the the palestinians bombs by israel hundreds killed in thousands, injured gaza under siege, running out of supplies. hundreds of these really scales and abducted by how my spices communities pounded by, walk and fired to civilians have any protection under international law. this is inside story. the hello and welcome to the program. i'm fully back people, most of the victims in the guise of war. our civilians, thousands of palestinians have either been killed or injured. and the numbers keep

rising. israel is intensifying this bombing of guys after mass shootings and abductions of is released by how modified is on saturday. one of the most densely populated areas on earth is now under compete siege. the fried in 2300000 people are food medicine and water supplies. at the same time, also slide barraged off the barrage of rockets into is really towns and cities. protection of civilians is a fundamental principle of international law governing conflict. so what role is it play here? we'll be discussing this with, i guess in just a few minutes. but 1st, this report from benton model, a humanitarian crisis is unfolding and gaza. israel's bombing campaign has killed hundreds of palestinians, a forced tens of thousands from their homes. garza is now under a complete siege. no food, water, or fuel is getting into the enclave to do you and human rights off is regardless as collective punishments and

a violation of international law. the end position of sieges that endangered the lives of civilians by depriving them of goods essential for their survival is prohibited under international humanitarian law. and a restriction on the movement of people in goods to implement the siege must be justified by military necessity or it may amount to collective punishment. european union has issued a warning to israel, saying it's military operation and gaza is going to far. it will, it has to fight to defend, but it has to be done according to with international law. many daniel has some decisions. content dish, this international be attacked by him boss, have also been widely condemned. the armed groups of sold on israel deliberately target civilians. many have been abducted and taken back to gaza. a boss is threatened to execute them in are totally ation for his really air strikes. i recognize the legitimate grievances of the palestinian people. but nothing can

justify these acts of cattle and the killing made me a deduction of celia's. i right to raise my call to immediately seize these effects and release. all last searches but be, is really military insist. it's campaign is in line with international law. the idea remains committed to the law of conflict and we conduct ourselves according to it, despite the fact that we are furious. i'm very frustrated and appalled by the atrocities that somebody else has done against us. we still keep on walls and we still make sure that the finance according to the laws that we are committed to . and israel has support from allies in washington. the binding administration throws distinction between attacks by him off which it calls terrorism and israel's bombing of gaza, which it describes as self defense. so in this moment,

we must be crystal clear. we stand with israel, tears pressure purposely target civilians killed. we uphold the laws of war law more in matters. there's a difference in the ordinary people on both sides who are paying the heaviest price in this war international law, as opposed to shield noncombatants, but was seemingly to consequences for those who break it. how much protection does hello really offer sense and mon, in for inside story. the next spring in august. now for today's inside story in london, jeffrey nice barrister and former prosecutor at the international criminal court in chicago is omar shakira, the israel and palestine director at human weiss watch. he wrote a report 2 years ago and he's really war crimes against palestinians and was reported from israel as a result of his investigation. and in ontario,

canada is michael lincoln, professor emeritus in the faculty of law at western university and a former un special robert tool on the occupied palestinian territory from where he was banned by israel down. and welcome to you. oh, thank you very much for joining us on inside story. michael link. if i can start with you vs likes the past few days on guys. a has been indiscriminate and widespread in response to hamas is surprise attack on israel. help us understand for us what the rules of engagement and the fundamental principles that both parties in this conflicts are expected to follow under international law. and specifically, what israel is, obligations are as the occupying power. sure what the primary responsibility, the occupying power in any occupation is the protection of the other protected people under occupation. that's to ensure their well being that their 1st interests

are always the top of the mind in what the occupying, occupying power is doing. in. busy of conflict, the standard roles of international humanitarian law, wind replying, which means that there must be of the occupying power. and the military force must always make a distinction. a very clear distinction between civilian and military objects. it's forbidden to be able to target um, civilian populations, either directly or through their property or through their means of a subsistence. and the other aspect of this is obviously the siege that's going on . now. we know the cause has been under a block a since 2000 and, and $6.00, i have a special rabbit tor. the and one of my reports to the united nations stated that this amount of to collective punishment, which is absolutely forbidden. under article $33.00 of the 4th geneva convention,

the total sage that has been placed on gas and now since the weekend where they're cutting off of, of water sanitation, food, and any kind of supplies getting in the guise of it is forbidden, under international humanitarian law. is forbidden to starve ation or the, or the deprivation of any kind of the necessities of life that would support the civilian population. so there are a number of areas of deep concern with respect to international law. so mike, on link, a number of violations being committed here by these relays. what about violent resistance against the occupation? is that legal? is this? the answer is yes, but the answer is, is also that it must be done within a very clear boundaries. the people under occupation, people under colonialism, has had for a number of decades the right to resist their subjugation. but that must be done again within the rules of international law. and in particular,

