Sharon to be sued for war crimes

[Jako]

So what do you think? I think it's a good thing because hopefully it will make it easier to prosecute former heads-of-state who commit war crimes (Milosevic, Pinochet, Arafat, Kissinger, heck even Saddam if he survives long enough).

And I think Sharon ought to be prosecuted for the massacre too, he was found by an Israeli tribunal to be indirectly responsible and forced to resign. It would at least be some closure on the incident.

I'm curious to hear other people's opinions though.

Sharon to be sued for war crimes
By Fabrice Randoux in Brussels
February 13, 2003

BELGIUM'S highest court has delivered a landmark ruling that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon can be prosecuted for war crimes – but only after he leaves office.

Israel responded angrily to what one official called a "scandalous" decision, immediately recalling its ambassador to Brussels for consultations and summoning the Belgian envoy for a dressing-down.

The move by the Cour de cassation, the top appeal court, opens the way for several serving or ex-leaders around the world to be tried under a unique Belgian law that allows for war crimes prosecutions independently of where the offences took place.

The court ruled that "international custom does not allow heads of government to be the subject of legal action in a foreign state".

But it overturned a ruling made in June 2002 by a lower court, which said that Belgium's "universal competence" law only applied if the alleged perpetrator was in Belgium.

The lower court's ruling halted one of the most high-profile suits brought under the law – one filed against Sharon by 23 Palestinian survivors of a refugee camp massacre in Lebanon in 1982.

Today's ruling clears the way for Sharon to be tried once he ceases to be prime minister, regardless of whether he is in Belgium or not.

It also enables a war crimes trial of Israeli General Amos Yaron, who oversaw the Beirut sector in 1982.

The unique "universal competence" law, adopted in 1993, enables Belgian courts to try cases of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide regardless of where the incidents occurred.

It has attracted numerous lawsuits brought by victims of alleged atrocities who may one day seek recourse in the fledgling International Criminal Court.

Israeli public television quoted an official as calling the Belgian court decision "scandalous" and warning that it threatened to open a serious crisis between the two countries.

Ambassador Yehudi Kenar had been "called to Jerusalem for consultations", a foreign ministry spokesman said, adding that the Belgian ambassador to Israel, Wilfred Geens, had also been ordered to appear at the foreign ministry.

The massacre, in which up to 2000 Palestinian refugees were slaughtered in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut, was carried out by an Israeli-allied Christian militia during Israel's war against Lebanon.

An Israeli tribunal in 1983 found Sharon, who was defence minister at the time, to be indirectly responsible for the carnage. Sharon was forced to resign.

One of the lawyers for the Palestinian survivors, Chibli Mallat, was delighted that Sharon could eventually stand trial in Belgium.
"It's one of the most important rulings that there has been in international law," he said.

Under the Belgian law, four Rwandans were found guilty in 2001 of taking part in the 1994 genocide in their homeland, which left an estimated one million people dead.

But last year's lower court ruling effectively shelved suits brought under the law against some 30 foreign leaders or ex-leaders, including Sharon, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and Cuba's Fidel Castro.

The New York-based lobby group Human Rights Watch hailed the new ruling, which came as a surprise to legal observers in Belgium.

"It's a huge victory not only for the victims of the Sabra and Shatila massacres but for all victims of grave crimes who have put their hopes in the Belgian law of universal competence," said HRW's Reed Brody.

The Belgian parliament was forced to reinterpret the anti-atrocity law in response to last June's ruling, and a new version is awaiting the approval of the House of Representatives.

Agence France-Presse

[andak01]

We can't have that. Where is CAMERA? Where is the Honest Reporting group? Where are the boycotters. Those Belgians must be terrorists, anti-Semites, liars! Stop the presses! Arretez les presses!!!

[LionOfLoyalty]

*rollseyes* The sarcasm really isn't helping here...

Give me a moment, I intend to write my opinion in a little bit. I'm a bit busy lately, I'm going camping at Valley Forge in the middle of a snow soon, so I've got to get ready now or freeze later. (So I'll be absent from any debates this weekend, just so you know.)

[LionOfLoyalty]

Frankly, I feel it's ridiculous to say that Belgium has any jurisdiction over Sharon. Did Sharon ever do anything in Belgium? Were any Belgiumese (Or what ever you call them) involved in Lebanon? No. So why does Belgium have the right to try Sharon?

