they start there. yes? this is interesting. in general , yes, fascist, you also have quite interesting movements. edward showed great interest in england there was a big problem. and then there is the british fascist council at the end of the war. the so-called march files were discovered, where was the windsor dossier, judging by these documents, and edward, uh, the eighth. this, it turns out, in every way supported the bombing of great britain itself, which was terrible for the british information society.

one law for the whole world by what right judge the materials of our program? nuclear horizons expanding missiles as the basis of deterrence testing money everyone is an illusion, but many still can't believe it, and while this is the case, inflation will rise until we are reduced to total nothing in the present there is still a devilish dance of numbers, winners and losers we know that we cannot be in absolute gain, but we would not like to be among the final losers, filled with

ironic hopelessness roman black obelisk germany exactly 100 years ago 1923 hyperinflation devours life. the impoverished population demands justice , the radicals score points when they recently spoke to vladimir putin about the biggest changes in 100 years. nightmares of the roaring twenties shift changes between the world wars, god forbid, but socio-political tensions are growing everywhere only in recent days the largest strike in germany since the 20th century millions protesting pension reform in france to israel the original attempt to shift the balance of the judiciary caused the sharpest polarization of society from israel vgtrk correspondent sergey pashkov last monday

, when hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets, when transport stopped and the airport closed, when banks and shopping centers did not work, or the vice-mayor of the primorsky israeli city. ashdod went along with everyone to the central square. we have in ashdod when they have already started first it was in the center. and well , you can't get there. i don't know when people get there. i'm even afraid to think about it, that when there are several hundred thousand more or several hundred thousand cars in some radius there, i can’t even imagine how you can get there, when somewhere it’s already started to be carried out with us, that is, i went there funny molensky has been living on the west bank of jordan for a quarter of a century the village of dko is located in what the international community considers palestinian. he also went to the rally on monday, but it was a rally. yes

, the supporters of netanyahu and the reforms he is carrying out gathered near the building of the knesset jerusalem, but they have already gathered, they have already proved they have already carried out several largest demonstrations of several hundred thousand people about this, though the media is not only silent, but greatly underestimate the numbers, while the left is overestimated, but certainly if desired, uh, enough power to flood all the streets of all cities civil conflict , threatening to go into hand-to-hand combat stopped at the last minute netanyahu. he announced a pause in lawmaking and invited a position to find a compromise, at the negotiating table the streets were empty for the time being, but the claims and distrust of each other remained. here they are very cunning an experienced politician, he definitely does. in my opinion. a lot of things came in handy.

he did for the state, israel and everything and everyone considers him a very big leader in the world and so forth, but today he went off the coil in my understanding, went off the coil, because the personal problems that he has. there are some judicial coalition problems, because again, he wants to be an example. he is an example, firstly, so that this does not affect his court case, secondly, he wants power, like any politician , the opposition is sure that benjamin netanyahuts, the current premier with the status of being on trial, united in corruption, started a legal reform for himself to make judges, including judges of the supreme court of justice of israel of wealth, more obedient and accommodating supporters of the current government. such as scrapping lensky reproach him for insufficient rigidity and adherence to principles, while accusing the judges of the supreme court of betraying the basic interests of the people of israel. terrorists already convicted and

in prison turned out to be right. they need it turns out to give them it is necessary to feel sorry for them, it is necessary to enter into their position. it turns out that it is possible to negotiate with a tourist organization, if it is for the good, but for the good of the country's parliament and government, which did not gather at all, but from the point of view of some group. there are professors of doctors of sciences of the elite, and the city dweller, the elinarcht and the settler of the shla-molensky one, only in one they do not consider the legal system of israel to be sinless, and the supreme court of justice, fully answering to its name, further begins differences differences in the interpretation of this and justice by supporters who consider themselves reform needs 100% of the judges who we have definitely do not do the work that we say the majority of residents. and

the population of israel would be expected, because sometimes somewhere they make decisions that are not comparable with our parliament and the desire of the people. somewhere there is such a thing. this does not mean that now you need to completely break everything. yes, let's fix it. let's rush, strike and demonstrate together. behind behind the closed doors of the presidential office in jerusalem, representatives of the government and the opposition are trying to agree on a compromise, trying to combine the incompatible and reconcile those who hated each other yesterday, justice is a strong feeling, it can divide the country into friends and foes, and then people who called themselves brothers can become enemies. and this means that in the hands of the negotiators today, the fate and future of all israel sergey pashkov alexander ivanyuk anastasia demyanets from israel especially for international review. everywhere has its own background, but the reason for the general feeling of the fragility

of the future and the lack of justice in germany 100 years ago is precisely the latter because of the defeat in the war of predatory peace conditions and the incapacity of the government. a demand for the simplicity of radicalism was born. and now the feeling of injustice is spilling over the planet in different countries, communities , age and social groups. gathering of two subjects kristo komarnicki from bulgaria on the left, a macron-like man yells, go, get yourself a job, and the frenchman answers. it's better for you to resign artist piet from france who inspires emmanuel macron, the gravestone says 1925 - 2018, although thatcher died for 5 years.