it means that even though you may be using the right to resist any military force and the occupation that you cannot target, for example civilians, you cannot fire rockets into a civilian areas. you cannot cannot civilians or kill them. so all of these a donate that that any side to a conflict via the occupying power, increasing its oppression or a resistance force trying to big back the occupying power. all of them have to be, uh, the rules of international law in terms of who your target and what mills reactions you wind up and committing. so jeffrey, nice, i want to bring you on this particular point and terrify something with you. that's a, i think a lot of people are asking about, and that is a fact that how moss is a non state actor in this conflict. and both israel and us politicians have characterize your mazda attack on israel as terrorism targeting,

as we've heard civilians under international law, is illegal, illegal under the rules of war. but those rules are set by countries that govern themselves. what about non state actors like come off? what's the law regarding that with it? was the lowest bit unsettled because as an own, stay that then you agree is room may not be fully entitled or in titles to argue self defense in the way that it has. and the whole issue has to be approached in the way that's being so helpfully described by much more than, sorry to keep calling this to lynch has what has to happen in respect of an occupying pie. so the position is exactly as explained that they can resist the occupying power, that those within cause it can resist the occupying power within the law using force, but without breaking the role. and then they may not have to consider the possible

defense of self defense as being raised by israel. but that doesn't change the duty on them to act awfully. and i'm afraid we're in the position of afraid is not for me to express any aside from way of the of the position is clear that the opening actions of this particular part of this, i'm happy, long term conflict. the opening actions on the low piece you cannot go, for example, and kill people. there's a party in the way that they were killed and all the civilians. so it's a complicated issue. but the rule to keep in mind is that both sides subject to the limitations that may apply because of the different stages. one from the of the basic point has to be that the root of the jeffrey nice was, was saturday, and how mazda is actions. the opening action really was it. oh is it the occupation

that's lasted over 70 years as well? it's the opening action of this part of a long contest or long series of contests. and how that would play out in the course of roy's nothing tale easy to force it full cost. and indeed, the whole question of self defense of a country visit would be, or against a not in stay tact, which is the would be the position for israel here. there's never been paid out yet in the quote of low. okay. that i think brings me if i may just interpose this point to something of great importance. and why is this math and not as never for quote a rule. there are quotes that should include have dealt with the earlier events in tutoring, for example protective adage, in 2014 in the of the nothing the golf is. i think that called attacks by,

by israel. and of course i never considered because israel is not a participating member of the international criminal code, right? say not only sizable. yeah. let me, let me bring a martial here into the conversation if i may. so jeffrey, a nice if i can omar your thoughts about we've what we've heard so far from both jeffrey nice and mike link and also based on the information that human rights watch has observed on the ground these past few days. what would you say are the potential war crimes that are being committed by eva side in this conflict right now? were here precisely because the parties ever too long, flagrantly violated international humanitarian law. and already in the 1st few days of this conflict, we're seeing much of the same. we should be crystal clear from us as brutal assault on southern israel, including deliberately targeting civilians shooting them in and mass taking as far as just women and children. those are more crimes flagrant violations of

international law. they have no justification. we've seen the use rid of the army pound, the densely populated cause of strength over repeated days and evenings. this includes dropping explosive weapons with wide area that's into gaza. we have all. ready the same large numbers of civilians killed, including children and we see a high rise buildings reduced to rubble. we've seen the cutting of the electricity of fuel water of the entry of goods a few minutes hearing aid. this is a clear war crime as professional like noted, which is not only collective punishment, you know, an entire 2 point. 2000000 people punish for the actions of individuals. but it's also potentially starvation as a tool war. and we'll see where things go in the coming days, right? it's rarely authorities for the long track record of committing serious war crowds and gods, including deliberately targeting civilian buildings, wiping out families,

destroying high rise buildings without any apparent military target there. so we're seeing a real descent into darkness. can i ask you about one specific aspect of all this? because the laws of war, omar require the warring parties to give effective a warning advance of attacks that may affect civilian populations. and we've seen this happen in the past in guys where these really military has given warning to civilians. is it happening in this current conflict? are they speaking to warning a warning signs given to the policy and population of casa a look, i think, were too early in our research to make definitive conclusions. we've heard, you know, in our research examples of our warnings have been provided and there have been allegations that. ready been cases or warnings are not provided with the let me be clear on. ready even more warnings are provided that does not make an air strike necessarily legal. for example,

