in scare matters. this is al jazeera. hello i'm sam is a dan this is the news hour live from coming up in the next sixty minutes and storm a government building and detonate a suicide bomb in iraq is kurdish region. this is the scene at the international court of justice where judgment will soon be issued about the blockade by the united arab emirates. trump issues an angry warning to iran never ever threaten the u.s. again. china's child vaccine scandal the premier warns companies that make substandard drugs for children. and the iceberg endangering an entire

township we report from the remote place in greenland living in fear of a natural wonder. three gunmen have died after storming the kurdish regional government building in a deal in northern iraq. that follows a five hour standoff with security forces in the center of the city the group shot its way into the building in the early morning hours injuring at least two policeman on of the attackers blew himself up let's go live now to he's in baghdad for us so far as he's made sense of this attack now. not yet we're still waiting for a statement to confirm whether indeed it was eisel who were responsible for the

attack the attack actually does bear all the hallmarks of a nice let's hack a suicide bombing multiple gunman but that has been confirmed by the kurdish security sources but kurdish politicians are definitely pointing the finger toward ice will not be as been spared much of the violence that we've seen in the rest of the country in fact the last attack there by ourselves in two thousand and fifteen when a car bomb went outside the u.s. embassy the u.s. consulate in karachi and now the attack began around seven am local time before the workday began gunman entered there was a skeleton staff there two policemen were wounded they made their way up to the third floor where they started shooting out from the window. very quickly cordoned off the area and then prepared their assault they went in and cleared the building room by room by room and that's when the suicide bomber blew himself up using his suicide bomb belt then one sniper took out the one of the attackers and then

injured another who then later succumbed to his injuries in the hospital now as i say politicians are blaming eisel for this attack it certainly bears all the hallmarks of ice and we don't have a confirmation on that yet. thanks for updating us on the situation. in iraq the u.s. and iranian presidents have been trading threats the rhetoric escalated on sunday when iran's leader hassan rouhani warned the u.s. against playing with what he called the lion's tail an angry response trump warned against threatening the u.s. shelob us reports. with television as their platform a ratcheting up of thrifts between iran's president hassan rouhani and the trumpet ministration on sunday secretary of state mike pompei or spend a full twenty six minutes criticizing rouhani and his leadership the ayatollah are in on the act too judging by their vast well they say more concerned with riches

than religion these hypocritical holy men advised all kinds of crickets games to become some of the wealthiest men on earth while their people suffer as the u.s. administration is attacking iran from multiple angles in may president trump withdrew from the twenty fifteen nuclear chord in august he will reimpose sanctions aimed at crippling iran's economy pompei are warned tehran its exports will be squeezed in the coming months and is pressuring allies to stop importing iranian oil by november its biggest source of income and now the u.s. administration is seizing on process in iran to begin a media campaign president rouhani referred to the strategy and threaten trump against turning his people against him but don't machine was you not going to change don't play with the lion's tail you will regret it forever you cannot carry out these measures it is out of your capability you cannot force during ins to act

against their own country you have clearly shown you are against the iranian people . those comments got this response from president trump who tweeted in capital aces never ever thracian the united states again or you will suffer consequences the likes of which few throughout history have ever suffered before we are no longer a country that will stand for your demented words of violence and death be cautious . to tweet as a flashback to trump and north korean leader kim jong un kim was also at the wrong end of a new caps tirade last year before the two leaders came together at a summit in singapore in june. the difference with iran is protests the soaring cost of living has pushed iranians to the streets numbers not seen since twenty twelve but analysts say a media campaign to win them over will be received as u.s. propaganda i think it's quite clear that as much as they are frustrated and deeply frustrated with the government of iran they're not jumping onto trump side anytime

soon from california to tehran the high stakes verbal sparring will be watched by its target audience the iranian people shall at dallas al-jazeera. a senior commander in iran's revolutionary guard says trump's tweet amounts to psychological warfare he says iran will never abandon its revolutionary beliefs despite pressure from the u.s. bank has the latest from there on. we've seen in the days since donald trump pulled the united states out of the twenty fifty nuclear deal with more sanctions looming large first in august then again in november iranian leaders are becoming more and more aggressive in their tone and we're hearing more consistent public speeches in which they criticize the u.s. unilateral decision to pull out of the nuclear deal and reinstate sanctions what is also at the center of this escalation in the war of words is a statement made by the president in

