainly there it is as you right, the notion of a growing pressure um in the western countries and to to not only respect international law but to adhere to it and uphold is, i know there was variety mentioned by the, by the previous panel as this is quite difficult to do regarding the universal jurisdiction pacifically. in this case, we must note that this is a serving ahead of staged who has different amount of community. it is not a coast and you know, at retired head of state. it is a serving member stage, so it's an extremely difficult thing to process. a prosecutors, it's extremely difficult thing to to file however crush as you're writing noted,

pressure is being exerted at not by governments and not by yes, by some does extend the government. but the political power is not backing a lot of western states. it's the people around the world who are really actually growing this movement of pressure rising their states and, and their legislators to do this. yeah, absolutely. from what we know about this criminal complaint against those really presidents, it has been brought by a number of individuals. ms. albano, do you think that we will see universal jurisdiction being used against as really officials who let's say on like president as a cuts off? who don't have that immunity because they're a head of state or head of government to a foreign minister. couldn't make it difficult for them to move around. is that something that you see happening? well, i absolutely agree that we're going to continue to see more legal action brought worldwide, whether it be in national courts or continued pressure on the international institutions like the i c, c and the i, c, j um,

to achieve some sort of accountability. and i just wanna say that whether or not those cases are ultimately successful, whether or not they're dismissed for 1st, external or procedural reasons, or whether they actually reached a ruling on the merits is almost not really the point of renew case which has brought in an effort to hold israel accountable for their genocide on slot in gaza is going to add more pressure to changing the status quote. and this, of course, is not to be viewed in isolation from all the forms of resistance that we're seeing in this moment worldwide, including b. s, grassroots efforts like direct action and other efforts to hold elected officials accountable amongst others. so really i just want to emphasize that the law is merely a tool. it's not sufficient, but it's also not meaningless. a, some might think after decades of understandable frustration, ok with it as a means for achieving justice and accountability. yes. and we've certainly seen

protests around the world. we have seen growing support for the boy club, divestment and sanctions will be the movement. if we can continue to talk about what's happening legally. most the shape is mexico and surely have referred what's happening and as well. and gaza to the international criminal course. and mexico has said that the i, c. c is the proper form to establish criminal potential criminal responsibility. why do you think that these countries think that the i c c is a special court to investigate what's happening? well the i c, c is of course a criminal court and it's going to focus on individuals. we were talking about the, the situation of the president of israel visiting switzerland, according to the case law of the international criminal court. he has no wouldn't even be there. and so he could be prosecuted in switzerland would be under an obligation to, to bring him to justice to see that he would be transferred to the hague, arrested, and so on. so there are some real advantages to the criminal law route. it's also

something that can operate more speedily of and for example, the international court of justice, which is going to probably in the next few days and the next week or to deliver an order against israel. but on the merits of the case, we're not going to have a ruling for probably 345 years. it's another way of putting pressure, and it's very important what states have done because they are putting pressure on the prosecutor of the court. the prosecutor of the international criminal court has been reluctant, i think, to proceed with israel and palestine. and this is going to tighten the screws on him and, and, and hopefully compelled, more action on his part in this category. that certainly be more accusation against the icbc prosecutor. so cutting con, isn't it? does that he favors is really charges over long standing palestinian charges. do

you, how much pressure do you think the cutting con is on the, as the chief prosecutor of the international criminal court is a huge amount of pressure and right is so, and i think your observations regarding the at will also the global observation is that he's favoring the is, is, is really side of the palestinian side because we need to bear in mind this is these advisory motions also by the i c, j and other countries regarding the legal annexation of territories. when it's happening in the west by the changing status of tourism. all these charges have been brought well before, you know, october 7th and this has never been looked into by the court. but he is and he should be experiencing a lot of pressure on i think a key point to note that was noted again, but by the previous pods which we most pickup on is the speeding this at which the