previously, the year of the beginning of the protest in france, apparently, matters here, the provocative german ericaturist oraner hakld on the topic of the strike qua in france in germany, a man who looks like a macron, says just a small reform, and the child in the stroller at the chancellor answers him. we strike them too. this is a walker of the crap protests against judicial reform and a split in israeli society job. briefly titled israeli among themselves chik. patrick champade on the subject of a crowning visit to macron due to a strike says the sign of the british king charles iii went to germany and not to france drawing the cancellation of the visit. justice is an infrequent companion of history, but the uneven distribution of benefits, even economically, even politically , even culturally, is easier to bear. if there is an expectation that tomorrow will be better than yesterday,

the past post-world war ii era and until the recent dawn of liberal globalization is a period of comfort and optimism for no small parts of the world population. but it has now ended with a circle of fears, even the innovators who promised that technological progress will solve all problems beat thousands of not the last people in this area, led by elon musk and steve wozniak. just called to freeze the training of artificial intelligence, too dangerous for russia lord of human rights , humanity is even late considered by some. the tectonic shift that the world is experiencing is multifaceted. we will return to various aspects of this topic more than once until we confine ourselves to one as a statement, the creation of a just world is an extremely complex process, because

everyone has their own interpretation of justice. before we live. yes, and the harmonization of kalizin, any taste is to be pretty. justice in the sense of justice should be universal , such a view prevailed at the end of the 20th century, the systemic split of the cold war ended . bloody civil strife in europe and africa demanded a response. moreover, life seems to have proved that there is only one correct moral and ethical system and it is based on liberal principles. international the criminal court began work in 2002 after the entry into force of the roman statute, it formalized the creation of a new judicial body and authorized it to investigate the case of genocide , violation of the rules of war or the neva convention, but the mousse is not directly related to it should not be confused with an international court, which is also located in the hague and

is one of the main organs. un in forty-five. it was created to resolve international disputes or situations that could lead to conflict it is important that the jurisdiction of the mousse extends exclusively on the state that signed and ratified the rome statute , the exception is cases when the request is made by the un security council , 123 countries entered the musa jurisdiction, and more than 40 of them refused to do so, among them turkeys. china, the united states and russia, with the front two signing the rome statute, but washington withdrew the signature, and russia did not ratify the treaty. in doing so, the united states acts as a consistent critic of the court of american law. even allows the special services to carry out forceful operations to free us citizens detained on the basis of his warrant, and while donald trump was president, he imposed sanctions against his music employees

, does not have its own police or any coercive apparatus in general, in theory, the state itself should transfer wanted persons, but there are internal rules of law that allow this not do. at the same time, the mousse does not consider cases in absentia, but only after the arrest of the accused, they finance him in approximately the same way as he is. each participating country makes its contribution depending on the population and its income, by the way, in the top ten the largest donors for 2020 are six participants. nicknames of the so-called big seven and also austria, spain and south korea , but there are also voluntary contributions or donations, it is impossible to establish who made it, the state or an individual, in 20 years. mousse, who received more than one billion euros , registered claims in 139 countries, and opened an investigation in only eight cases.

however, some of them ended in justification. fu, the international criminal court loudly reminded of itself by issuing an arrest warrant for the president of russia and the russian commissioner for children's rights, the prosecutor considers the evacuation of children from the war zone a mass abduction, that is, a war crime from now on , countries that recognize the jurisdiction of the court are supposed to arrest the defendants if they find themselves on their territory and transfer them to gaga when it comes to such incidents, neither of course, there can be no talk of any kind of justice outside of politics, but if, in principle, the chance for a more or less impartial trial in a common supranational jurisdiction is one world. it is available in only two variations. at least measure. uh, so far we are offered two variations. this is either some kind of global hegemot that will exercise