a recent visit to switzerland iranian president hassan rouhani on a diplomatic trip. made a vague threat against the strait of hormuz saying that it would be unrealistic to expect that if iran can't sell its own oil that everybody else still can so we're seeing iranian leaders backed into a corner at every turn trying to secure their own economy against oncoming u.s. sanctions and playing every card they have it used to be that iranian leaders would threaten to restart nuclear enrichment at higher levels and now we're seeing them also play their other card which is to threaten or to disrupt international shipping lanes. the only her save me is a member of iran's parliament today told al-jazeera the recent threats are more evidence that trump has risen against the global order then more. in arrow pinion trump is angry because of his failures americans have been trying for years now to convince other countries to confront iran and stead of cooperating with iran

but they haven't succeeded even their commercial partners in europe and china have clearly announced they won't go with these sanctions naturally russia won't cooperate nor will other countries in our opinion america's angry because it has isolated itself and it feels that it remains alone against iran america has many expectations of countries in the middle east region even they aren't complying so this anger is not because of his might it's because of his failures. is a professor of political science at the wrong university he says the u.s. his policies on iran aren't hurting the government. i don't i don't think iran wants the war in to be frank i don't think the united states wants a all out war either i mean the united states can also not afford a major war with iran nevertheless what is important here is the u.s. administration is trying to say we are supporting ordinary iranians whereas in

reality the sanctions actually hurt ordinary ukrainians the most so you cannot on the one hand say that we're against the iranian government while sanctioning the people who are in essential he also we have to consider the fact that rowhani was elected during an election with over seventy percent participation rate and he got almost sixty percent of the vote so whether we like him or not he is the representative of the reigning people and we cannot essentially put on this face that we're supporting the reigning people but we're against the iranian government . china's president is demanding an investigation in a scandal over substandard vaccines hundreds of thousands of children may have been given poor quality rabies vaccine health regulators found the drugmaker violated safety standards it's the second scandal to hit the company in the past week adrian brown has more from beijing. it is a worrying time for parents across china outside beijing's top children's hospital

we found many still absorbing the fact the china's second largest pharmaceutical company has been producing vaccines for babies that are fake you know your god you know the people who made this fabricated vaccine should be executed right away without any hesitation they did it to babies not adults he added this mother is especially concerned her one year old son was inoculated for rabies last month he has a fever and the scandal has heightened her anxiety my son was born very weak he always has to believe it now his dad and i don't know if it's related to the fake vaccines in china or vaccinations to prevent. let's take you now we're breaking in to take you to the hague in the netherlands where the international court of justice is meeting or expecting them to issue a ruling in the case brought by the state of qatar against the united arab emirates

visagie the blockade and allegations that it's violating the rights of country citizens and residents of cutter we're looking at the judge there. the juice of president of the court let's listen to what he's saying. on the elimination of all form itself racial discrimination. that's the united arab emirates. judges. for. who do really participate in both the deliberation and the final vote. for a reason it's made known to me unable to take their seat on the bench today i would recall that on eleven doun twenty the state of qatar in the registry of the call and application instituting proceeding against the united

arab emirate with regard to our leg the violation is of the international convention on the limitation of all forms of racial discrimination of twenty one december nineteen to thirty five on the same day qatar has submitted their request for the indication of provisional measure refer him to article forty one of these two and two article seventy three seventy four and seventy five of the rules of call a meeting at safeguarding the right is it claim under the convention bending the court decision on the merits in accordance with the usual practice i shall not read introductory paragraph is of the order which set out the procedure of his study of the case they should also all meet or summarize

some other products cordingley begin the reading of the order the. other got out of fourteen the court may indicate provisional measures only if the provision is relied on by the up and come up here but he must pass it to afford it besides on week it jurisdiction could be found. but the court need not fight. in a definitive manner that it has jurisdiction a cigar in memory of the case in the present case of seek is to found the jurisdiction of the core on article thirty six by the gulf one of these bad tooth of the core unknown article twenty two of. the court must therefore fair is to mean whether those provision is pretty much files

year confer upon the jurisdiction to rule on the merry death of the case enable in it if the other necessary condition is fulfill to indicate provisional measure. and the united that have been merely the parties to settle. acceded to that interest to the men on twenty two july ninety seven. without entering any resort of asia the united arab emirate is digital on twenty june nineteenth seventy four without entering a resort of vision to add to called twenty two or to any other relevant to the set of asian for the present parables. article twenty two of said make is the court has jurisdiction conditional on the existence of