Furthermore, according to generally accepted practice, I do not believe Sharon committed War crimes. The unfortunate civilian casualties in Lebanon that you refer to were not done by Israeli forces, but in fact by Christian militia groups, the fact that these groups had Israeli backing is not sufficient to qualify Sharon for war crimes, unless anyone who backs a group who later commits an action contrary to internation law is to be held liable, thereby opening a whole can of worms that the world hardly needs now.

As always, however, I am open to other points of view and invite you all to attempt to convince me otherwise. That's what we're all here for anyway.

[takeo]

the Belgians didn't say Sharon committed war-crimes, they want to investigate the war-crimes, something sharon and the israeli establishment seem to be extremely nervous about.

What did Milosevic or Noriega ever do to the us, what did Pinochet ever do to Great Brittain?

That's the principle of international justice!

[NewsGuy]

Unable to succeed at much of anything, and scared of its own irrelevance, Belgium has decided that it will now the world's judge and jury.

If this is to be allowed under international law, then I guess any country can decide to judge the leaders of any other, and brand them as war criminals. Could make for a new reality TV show called "Belgian Survivor," where the audience guesses which country will Belgium decide to leave as the last non-guilty survivor of its court system.

I suggest that Belgium should judge Great Britain for their slaughter of hundreds of thousands in their colonies around the world. French leaders, too, should be judged for their mass murder of hundreds of thousands, Same thing for Japan, as well as all African countries, Cuba, South American countries, the rest of the murderous Europeans, Asian countries, etc...

Come to think of it, maybe Belgium will declare the entire world guilty, and then arrest all tourists it can catch.

Afterwards, Belgium will even judge itself guilty of massacring hundreds of thousands of Africans in the Congo, and then will just declare itself null and void.

After all, a country like Belgium, which has never made any contribution to humanity has, no doubt, earned the right to be the world's supreme arbiter of justice, no?

[alexbmn]

Belgian Lawlessness
“Justice” for Sharon, not Saddam.

By Nissan Ratzlav-Katz

On Wednesday, the Belgian Supreme Court ruled on appeal that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon may be tried before a Belgian court for alleged war crimes, but only after he leaves office. For now, the court ruled, Mr. Sharon has immunity from prosecution under Belgian law.
The petitioners in the Belgian case are survivors and relatives of victims of the 1982 massacre of Arabs in Sabra and Shatila, which was carried out by the Maronite Phalangist militia during Israel's Operation Peace for Galilee. Sharon was defense minister at the time of the IDF operation, which targeted the PLO terrorist canton that had been established in southern Lebanon. The Maronite Christians of the region had allied themselves with the Jewish state in the hopes of freeing Lebanon of PLO tyranny. In the context of this alliance, and with the intention to transfer authority to a free Southern Lebanon, Israel allowed the Maronite militia to go in and root out PLO terrorists who had taken refuge in the two camps. Unfortunately, the militiamen behaved with limited restraint and killed up to 800 people, including 35 women and children.

Ariel Sharon and then-IDF chief of staff Rafael Eitan undoubtedly failed to anticipate the less-than-honorable behavior of the Christian militiamen in the PLO enclave, but it is hardly a "war crime" to expect moral behavior from an ally.

Let us be as blunt as possible: Arabs massacred Arabs, yet a Jew is being held responsible.

In contrast, there has been no international suits, no Arab outrage, as a result of the massacre carried out in the same Shatila camp, just three years later, by Muslim militiamen. In that bloodbath, according to United Nations officials, 635 people were killed and 2,500 wounded. All told, Lebanese factions and sects spent a good part of the 1970s and '80s repeatedly attacking each other, leading to the deaths of about 95,000 people.

One such Arab-on-Arab massacre involved that world-renowned Nobel Prize laureate, PLO leader Yasser Arafat. In that brutal 1976 assault on the Christian city of Damour, 582 people were killed and the remaining 25,000 residents fled in fear. The Church of St. Elias, gutted by PLO grenades, was turned into a combination garage and gun range, with targets painted on the eastern wall of the nave. Arafat, of course, has yet to be charged in a Belgian court — or any other — for his war crimes against the Christians of south Lebanon.

However, charges were filed against Arafat in a Belgian court by relatives of Jewish victims of PLO terrorism through the years. Those charges were initially filed in November of 2001 and the case has yet to go to trial even once, with the court unconscionably dragging its feet. Au contraire, last year, the foreign minister of Belgium called on the European Union to reconsider commercial ties with Israel, calling Israel's refusal to permit EU officials to meet in Ramallah with Yasser Arafat an "affront" to the European community. On the other hand, the case against Ariel Sharon, also originally filed about two years ago, has already had time to come before Belgian courts three times, including Wednesday's appeal. One might be tempted to accuse the Belgians of having (hard to believe) an ulterior motive.

Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called the latest Belgian Supreme Court decision in the Sharon case "scandalous" and has recalled the Israeli ambassador "for consultations." Netanyahu was being extremely generous and diplomatic in his description. Even the former prime minister, beloved of Europe, Labor party Knesset member Shimon Peres had sharp words for the Belgians. Belgium has no right to place itself as the "judge of history," Peres said.

Well, if Belgium is to be a "judge of history," let it begin at home. While it is unlikely that anyone who was involved in the genocidal exploitation of the Congo Free State by the Belgian monarch is still alive, the fact is that the Congo remained an oppressed Belgian colony until 1960. In another Belgian colony, Rwanda, Hutu resistance in the first half of the 1900s was brutally suppressed by the ruling Tutsis, under the watchful eye of the Belgian authorities. Then, in the 1950s, when a rebellion of Hutu agricultural laborers broke out, the Belgian colonialists encouraged a new campaign of incitement against the Tutsis, to divert attention from themselves. Meanwhile, back home, during World War II, Belgian collaborationist authorities deported 35,000 Jews — fully half of the Belgian Jewish population at the time — to German gas chambers.

Is it really any surprise that Belgium had no qualms about helping France and Germany block plans for NATO to protect member-state Turkey from Saddam Hussein's Iraq?

While Belgium may see itself as the "judge of history," history won't likely be kind to Belgium — even if there is no court to which Belgium's victims can appeal.

[rhodescholar]

It is clear that the Belgian vassals of France have not only a poor and selective memory, but little common sense.

I would speculate that should anyone offer say, $ US 500,000 to research Belgian atrocities in the Congo during the 1950s, where thousands of natives were slaughtered by Belgian hands, that this sham would disappear and quick.

I suspect the following will occur:

The Israeli govt behind the scenes will ask a well-known Jewish organization in the US, such as the Jewish Theological society or the American Sephardi Foundation, to begin fundraising drives soliciting funds for this research project to be launched about 2004.

After Belgian diplomats have quietly conferred with Israeli counterparts and the initial fundraising letters are sent, the Belgian "Court" will quietly issue a ruling dropping any charges against Sharon,

As for the article mentioned above:

"In contrast, there has been no international suits, no Arab outrage, as a result of the
massacre carried out in the same Shatila camp, just three years later, by Muslim militiamen.
In that bloodbath, according to United Nations officials, 635 people were killed and 2,500
wounded. All told, Lebanese factions and sects spent a good part of the 1970s and '80s
repeatedly attacking each other, leading to the deaths of about 95,000 people."

This part says it all, as far as the absolute lack of credibility by so many (UN, Europeans, let alone the Arab muslims, US left wing, etc).

On another front, why, can anyone please tell me, is Arafat - or his vast wealth - NOT being investigated?

How can someone amass over $ US 2 billion, confirmed in several Swiss accounts, with most of it derived from unsuspecting, but painfully naive "donors", and not be under some kind of charge?

Could it be that those said "donors," i.e. the Europeans, are buying "protection" money from this arab trash? It has not gone unnoticed that over the last 6-7 years, after European $$ started to really flow into the PA that terrorism in Europe has slowed.

Where is the ICC in regards to Arafat? If the Europeans, partciularly the hyocritical Gaullist French, desired any credibility, they would begin an investigation of Arafat's wealth.

How do these idiots think he is able to buy off potential enemies and keep them at bay, but by co-opting them through these discretionary funds?

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by rhodescholar
I would speculate that should anyone offer say, $ US 500,000 to research Belgian atrocities in the Congo during the 1950s, where thousands of natives were slaughtered by Belgian hands, that this sham would disappear and quick.

Excellent idea.