we've documented in previous runs of escalations. after warnings have been giving destroying high rise buildings, hundreds of homes and businesses solely because there, there may have been a office for a policy auto group there, something like that would clearly be a violation of international law, disproportionate or indiscriminate. so the warnings do not themselves give you cardboard, sticking to kill the fact that a warning has not been given. certainly. um, if it involves significance to big ceiling cavities could be evidence of a work, right? but it's really important to know. we have a lot of this information out there. there are a lot of things happening in real time. these sort of things required details, factual investigations. these really government is blocking access as long blocked access to gaza to un mechanisms to human rights organizations, which makes this work very difficult. so i think we need to be careful of making concrete claims. there are some that we can make based on the brace in this, which with they've been carried out or stated,

but others will take time. it's interesting that you point out to the, this information and i'm curious to find out in just a little why, how the media coverage in public press. spect perception may impact efforts to uphold international law michael link. let me come back to you and ask you a question about the issue of proportionality here. israel has one of the most powerful militaries in the world. of course, how does international law define proportionality and distinction in on conflicts and how do these principles apply to the situation in, gosh, as sure, well, the distinction is clear, you are not to target a civilian populations are here to try to minimize, to the absolute degree possible any harm to civilians or to their or to their property in, in terms of the other question of a portion ality it, it is permitted, international law i guess, to be able to choose the military target,

which might have consequences for civilians either in their lives or their property, if the, the advantage militarily is overwhelming in favor of it, of attacking that, of all that said. so it's important. the military's never use these rules loosely. and israel has been cited on a number of occasions on reviews of as a tax, particularly in gas or in living on that. it has a very flexible or elastic definition with respect to the strict rules on international humanitarian law. and how you were to go about choosing particular targets. we can see in virtually every one of the major conflicts or thoughts on gas or that have occurred since 2008, 2009. but there are many credible instances where these rules have disregarded the . you know the one example i can i'll cite to now is 2014. when

a roughly 2300 cala stadiums were killed in in gas, over the course of the 50 day war, 2 thirds of those were were civilians. and there were many instances where question marks or actually firm conclusions were drawn, that the way in which is really targeted. the destruction of buildings or the targeting of middleton's add to higher price with respect to civilian lives, typically in wounding and the civilian property. to be justified under the laws of war. all right, so jeffrey, nice let me come to you. now as we've heard, both sides have broken the rules of war here. and we've heard from some leaders calling on israel to exercise restraint in response to the attacks that had suffered. but the biden administration in the us, it seems as old, but given the green light to israel to retaliate against him, us vowing is public unconditional support for. and it's now is war as

michael link said, that we have been here before in 2014, where the rules of war were again, ignored. what consequences then, what avenues all day for accountability if this keeps continuing topic of the very limited avenues of accountability as long as a israel remains? can you, so far as the international criminal court is concerned and as long as america would found any referral to that cooled by the security council. and this is a matter of real concern because the rules of laws being so helpfully explained by the 2 other speakers require a great deal of his row. they've been cry for example, not just the proportionality that we've heard all the proper record keeping. so that in the case of gauze, or if you decide you want to talk you to particular toilet annual household

building, because of who you say, well, it's got to be in in it. you've also got to have regard to the impossibility of avoiding collateral damage in the form of human, a civilian suffering and death because of the nature of the building. the limited ability all complete in ability of civilians to escape from the area where the particular targeted building is going to be boned. not this detail in the legitimate, if it ever is legitimate defense of this kind of bombing is never going to be available for the public to see as long as israel is kept away from any form of criminal court. and that is the position at the moment, and it has been clear that israel is happy to avoid official investigation into its practices. and when in very efficient investigation happens in respect to for example,

the award of the international court of justice. it just just disregard it. and so when 5 and said, as he said yesterday, as well as of what you said, he said, you know, we respect the golden rule. one is entitled to ask him, and i hope some of them will who respect the rules rule. why on the you prepared yourselves to join the international criminal court and not to abandon the access of others. the victims in particular, who are the concerns on all sides. okay. big tends to consideration by the international criminal code when i was in cause a shortly after the 2014 a protective edge event. and i, as i spoke to israel and i, uh, caesar of how mass a in respect to the program for this channel. it was never actually ed. and he indicated at that stage that he was prepared for the vin prosecutor to try to been

sued to, to enter garza and to consider about this. but of course that wasn't going to be possible and is where i would never cooperate. all right, so my to see, oh my gosh, i can't what, what is possible today as both michael and geoffrey, a said israel is not potty to the rooms taught you how mazda is a non state actor. what consequences, what avenue use all of a for accountability today? a full look. i mean the international criminal court has a formal pro. ready on serious crimes committed in palestine, so they have, the court has set out that they have jurisdiction over crimes committed in palestine. that would include obviously what's happening in gaza with these really airstrikes with tools like that that can be cutting of electricity and water and everything else that are included rocket stripes and other attacks that originate from gaza. so that there are the international criminal court release. the statement yesterday outlining that the current context fits within part of their mandate. we know. ready is also, although not