a dispute arising out of the interpretation or obligation of sale a dispute between the state does exist is where the whole clearly or possibly you concerning the question of the performance or non-performers of said thane international obligations the claim of one party must be positively or pulls it by the arab. in order to determine whether a dispute exist is the core can not limited. to note in that one of the parties maintains that the convention applies while the other denies. since qatar has invoked as a basis of the court has jurisdiction the compromise clause in an international convention the court must asserting whether the act is complaining

off by the applicant. capable of fall in within the provision is of that mr rahman and whether as a consequence the dispute is one which the court has jurisdiction plus the only material to entertain. the court considers that i say be then sit by the argument is advancing and the document is place it before you depart is different. on the nature underscore of the measure is to take him by the united that i've been really does begin in on five june twenty seventh teen as well as on the question whether they relate to all right is an obligation is and the sale. but i got up two of the statement by made by the united that i've been meeting on five june twenty seventeen in this

ages before when measured and i call that event in nationalists from emperor in the united arab emirate or cross in it is pointis of entry giving president this is thirty's in the u.a.e. fourteen days to leave the country for prep question no three security reason is. the u.a.e. nationals likewise banned from traveling to or to stay in in qatar or transit in through it is thirty third the court know. that qatar contend that the measure is adopted by the u.a.e. para possibly targeted qatar was based on their national origin. consequently according to qatar the u.a.e.

has failed to respect it probably gauge this and that article is due for five cities and seven of said the core ops elders that qatar maintain is in particular that because of the measures taken on five june twenty seventh in usa we mix it families have been separated medical care has been suspended for in the u.a.e. depriving those who are under medical treatment from receiving further medical assistance. the student is have been deprived of the opportunity to complete their education in the. and to continue their established elsewhere since you a universities have refused to provide them with their educational

records. and kept audience have not being. equal treatment before pray this judicial organist in the u.a.e. . for its part the u.a.e. further milly denies that it has committed any of the violation is set out above. in the court's view. the actives to the ferry to. impart to call out of the statement of five june twenty seventh in. which led to the targeted on the basis of their national origin whereby the u.a.e. announces that this with to leave territory within fourteen days they would be prevented from entering and there legged the restriction is that ensued include the in bone their right to marry. of a spouse to

a duke asian as well as to medical care and to equal treatment before tribunals. capable of forli in within the scope of sever that's the only material the court considers that while the parties differ on the question whether the expression mission now or even mention it enough to cover one paragraph one of. incompetence is discrimination based on the present a nationality of the individual the court need not decide this is the of the proceedings in view of what this is stated the ball which of these de berry in interpretation is of the convention is the correct of. the court find that they are both mentioning element. of sufficient this is. to

establish the existence of a dispute between the parties concerned in the interpretation or obliquely of. the court to recall is that it has previously indicated that the terms of article twenty two of sarah established procedural preconditions to be met before this is in of the core. and that article twenty two of sale did this putrid fairy to the core must be a dispute and a pool not in negotiation or by the procedure is expressly provided for in this convention and of court t.v. in addition article twenty two estate is that the dispute may be referred to the core at the request of any of the parties to did this view only if the

parties have not agreed to another mode of settlement the core note is that neither party contends that they have agreed to another mode of settlement regarding the third better condition enough to call twenty two of sale namely the negotiation is due with the complimentary. decor. that negotiation is this thing from the mirror protest days or disputatious and require a genuine attempt by one of the parties to engage in discussing this with the other party with a view to resolve in the dispute where negotiation is out attempted or comments the break condition of negotiation is only met when the attempt to negotiate has been unsuccessful all where negotiation is have failed or

become a few tie or deadlock. in order to meet the precondition of negotiation contain it in the compromise for all of it treaty this subject of the negotiation is a must to be late to the subject of the dispute which in turn must concern this substantive obligation is contained in the treaty in question. at this estate of the proceedings the corps has to ourselves whether it appears that qatar genuinely attempted to engage in negotiation issue with the u.a.e. with a view to resolving their dispute concerning the loud parties compliance with the substantive obligations under sail and whether it appears that