icbc can act. because with the i c j for example, we know that a genocide, a ruling is going to take years. i, myself worked on the commercial type, even those in can bodya. and these took, you know, over decades for convictions of genocide and crimes against humanity. but with the eyes you see, we see a much speedier and it's also not going to be brought to the un security council for binding resolution. so that's the other key distinction between the i c c and the ice j. m. as i'm going to why to your sense that the i c c has been slow as the criticism goes to look at the grievances of palestinians. and do you think that the amount of pressure that is on the story now the cause of as well as long gaza that that will that, that will change the way the icy scene looks at this case as well. i think part of the answer is at least the political pressure that the court has been under. so

remember when the court announced the prosecutor's office announced that they would be investigating violations of the wrong statute that occurred in afghanistan and in palestine. around 2020 the us actually impose sanctions on the i c. c. the then prosecutor for to been to the and revoked her us visa and so there's at least that political element that's that play here. but i think side really kareem khan needs to act. he could have issued arrest warrants months ago, and we're seeing greater criticism of how he's handling the situation. hundreds of scholars and practitioners of international law submitted an open letter to the assembly of state parties regarding the office of the prosecutor's engagement with this case. and this letter, i encourage everyone to read it raises questions surrounding his impartiality and his entire handling of this matter. so he really needs to move much quicker than he

has. there hasn't even been an update in terms of news on the icbc website with respect to the case in palestine since november. and this is really just unacceptable. all right, and if we look now and what's happening at the international court of justice as a wait to hear, if it's going to order those provisional measures to south africa is asking full for the protection of civilians and gospel. then gaza. was the shape of do you think that even before we have any rulings to that does what's happening in the court? has the power to shape events even separate from any rulings? you know, we had the is really, attorney general said that she was going to investigate statements that might qualify as incitement to hom, uninvolved civilians a few days before the hearings. yes, absolutely, and i think that the, the, the hearing that took place a week ago in the have had, had great deals was people heard the very, very compelling and powerful arguments set out by sought after this was of course,

viewed around the world. and i think the rather pathetic after 3 the by israel to respond to them. so this is already influential in putting that argument out. we've been certainly living in western countries as i do. we've been bombarded by media and so on there, which are all presenting which are with our tilting very much to the is rarely signed in the debates. and it was stolen casting to, to have that access and to see that very transparent and public debate where we saw both argument sort of people didn't judge based on it. and, and so this was very, very influential already. but of course, we need the order from the court and, and that's going to be a very important development. yeah. and this cassidy. mr. travis, is saying that, you know, what is happening in the court is really influential as exposed the deepening global divide. but it hasn't that we have dozens of countries supporting south africa's case of the international court of justice,

but they will happen to be from the global south. well, many western countries are standing standing by as well. do you think that the number of countries that are supporting south africa's case does that put pressure on as well, or does it not care as long as the u. s. and a number of, you know, a small number of western countries stand by it as well. the personal part of me would like to say, yes, it puts pressure on israel, but from old, in the, you know, from, from the academic side of me, all the evidence and the statements points towards your, your, your letter response. that is real simply does not care. we know the direct statement from netanyahu who came matters and said that if there was a routing of genocide or, or off the visual measures, i believe the court was and may not be for beijing but. and we do not care at what

said no one is said that no one can stop them, but the hell is not yet not the axis of evil, no one. so yet he israel. and once they have the backing of the us and also the u. k. they have the, the funding know they have the backing of germany. i don't think it any from the on the barbaric actions. we've seen israel commission in gaza. i do not think and as pressure by western governments that they're not heating regarding is going to have any play as with then where we're going to see the difference here is whether when there's an icy j really well and it goes issue and security can. so will the u. s. a by, by the legal arm of the un, or will they still continue to and obtain on the resolution or vote against it? yeah. and, and, and the cell born or what do you think? you know, if the i c j does order the provisional measures that south africa is asking for