jurisdiction over the entire globe. and then any international courts. it's actually just courts. there is nothing. e new. for us. these are simply analogues of domestic courts. uh, since a world united under a hegemon is just an analogue of a sovereign state , the second variant of such an order extended to the entire global sphere, this is, for example , if there is, relatively speaking, some kind of extended situation with the un general assembly where there will be no no world hegemon, but the world hegemon will be represented, as it were, by a world parliament, some. ah, this is the second uh, the second option that was offered. here there in the middle of zero in the middle of the tenth years. this is considered such a european version of global international law. e is not under the leadership of any particular state. well, here, and then, in fact , the situation does not change at all. just conditional. this is not some particular state. they are,

well, a certain number of subjects. not only, by the way, it was proposed to teach states there. and representatives of various kinds, namely the nationality of the nations, not necessarily , which are formalized, as state associations sound like utopia both of them, moreover , the hegemon himself, now rather, who was in relation to justice from the outside, takes a tough position, even a special law adopted on the protection of us citizens from attacks by critics of the international court back in the late nineties at the beginning of the two thousandth they talked about what we have the us constitution which in article three provides that the judicial power is exercised by the supreme court and lower courts created. i do not interpret the provisions. in the literal sense, that us citizens cannot be subject to any other court, except as a matter of fact, created on the basis of the constitution, why is this so? it's not

just a matter of some selfish interpretation of the idea that the constitution is not just some. a random document is a legal act that the constitution is a form of expression of a social contract, that the constitution continues the idea war of independence, uh, the declaration of independence of 1776, which, first of all, enshrines the right of every people, but above all, the people of the former colonies to self-determination and to design for themselves the political power system that they want in other words, all power belongs to the people and in in this case, the american people and all authorities, including the judiciary, must. after all, to be responsible directly to the american people is a situation where an american citizen is judged, for example, some national body. well, the same university, a situation arises in which the decision is made by people who do not and

cannot bear any responsibility to the american people. they have nothing to do with american statehood and the american republic, and therefore the opponents of the mousse directly point out that he denies not just the us legal system there. he denies the right to self-government in general, that is, he denies the entire constitutional history of the united states of america. well, there is, of course. , claims also to the purely legal side, because the same constitution provides for everyone to consider the right of everyone, and she is a court with the participation of, for example, a jury, which, of course, is practice. absent. well, it's just that such a procedure is not provided for. to examine the criticism of the court indicates that it provides the citizens of the united states of america with a lesser degree of guarantee, and in terms of rights and freedoms, than the national legal system and therefore in no way. it cannot be applied to them. in addition, critics also pointed out the following curious

moment. uh, the court procedure in particular on the jurisdiction of the so-called withdrawal, that is, by default, of course, as a general rule. e, the court applies its rules to citizens of countries that have signed and ratified the relevant treaty. however, at the same time, it provides for the possibility of retreat. that is, on the occasion of a particular party, not a party to the treaty, but rather accept jurisdiction over a particular case in its territory. the position, it must be said, sounds convincing, but the americans defend this approach exclusively for themselves the fact is that the americans here are not defending the idea of ​​sovereignty, as such, they are defending the idea , first of all, of their own exclusivity, that the united states of america is not just one of the countries. not just one of the nation- states. this nation-state is based on certain principles. well, including, for example, democracy, but the fact

is that, for example, the prosecutor of muses or the judge is elected by representatives of the assembly of the countries of the parties to this agreement, among which, for example, there is the central african the republic of afghanistan, and so on, and it turns out such a situation that the decision in the end. issued by this court will be accepted on the basis of the will of countries that, from the point of view of the united states of america , have nothing to do with democratic values, and therefore the united states believes that they protect universal values. they are not opposed to meaningful activity, that is, they are not opposed to the values ​​that in turn protect the immus. they simply assume that the structure of this organization is procedural. moments related to the formation, and then with the composition of the judges and so on. they simply do not protect those universal values ​​that they protect themselves, the united states of america, therefore, the united states of america believes that they themselves

will be able to protect these values ​​much better than through, for example, these national structures were ardent supporters of this permanent court. well, after the temporary tribunals. they pointed to one proviso that they consider it necessary to initiate any proceedings. uh, in this court only sanction councils of security. oh, that is, the body where the us has the ability to simply veto any decision and therefore. this way they can limit it. uh, the likelihood that not democratic countries, for example, but can influence the adoption of appropriate decisions regarding citizens of the united states of america, a situation where, in fact, without the consent of the united states, a situation can be initiated, and the next us case is no longer ready to participate in this entire event, that is , in fact, this is not a defense of sovereignty, as