[tandem]

what gives belgium the right to think that they are some kind of a universal tribunal, that they can prosecute anyone they see as a "war criminal" (aside from their own, of course) and regard themselves as though they have the higher moral ground?

if you ask me, belgium should look at its own past and all the war crimes they were responsible for in their african colonies:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/fro...nt/1123933.stm

of course, let's not forget how the belgians collaborated closely with the nazis during WWII. perhaps the belgians are cowards of the highest order when it comes to confronting their own past. did you know that to this day, there has been no official inquiry into how "involved" were civil authorities in belgium in helping the nazis to identify and deport thousands of jews to nazi death camps?

this is all hardly surprising. with extreme neo-facist parties like the vlaams blok and front national belge and considering the fact that the belgium-based EFFHR is one of the leading organizations that distribute holocaust denial works today, is it any wonder why the belgians have a grudge against the jews and israel?

the way i see it, belgium! they are nobody. they have absolutely no jurisdication to prosecute arik sharon or any israeli commanders during the war with lebanon

>>>' the Belgians didn't say Sharon committed war-crimes, they want to investigate the war-crimes, something sharon and the israeli establishment seem to be extremely nervous about. '<<<

takeo: it doesn't matter what the belgians "want". they have no jurisdiction over this issue - period!

[JustPat]

I never cease to be amazed at the gall of the French speaking/French thinking world. Belgium, the seat of world justice, what a laugh. What an affont to true justice. It's no wonder most prophecy experts see Brussels as the home of the "anti-christ."

[Am Yisrael]

Originally posted by JustPat
I never cease to be amazed at the gall of the French speaking/French thinking world. Belgium, the seat of world justice, what a laugh. What an affont to true justice. It's no wonder most prophecy experts see Brussels as the home of the "anti-christ."

Lets give thanks that they didnt rule the world on the scale of Britain, or we probably wouldnt be sitting here talking our free voices about a nonexistent Israel.

I think a dose of realism should be injected into those Europeans who are so easily influenced by what they see on the TV set that is run by anti-semites. The next thing we will here is that Saddam wins a nobel peace prize (like his evil twin Arafat)!

[andak01]

Originally posted by JustPat
I never cease to be amazed at the gall of the French speaking/French thinking world. Belgium, the seat of world justice, what a laugh. What an affont to true justice. It's no wonder most prophecy experts see Brussels as the home of the "anti-christ."

Which prophecy experts? You know, I am very frustrated with these prophecy experts. It seems that they are always encouraging people to go to battle and get killed in order to fulfill some prophecy.

[Mediocrates]

Strange though who this so called international court o' justice wants to put in the dock: People they can find, and people they can make a political statement about.

Milosevic - yes
Sharon - yes
Midlevel nobodies in Rwanda - yes
Kissinger - yes
Pinochet - no
Mugabe - no
Anyone in Liberia - no
Anyone in Sierre Leone - no
Anyone in Cote d'Ivorie - no
Saddam Hussein - no
The leaders of Chad - no
The warlords of Yemen - no
Anyone from Hamas, Hezbollah, PFLP, force 17, Tanzim - HELL NO
Whomever in the PRC is responsible for Tibet - no
Kim of the DPRK - no
Iranian mullahs - no
Arafat - no
The Syrian army - no
Southern Lebanese Christian militia leaders - no
The Shining Path of Peru - no
Columbia's FARC - no
Anyone from Argentinas's junta - no
Duvallier - no
Laurent Kabilla - no
The Taleban - no
The Russian Army in Chechnya - no

[takeo]

some observations:

1)Belgian autorities didn't collaborate with the nazi's, on the contrary belgium was a military occupied zone, and the entire government went into exile in London.

2)Yes, Belgians behaved very badly in its colonies, as ALL imperialist nations, including the us and Great-brittain (and France). Currently there has been an investigation about belgian crimes in the past, such as the murder on the first former prime minister Lumumba, suspected of communist sympathies. Conclusion: he has been murdered by Belgians, in FULL cooperation with the us-autorities...

3) You think Belgium doesn't have the right to be the international judge of the world. Perhaps you're right... but you don't have the right to say so coming from a country that thinks it has the right to bomb and invade countries to pieces because they don't like the leader of that country (panama, Iraq, just some examples...). This is a clear case of double standars!

4) yes the arbitrary judgement of former dictators and war-criminals is very at random... for example Milosevic is to be trialed, but kissinger ISN'T for killing millions of Vietnamese...

5)the incidents in Libanon were not just arab versus Arab incidents... Sharon was the military commander of Libanon ("liberated from palestinian oppression", as your unbiased source puts it). in this function he was responsible for every action inside his controlled area. He did send the falangists into these popular neighbourhoods, and could have guessed the outcome of such a decision. Milosevic is been jailed for much less than this.

6) Europeans have been hit by terrorism as well in the latest years. Remember the attack against French employees in Pakistan? In Algeria as well French targets are targetted by the terrorists. But Europe is cooperating with the non-terrorist Arab governments, while the US doesn't make any distinction between terrorists and independant arab countries who do not accept us-dictates or troops.