how much pressure does that put on the united states on as well as the biggest ally to abide by what the you when's top courses saying? but i think it will put the us in a difficult place because if they ignore the ruling and you know that there's a plausible case for for genocide, which is what the court is being asked right now that there's a plausible case that is real, has violated the genocide convention and then it'll put the us in a really difficult position because do they really want to continue to provide unlimited and unconditional financial and military aid israel. and thereby actually violates in a sense that order because that will only undermine the court itself. and does the, does the us really want to undermine the highest, you know, traditional oregon in the world? i think it will put us in a difficult position. obviously, it will make it much more difficult for the us to lecture anybody, worldwide about human rights and their own behavior. and it will just expose even

further that the us operates according to double standards and hypocrisy, and not in accordance with the legal framework established after world war 2 to prevent infection last atrocities. mr. shavers a lot has of course known and made of the us support for as well. but i want to talk about germany's intervention at the international court of justice. germany has a very interesting history, doesn't to commit to the 1st genocide of the 20th century against the media. the of course committed genocide against the jews and the holocaust. and yet it supports it began this case against nama. it supports ukraine's case against russia. and this time, it is intervening on behalf of israel. what do you make of this and do send that it could germany's history, could it helpful heading to as well as case i don't know, i really appreciate the statement from the president. nothing that may be or who, but do basically said to the germans, you know,

you should keep your mouth shut when you start getting involved in their 9 genocide . that's not a good look for that country. but, you know, the, the, this is the, the beauty of these remedies before the international court of justice and the international criminal court. i'm, i'm, i'm not sure that they really have much influence on the united states. that was your previous question. but i think that they do put a lot of pressure on some of the many of the middle powers who are very close to is really very supportive germany among them. perhaps 1st and foremost, but other countries of the netherlands, belgium, france, canada, where i'm coming from today. and these countries are all very loyal to israel, but they're also very loyal to the international court of justice and to the international criminal court. so taking a battle there and so to speak, puts them in a very, very difficult and uncomfortable place, especially when you have some of the, like the prime minister of israel, of basically being totally dismissive of the international court of justice. and of

course, they'll say the same about the international, the international criminal court. just to give you an example of a few months ago, canada, the netherlands, germany, france, made a submission to the international court of justice. in the case that's been filed against me in march and they proposed a very expensive understanding of the problem of genocide. of this, of course is going to be very helpful in terms of finding against me and more than the case. but it's also going to be very helpful to south africa. i think the probably the lawyers in those countries of those european countries in canada who prepared that are now regretting that they took that ignition of what it, it brings up the double standard speak. this is the beauty of the court, is that that's a place where you can, to some extent, i don't want to say there are no double standards, there are there, but you can cut through them and you can expose them. and that's, and that's the interest in these remedies. absolutely. and this cassidy. how much

and did you think, how many we have been talking about it already, but just how much has as well as one, gaza at the devised expose, the double standards of the west of europe when they open the time and time again, condemned, say, russia's actions and ukraine and stand by israel, how much longer do you think they can do this without realizing how it looks? yes, well, it has a, there has been many movements in the past decades that have exposed the double standards on the west when it comes to war. crimes and when it comes to their and quote unquote attempt to spread democracy around the world. and i think we are i the optimist in meetings, we are at, it's somewhat of a breaking point on this issue because we have my area of expertise is social

media and real time governance. we've never had a war which we have, as, you know, a global society being able to see these atrocities before our eyes. so i think the people, we've seen the reaction of the world, you know, we seen it as people marching in their millions, if not billions of countries of, you know, every now. yeah. and being every beach. and so i think we are as a breaking point. but you know, turning directly back to back to your question, the hypocrisy is so strong i'm, i'm, as was knows it earlier. if the us rejects the icy days, even provisional matters. you know that they, they've already lost credibility in my opinion, to now lecture along with the u. k. to lecture people on upholding international human rights. but this will really right this, didn't this test. yeah. this out of warner. let me come to with a people who didn't have the benefit of social media. the people who survived the,