such is the protection of the interests and sovereignty of the united states of america, which consider itself. naturally, exemplary exemplary state and believes that they are the very city on the hill, which should serve as an example for everyone else, and let's not democratic countries. to judge citizens, and this exemplary state. well, they just think it's wrong. the first international tribunal was the nuremberg trials , representatives of the four powers of the allies of the ussr usa france and great britain worked on its creation in the dock were the highest military officials of the third reich, almost all were found guilty . racial laws were also adopted here, by analogy, the tokyo international military tribunal was held on japanese

war criminals. in may 93 , an international tribunal for the former yugoslavia was created, 2/3 of the defendants were serbs, and the defendants and croats. most high-profile defendants escaped prosecution ex-president yugoslaviishevich and his companions did not live up to the verdict, but rather karacha and eradka mladdic. sentenced to life imprisonment. this is the first tribunal that the organizers said was held on behalf of the entire international community. in the ninety-fifth year, the perrondi tribunal was created, it investigated the causes of the genocide organized by the hutu people against the tutsi people, according to some reports, a murder was committed in the country every 10 seconds, 2/3 of the verdicts turned out to be guilty at the beginning of the 2000s on the initiative. he was established. another international tribunal to investigate the crimes of the red worlds in

cambodia for 4 years. they are known to have destroyed their fellow citizens, according to various estimates, then from one and a half to three million people died. in 2008 , for the first time, an international criminal court issued an arrest warrant for an incumbent president, sudanese leader omar al-bashir , who was charged with genocide and ethnic cleansing in the province. dar-fu, after the coup in 2019, he was overthrown and arrested a year later, the new authorities agreed to extradite him to the international criminal court, but so far this did not happen. mousse is a phenomenon of a unique time, when it seemed that justice without national reference was about to become a reality. and when it turned out that a single universe, while the previous obligations were being postponed, they became somewhat of a burden. for some, it’s interesting, for example, how the authorities of south africa will behave there in the fall

, the brix themselves, respectively, the arrival of the russian leader formally in south africa , the mousse jurisdiction is recognized, in fact, they even tried to get out of it, but internally politically twists do not allow, however, when in south africa sudanese president omar al-bashir came to the african summit 8 years ago. no one , of course, betrayed him anywhere, there is truth and the pioneers-hero of the constitutional court of armenia precisely. now why is it appropriate to decide that the ratification of participation in the mousse is in accordance with the legislation of the country. there, of course, in their heads is not belokamennaya at all, but the capital of another neighboring state. but still, there is nowhere to go further in a timely manner . and end as the international criminal court. yes, this can be a verdict on him in the part

that, well, his authority can hit. although i must say that he has never been great, especially not. uh, if you look, uh, his sentences are all over. that's how many twenty-plus years of his existence, then there, uh, actually considered doing, in my opinion, more than a third of what he was going to consider most acquittals . and as far as i remember , those that are not exculpatory are there. well, in general, nothing has been done. well, for example it was here is the production so far, but here they did not have time, okay, here, but in general, you just look there and didn’t show up for the proceedings . there is simply no need for excessive expectations, international courts are an indicator of the degree of integration of the community. if

the community does not have a consensus on how, for example, some fundamental concepts should be understood, then human rights. e, in terms of the limits of their content or e. hmm what kind of concepts war and peace, for example, it is impossible to say probably that international justice will disappear altogether. yes, because the world is not divided into completely separate national entities. yes, it is split up, rather, as if into some blocks, and if it is just some block system and integration associations, then inside these integration associations there should be courts, of course, that will resolve disputes between the participation of these integration associations, with regard to relations between these blocks, then uh too it cannot be said that i can imagine how this justice will completely disappear. there is something, here are

these situational tribunals that were created, and in the era just e hmm the dominance of national sovereign states. uh, within the framework of resolving disputes between them, yes, but hmm, they would be quite applicable in this case. dmitry anatolyevich medvedev, chairman of the board of trustees of the russian bar association, made his professional contribution to the dispute on jurisdictions, he gave the following legal argument, it is quite possible to imagine targeted use of hypersonic onyx from the north sea from a russian ship on the building of the hague court

we are dealing with a religious war, the seizure of a temple drone, there is a shelling

of orthodox churches, the creation of the so-called orthodox church of ukraine, a purely political american empire precisely for orthodox unity. a huge number of clergy of the ukrainian patriarchy