our peers you see with this negotiation is as far as opposed to. the court notice that it has not being challenged by the parties that issues relating to the measure take him by the u.a.e. in june twenty seventh team have been praised by representatives of qatar on several location is in international for include him at the united nations in the presence of representatives of the u.a.e. . for example duty in the thirty seven station of the united nations human rights council in february twenty the minister for foreign affairs of qatar to ferry to cool the violations of human rights is caused by the i'm just lucky and the unilateral measures imposed on his country that have been calm fair

by the report of the united nation is high commissioner for human by these technical commission or technical mission and of forty why do you weigh along with the having sat with the arabia and egypt issued a joint is statement in response to the remark is made by the minister for foreign affairs of. the court further note that in a letter dated twenty five april twenty eighth in an address it to the minister of state for foreign affairs of the u.a.e. the minister of state for foreign affairs of qatar chris ferry to the leg the violation is of sale arising from the measure is taken by the u.a.e. beginning on five do twenty seventy and he stated that i quote

it was necessary to enter into a negotiation is in order to resolve these violations and the effect is there of within your more than two weeks and of corti the call of can see that is that the letter containing an awful lot by kappa to negotiate with the u.a.e. with regard to the large parties compliance with the substantive obligation is said . in the light of the fall of growing and given the fact did that do you a did not respond to that formal invitation to negotiate. the core is of the view that the issue through a seat in the present case had not been resolved by a negotiation is at the time of the five of the application the court will now

turn to the second but a condition containing enough to call twenty two of sale relating to the procedure is expressly provided for in the convention it is recorded that according to article eleven of the convention if it is a powerful considers that another state is not given effect to the provision this of the convention they marketed may be brought to their tahsin of the sehr committee the court notice that the paucity on eight twenty eighteen communication with committee and that are fickle eleven of the convention it's absurd it is however that does not rely on this communication for the purposes of show we pretty much see a jurisdiction in the present case although the parties disagree

as to whether negotiation is and recourse to procedure is sort of fair it to enough to call twenty two of the sale. constitute alternative or. conditions to be full feeley before this is in of the core the court is of the view that it need not make a pronouncement on the issue a deceased state of the proceeding. nor does the court consider it necessary for the present parables to decide whether any elector principle or lease bendin is exception up lick a ball in the person situation the court that's fine in view of all the foregoing that the procedural condition is

that article twenty two of four it is says in appear this is a to have been complied with. in light of the foregoing be called conclude that dream of seeing it has jurisdiction pursuant to article twenty two of fair to deal with the case to the extent that the dispute between the parties related to the interpretation or abdication of the saide convention. the corps notice that do you eighty has contended that i had to prove that it is it is in this had exhausted local remedies before it sees it because and that has denied that the exhaustion of local remedies is

a precondition for this is in of the caught in the present case the court observers that in the current proceeding cut ourselves does it right on the basis of our late did leash units of sale by the u.a.e. . the court fair that note that the u.a.e. did not indicate any effect give local remedies that where i vailable to the capacities that have not been exhausted the court is of the view that this is stage of the proceeding relating to a request for the indication of provisional measure this the issue of exhaustion of local remedies need not be addressed by the court. the power of the court to indicate provisional measure this pickle for two one of these tattoos

has as cities object the preservation of the respective why it is of the parties in a case bending it is decision on the married there or. it follows that the court must be consented to preserve by such a measure to the right which may subsequently be i judged by to belong to either party therefore the court may exercise this power only if it is such by the right this ourselves by the party requesting such measures are the least possible. at this is stage of the proceedings the court however is not call it a point to deter them in definitively whether the right is which wishes to see

protected exist it needs only to decide whether the claim made by qatar on the married and for which it is seeking protection to proceed will moreover a link must exist between their rights whose protection is saw and the provisional measures quest the court notice that imposes and number of obligation is on the state with regard to the elimination of racial discrimination in all its forms manifestations the court recalls as it be in past cases in which sarah was at issue that there is a correlation between respect for individual rights and the obligation is of the state these parties under sail and their vitus of status bar these to see

compliance there with the court to note that article two four five six and seven of sale. intended to protect individual use from racial discrimination consequently in the context of a request for the indication of provisional measures a state party to sale may avail itself of the right is under the above mentioned article of all money if the active complain it off appear to cornish due to the act is of racial discrimination as defined in article one of the convention. in this regard the court to recall this its conclusion that it need not decide at this estate of the proceeding between did they vary