both in the, in more, 1000 survives of the will have rich in the letter to the international court of justice saying that, you know, if the court had acted on earlier, then it would have prevented a genocide and war crimes. there do think that what happens in both in the or what happened a new wanda, that these things. so the international court of justice that these are things that they will be thinking about. and i would certainly hope so. in fact, even south africa's advocate during the oral argument said very clearly to the court that the court actually failed. those people who had experienced genocide and failed to deliver them justice and so called on the court to act before. it's too late in this instance. and not to fail to palestinian people and some might say that actually that's already taken place. and that there's really, in a sense, no justice, you know, that can be, attend from this point on because where do you go after already 30000 people have been killed in 3 months and, you know, gaza is creating, you know,

and breaking new records every day. in terms of destruction and human suffering, it seems like every time i check my phone, i'm seeing some sort of a new super would have been used to describe the situation in the process. so i would hope that the court will take that into account and, and recognize that they have a tremendous responsibility here not to fail another people within the past, which is what south africa underlined many times to the court was to shave us despite the international court of justice in 1993 ordering provisional measures in the bosnian bull. we know what happened in 1995 the that both of the and subs systematically mode at 8000 bosnian muslims. that's the spot that provisional order that was in place. so what, anything short of a complete says fine. now help the people of gaza. well, anything is going to help them, but i totally agree we need to complete ceasefire. and i, i hope that the international court of justice has the wisdom to do that. um,

everything points to the fact that regardless of how strong the claim is about genocide, israel has shown itself to be incapable of distinguishing between civilians and military objectives. and so on the left is it incapable of distinguishing or does it make the distinction? i'm go ahead anyway as well. perhaps. i mean, there are 2 ways to look at this one. does it have to enable the distinguishing or the other is that it's essentially directing a war against the civilians of gossip back to the coming. also increasingly apparent that it's, it's actually trying to drive the people of guys, either out of the country entirely out of their, their home. i mean, their new home because their refugee is a gas it to begin with. but that, that this is the real objective, not to destroy it. come asked, as they say, not the rescue the hostages, which they are incapable of doing, but rather to attack the people of gas with. so hopefully the international court

of justice will appreciate that. and we make an order against israel, now you raise the question will, is real follow that that's the other problem and there's no meaningful way up and forcing this except that if the research and order it is going to really turn the screws on some of israel's outliers, although as i say, i don't think that the united states is going to be persuaded at all. you have to remember that the 1st, the decision by the international court of justice on the binding nature of british little measures was directed against the united states. because they refused to themselves respect for visual measures of the court in, in a case of more than 20 years ago. all right. i'm afraid that we have run out of time, but i want to thank all of our guests for this inciteful discussion. that is laura albano and powers william shave is in toronto, and jennifer cassidy and dublin. and thank you to for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website, which is 0 dot com. as

a further discussion do go to our facebook page, that's facebook dot com, forward slash age and side story. you can also join the conversation on x a handle as at age and 5 story from me, elizabeth, put on an indian tie a team here and uh huh. bye for now, the what constitutes exempt. so we can talk to a see, i want you to start with just the facts, right? as to what happened as independent. we want these, we want the education i want to, we don't have to lead them in different countries and policy. um, it's meant to get 50 percent representation and accountability benefits. no one doesn't service this placement and you're saying you're reports for that. i should just trust that unity often as

the crew that used to produce outstanding gentleness and elders. the integrity in the pursuit of truth vague. i mean, the artificial intelligence is altering the political landscape. how can we, as humans trust to you, the machine's trust is and not to keep them as and develop from the comfortable power for i believe it's important to build trust to transparency is communication between humans and machines. but do we know that you're not going to lie to us? no one can ever know that for sure, people empowered investigates a democracy on a jersey to the latest news as it breaks the word along over a 100 states has left many feeling like you will never end with in depth reports. many saying that is most like 3 until all the campuses, a boat to the price, even if that means i didn't need it. and from the how to the story palestinians

here say destruction caused by is really forces is a form of collective punishment. and the israel is attempting to turn them against the resist the of the desk told in guns that has now passed. 25000 killed st. baffles are intensifying and sign eunice and is really air strikes have targeted areas near another hospital the pennsylvania is good to have you with us. this is allison 0 life from don't also coming up and possibly unacceptable. reiterates his demands.