a criminal proceeding that the international court of justice has been asked by the un to issue an advisory opinion about the legal consequences. not only if is real occupation, but of the treatment of a patent discriminatory treatment of palestinians. we know that the un has mechanisms including a commission of inquiry with a mandate, and again the commission outlined that the current events would fit within that man . ready the courts around the world have jurisdiction over crimes of the gravity receive on the ground to investigate and prosecute. so we have the mechanisms there that what we have left is the political where the will to actually ensure that impunity and so long as impunity continues. we're here precisely because we've seen on level attacks, we've seen systematic repression take place with impunity for years and decades. this needs to be addressed. all right, michael, here with thoughts. how do we make sure that impunity ends? what should the international community be doing to protect civilians more in both

my opening. so how does that work here? um, in another dreadful situation precisely because we haven't married international law which is very clear with respect to the obligations of israel and the from us with international result. as long as international law continues to be sidelined either through the peace process again. but the also a process of in 1993 or with a host of un security council and un resolutions. israel learns the lessons that them. kennedy actually has a reward for them. so i agree was omar, that we have a path to account ability of through the investigations that aren't going on since 2015 uh with the office of the prosecutor at the international criminal court. alas, justice move slowly. the sun rises slowly with respect to this and every several

years we seem to be adding another huge file. uh to the, uh, to the i c. c with respect to what's going on in palestine with no great movement through the formal investigation process. i do want to point out if i can disappoint a 11 issue quickly. we've had 3 major commissions of inquiry after the 20082009, conflict them guys are for the 2014. and after the 2018, great march of return, each of these 3 major reports issued by the human rights council pointed to the prevalence of um, of impunity. the lack of accountability with respect to this, one of the report says we've, we have a just as crisis in the international uh, it's already in the occupied palestinian territory. it's imperative that the international community, a community learn the lessons that ignoring international law when it comes to israel and palestine. busy only big,

so repetition of these awful events. all right, so my so jeffrey, a nice how come to use the final word given evolving nature of this conflict and wolfy? how should international law adapt to address these challenges that we've talked about and protect human rights more effectively in guys out the policy and territories and beyond? yeah, how, how should the low adapt is not below that adapt? could see the contribution of your loss because it is so important. the said, the citizen of the world has the idea mistaken. there is a world or the of little full. and there isn't that are bits and pieces and it suits the politicians and the leaders of the most powerful countries for it to remain that way. it's not for the lawyer to adapt. it's for the leaders to show the determination that the nor should become universal. and should be accessible by

which i mean accessible to the benefits and purposes of the victims. where ever events like this a co and it is if it is a tragedy, not just concerning israel, but concerning many of the countries, the lessons available to us off to the 2nd world hall. when we learned how truman's can behave to humans, and we set up a number of instruments in order to save us from it ever happening again. it's a tragedy that we haven't looked that less from aisle timing to allows who one means or another corruption of the legal process to be maintained by an activity of the big state plans. oh, mario final thoughts on this. what we're seeing israel palestine is a challenge to the rules based international order. we see the, you know, western world rolling around international law accountability when it comes to ukraine. but that is too often been lacking in israel palestine. so long as the

world except the situation which impunity runs wild which were not defending the fundamental international legal. ready and israel palestine, it undermines that protection everywhere around the world. and so it's not only an imperative given the urgent humanitarian situation on the ground, but as an imperative to protecting the very rules that were created decades ago, to protect people around the world, from, from, from that for more. and it's a fast, as long as we allowed us to continue, we failed to speak out, recognize the reality for what it is, and ensure that international law protected impunity. and israel apartheid against palestinians is recognized for it is and is dismantled. we'll continue to see civilians in israel outside, but around the world up here. thank you very much. so jeffrey. nice all marcia here, michael link. thank your a very insightful discussion. thank you very much and thank you as well for watching. you can always watch this program again any time by visiting our website

at ology 0 dot com for further discussion. go to our facebook page at facebook dot com forward slash a j inside story. of course you can join the conversation on x. i'll handle is that a j inside story for me for you? back to one whole team here in doha. thanks for watching bye. for now, the the,

the meeting been coming to add any international anti corruption excellence award. nominate your hero now. the, [000:00:00;00] the hello. i'm sort of any age, great to have you with us. this is the news. our lives from doha coming up in the program today is really air strikes. pound garza and the only power station in the script stops working after