dented the use of the parties on whether the expression national origin in article one paragraph one of their incompetence discrimination on present nationality. in the present case the court no it's on the basis of the evidence presented to it by the parties that the measures adopted by the u.a.e. on five june twenty seventh. appear to have targeted only the targets and not other non citizens residing in the united arab emirate said on the measure this where directed to all capacities residing in the u.a.e. regardless of individual circumstances therefore it appeared that some of the activists of wheat qatar complains may constitute actis of

racial discrimination as define it by the convention consequently the court finds that at least some of the right asserted by qatar and that article five of our plausible this is the case for example with respect to the leg did racial discrimination in the enjoyment of privacy such as divide to marry and to choice of spouse their lie to do creation as well as freedom of movement access to justice the cold now to the issue of the link between the right disclaimer and the provisional measure this request it. the court has already found that at least some of the divide

a selfie by qatar under article five of. plausible if you recall is that article five. discrimination in the enjoyment of a variety of civil and political rights and the economic social and cultural way the court considers that the measure is requested by. amy not only at the end in any collective expulsion of qataris from the territory of the u.a.e. but also protect in other in specific right it's continued in article five the court conclude this therefore that illegal exists between the right to protection is being saw and the provision of measures being questioned by.

the core see when to article forty one of the stat. has the power to indicate provisional measures when irreparable break deduce could be costly to arrive it is the subject of judicial proceedings however the power of the court to indicate provisional measures will be exercised only if there is a region in the sense that there is a real and imminent reef. that irreparable prejudice will be cause to divide it is in dispute before the call give this it is final decision. the condition of the genesee is met when the act is susceptible of course in irreparable prejudice can or care at any moment before the court rules on

the method the court must therefore consider whether such a risk exists at this is the of the proceeding. the court does not call it up on for the purposes of its decision on the request for the indication of provisional measure to establish the existence of breaches of stare but to determine whether the circumstances require the indication of provisional measures for the protection of these under this instrument it cannot at this is day make a definitive finding this or fact and the right of each party to submit an argument is in respect of the marriage these remain is an effect by the court this decision on the request for the indication of provisional measure the

court considers that certain pride to see in question in these proceedings in particular several of the vitus is de blaye to be enough to kill five paragraph is a d. and e. of say or out of such a nature that brig did this to them is capable of course in irreparable harm. on the basis of the every then is presenting to eat by the parties the court is of the opium that the situation of the targets residing in the united arab emirates this prior to five june twenty seventh team appearance to remain vulnerable with regard to their right these are five of the convent in this regard the court has that following the statement of five june twenty

seventh team whereby the ministry of foreign affairs of the u.a.e. announces that the qataris were to leave the territory within fourteen days and that they would be prevented from entering many capacities residing in be you a at the time appear to have been forced to leave their place of residence without the possibility of repair the court nodes that the number of consequences apparently reside resulted from d.c. to asia and that the impact on those affected seem to bear assist to this date you are a mixed it is have been separate the. student is have been deprived of the opportunity to complete their education in the u.a.e.

and to continue their studies elsewhere since you a universities have refused to provide them with their educational records and qataris have been deny equal lot to tribunals is another judicial oregon it's in the u.a.e. . as the court has already observed an individual is forcing to leave their own place of residence without the possibility of it there could depending on the circumstances this subject to a serious risk of irreparable break it is the core of the view that they bring to this company can see that as irreparable when individuals are subject to temporary or potentially early on going separation from their families and

suffer from psychological distress when a student is prevented from taking their exams due to inforce it absence or from peers you when there is studies due to a refusal by academic institution is to provide educational records or when the person is concerned. p.d. from being able to physically appear in any proceedings or to challenge any measure they find discriminatory the court notice that the u.a.e. stated in response to a question posed by a member of the court at the end of the oral proceeding is that following the statement of five doom twenty seventeen by ministry of foreign affairs no administer to all that is have been issued under the me gratian law to expel.

the court nonetheless note that it appears from the evidence before that as a result of this is date me. kept things felt or bly to leave the u.a.e. chris sultan in the specific breakthrough this is today i described above moreover in view of the fact that the u.a.e. has not taking any of usually steps to rescind the measure is of five june twenty seven thousand this iteration affecting the enjoyment of the above mentioned it right in the u.a.e. remain unchanged the call does find that there you send him in and risk that the measure is adopted by the u.a.e.

as set out a ball could leap to prejudice to the right to invoke it by qatar specified by the court the court conclude this from all of the above considerations that the condition is required by the stat you for each to indicate provisional measure early map it is therefore necessary bendin it is final decision for the court to indicate certain measures in order to protect the rights is claimed by qatar as identified above the court to recall is that it has the power and that is the statute when the request for a provisional measure is has been made to indicate measure is that are in whole or in part other than those requests. article seventy five

got up to all of the rules of core is specific only repair is to despite our of the call the court has already exercised this power on several location is in the past. in the present case having considered the miss of the provisional measure is requested by a couple. and this is a committed dunces of the case the court finds that the measure is to be indicated need not be identical to those requests reminding the u.a.e. of duty to comply with its obligation is. the court considers that with regard to do situation described are both the united arab emirate is mouse bend in the final decision in the case and in

accordance with it obligation is to. ensure that families that include qatari. separated by the measure is adopted by do you worry on five june twenty seventh in our united that student is affected by those measures given the opportunity to complete their education in the u.a.e. or to op jane their indication our record is if they wish to continue their studies elsewhere. and that qatar is affected by those. are allowed access to tribunals and judicial organise of the you see the court three callers that qatar has requested the to

indicate may thirtieth a meet at ensuring the non i get our vision of the dispute with the u.a.e. . when it is indicating provisional measure for the purpose of press a lot of in specific provide the core may also indicate provisional measures with a view to prevent in. or extinction of a dispute whenever it can see that is that this commits tons these sorich while. in this case having considered it all we still commit stands in addition to the specific measures it has decided to tape the court necessary to indicate an additional measure directed to both parties and amy and sure in. the non i get ovation of their dispute

the court where fairness that it is all of that is on provisional measure is that article forty one of these tell you how binding effect and does create international legal obligation is for any party to whom the provisional measures are addressed the core. they are famous that the decision given in the present proceeding in no way brig judges the question of the jurisdiction of the corps to deal with the merits of the case or any question this relay team to the admissibility of the application or to the marriott is themself is it live is am affected the right is of the government is of cup our and the united arab immunity is to submit our agreement in

respect of those questions for this reason and. the coffee. indicate is the following provisional measure by eight voters to seven. the united arab emirate is must ensure that one family says that include a qatari. separated by the measure is adopted by be united arab emirate is on five june twenty seventh t. in our unite. to qatar the student is affected by the measure is adopted by the united arab emirate on five june twenty seventh in a given the opportunity to complete their fifth occasion in the united arab emirates or to open

a new creation are recorded if they wish to continue their it steadies else away and three qatar is affected by the measure is adopted by the united arab emirates on fire i doone twenty seven p. . allow with access to tribunals and other judicial organise of the united arab emirates in favor of president yusuf vice president. judges. been known. to the need to sit within the problems on. board a. against judges dumka guy are. crow for guevara the salam. hawk caught. by eleven vote two for both parties shows refrain from any

action which might get o.b. or extend the dispute before the call or make it more difficult to resolve in favor prison yusuf prison through or judges dumka been nuna to the need the guy said within the. robin son judge out polk go there again this judge is cut off or give orders. to hold off i shall now call on the register to read the operative of the or the in frame. or similar chief like you. and i dig at the top or visual image your conscience over to us we want. we've been listening there to the decision

handed down by the president of the international court of justice judge up to medusa saying that the court has indeed found a provisional finding in the dispute between carter alleging that the u.s. is in violation of the application of the international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination saying that as a provisional finding the court found that the u.a.e. had to comply with the acronym goes of obligation that the u.s. must ensure families which include a qatari and was separated by the measures taken by the u.a.e. on the fifth of june two thousand and seventeen that those families must be reunited the students must be given an opportunity to complete their education in the u.a.e. or given the necessary documentation so they can complete it somewhere else and

that parties must be allowed access to tribunals and other judicial organs within the u.a.e. for those countries who are affected by the measures taken by the u.a.e. when it imposed its blockade let's go to need for aussies the wives at the hague so i've kind of wrapped i think the what the finding is the overall headline here this is a provisional it's not the end of the case but this is a provisional victory for carter right. let me exactly explain what qatar was after it wanted the i.c.j. the un's highest court to rule in favor of it by granting something called provisional measures now they i.c.j. can in some cases take many months maybe even years to deal with cases but if there is deemed to be an urgent risk of harm to the. from certain countries example being

you know cases like genocidal so on and so forth then the court can grant something called provisional measures that's an immediate binding legal ruling only granted when cases are deemed serious enough to be for them to be granted so what we've heard over the course of this statement being read out to the court there by the presiding charges example after example whereby the court believes that it does have jurisdiction firstly to try to create the case at all and secondly to issue these provisional measures and it's given those provisional measures which are legally binding now form the offset because the u.a.e. is a key signatory of the of this convention of the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination hence it must apply these recommendations are immediately and you mentioned some of the families must be right united students given the opportunity to complete their studies or to retain records of their of their studies to allow them to go on

a study potentially somewhere else and catteries who had been basically told to leave the u.a.e. should be allowed access to judicial services something the car side said that its nationals had been denied in the past and a message to for both countries that both nations should do everything possible to avoid escalating the political standoff any further. nieve now that we've kind of recap the finding let's go back and see perhaps some other important points the court finding a as you touched upon that it does have jurisdiction in this case of a claim that it doesn't. and that the the other statement made that the measures adopted by the u.a.e. did target only those are two important legal points that the court has made correct. yes that's absolutely right and that's something that the u.a.e. here to repeat the lead tonight throughout i was here at the end of june for the

hearing the initial hearings where both cats are in the u.a.e. had a chance to put forward their argument the u.a.e. denied that there had been any policy a tool to expel qatari nationals from the country and that its argument was with the qatari government not with the cattery people. that it's legal team put forward several arguments and several examples citing students or family members that have been separated as a result of this alleged policy of expulsion and clearly the court has taken those on board and has said as a result that all of those cases were indeed plausible to now give qatar the right to this so-called provisional measures the right to now be able to instruct the u.a.e. to basically been toe the line and follow what the court is now insisting that it must do and the brief i think we've got about forty seconds you need but the court finding an imminent risk that. there is an imminent risk to the rights that is an

important point as well. yes it is it shows that the court believes there is a degree of urgency and that also it believes that there is a possibility of a long lasting impact. act psychologically but the judge mentioned on cattery nationals that had to undergo the consequences of the results of this expulsion we wait of course to hear what the u.a.e. have to say about it as i mentioned though they've denied that there has been a policy of expulsion bickley the court now has made clear what it believes is indeed going on all right neve sorry did tell us for the second we're going to keep this going a little bit so nice although this is as we need to point out this is a provisional ruling this is a point to which the court says whether there is a sort of emergency situation going on that requires it to step in and make some

provisional orders until we get to the end of the case which like you said could be months or even years the court has decided let me try and find the exact wording but something along the lines of that it did find that there was a risk for prejudice irreparable prejudice to the rights of the terri's imminent risk and that it needs to step in now this must weigh in to some degree doesn't prejudice the final ruling but it means something does it not in terms of where that final ruling can go it will be very difficult to see the cause of the fire ruling and say there was absolutely no prejudice to cut three rights after this. you're absolutely right the court has pretty much spelt out where it sees the

situation as things currently stand let's recap of course what i had always said was that the rights of the human rights of its citizens had been violated because the u.a.e. had failed to live up to its obligations under that create that key treaty as a result it said that its citizens were unable to access health care education judicial services they couldn't access their properties or their assets and as a result that should be seen as a violation of their human rights and what the court has made clear in this ruling at least is that it doesn't believe very much that the impact of all of that would be long lasting could well have a psychological impact on people and the u.a.e. needs to do something about it and then an interesting point as well neighbors when the courts are reminded in firm and firm to everyone its findings have binding effect well that's going to be the key question now is how are those decisions going to be implemented.

or yes the sheer fact of the u.a.e. out of the four countries that it impose the blockade upon qatar is the only one this is a signatory of this convention means that it is judy bound it is legally bound to uphold all of the details within that convention the judge went through point by point areas where the court believes the u.a.e. has erred from that now that does mean that legally going forward the u.a.e. could face other legal challenges other legal measures if it does not make changes if it does not implement what is advised by the court this is as i said the un's highest court what it says essentially goes there's no court higher.