CRY FREEDOM.net
Welcome to cryfreedom.net,
formerly known as Womens
Liberation Front.
A website
that hopes to draw and keeps your attention for both the global 21th. century 3rd. feminist revolution as well
as especially for the Zan, Zendegi, Azadi uprising in Iran and the
struggles of our sisters in other parts of the Middle East. This online magazine
that started December 2019 will
be published every week. Thank you for your time and interest.
FFor the Iran 'Woman, Life, Freedom' Iran actual news Updated Oct 11, 2024
For the 'Women's Arab Spring 1.2' Revolt
news
Updated Oct. 10, 2024 |
|
SPECIAL
REPORTS
Oct wk3 P2 --
Oct wk3 --
Oct wk2 P3 --
Oct wk2 P2 -- Oct
wk2 --
Oct wk1 P3 --
Oct wk1 P2 --
Oct wk1 --
Sept wk4 P3 --
Sept wk4 P2 --
Sept wk4 --
Sept wk3 P3 --
Sept wk 3 P2
--
--
Click here for an overview by week in 2024
October 17 - 15, 2024 |
October 15 - 12, 2024 |
October 12 - 10, 2024 |
June 14, 2024 |
|
May 23, 2024 |
When one hurts or kills a women
one hurts or kills hummanity and is an antrocitie.
Gino d'Artali
and: My mother (1931-1997) always said to me <Mi
figlio, non esistono notizie <vecchie> perche puoi imparare qualcosa da
qualsiasi notizia.> Translated: <My son, there is no such thing as so
called 'old' news because you can learn something from any news.>
Gianna d'Artali.
Al Jazeera - Oct 13, 2024 - by Moncef Khane Former
United Nations official
<<The ICC's credibility is hanging by a thread
If the court does not issue arrest warrants for Israel’s Benjamin
Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, it will lose what little legitimacy it has
left. Upon the entry into force of the Rome Statute of the International
Criminal Court in 2002, a palpable hope arose that the era of impunity
for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide was coming to a
close. Twenty-two years later, the international legitimacy of the court
hangs in the balance as it ignores calls to move swiftly against those
responsible for mass atrocities in Gaza. In May, ICC Prosecutor Karim
Khan requested the court to issue warrants of arrest for Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, along
with three Hamas leaders. The ICC is yet to make a decision despite the
mounting death toll in and destruction of Gaza amid Israel's continuing
genocidal violence. The idea of a permanent international tribunal to
prosecute war crimes first emerged in the wake of World War I in the
legal circles of the victorious powers, but never materialised. After
World War II, which killed an estimated 75-80 million people, several
concepts of "justice" were floated. At the 1943 Tehran Conference,
during which the heads of state of the USSR, the United States and Great
Britain met to discuss war strategy, Soviet Union leader Joseph Stalin
suggested that at least 50,000 of the German commanding staff must be
eliminated. US President Franklin D Roosevelt replied, reportedly
jokingly, that 49,000 should be executed. UK Prime Minister Winston
Churchill argued for trying war criminals for their individual
responsibilities. Eventually, the allies established the Nuremberg and
Tokyo military tribunals, which indicted 24 German and 28 Japanese
military and civilian leaders, respectively. But this was, in essence,
victors' justice as none of the Allied powers’ leaders or military
commanders were prosecuted for their war crimes. In the end, these
tribunals were, arguably, a symbolic attempt at trying those who waged
wars of aggression and committed genocide. During the following decades,
no such international effort was made to bring war criminals to justice.
Thus, for example, the mass murderers of peoples who rose against
colonial and imperial powers never faced trial. The notion of
international justice was revived in the 1990s when the United Nations
Security Council established two ad hoc tribunals to prosecute crimes
committed during the 1991-1995 and 1998-1999 wars in the former
Yugoslavia and the 1994 Rwanda genocide. While these tribunals served
their purposes, some questioned their efficacy, financial costs, and
independence, given that they were set up by a Security Council
dominated by Western powers. Here again, the notion of victors' justice
hovered particularly over the Yugoslavia tribunal, as it didn't
investigate, let alone prosecute, NATO officials for the seemingly
illegal 1999 bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia. With respect to the Rwanda tribunal, the latter didn't
investigate the possible complicity of Western powers in the genocide
and/or their failure to prevent or stop it in accordance with the 1948
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. In this
context, the signing of the Rome Statute in 1998, which entered into
force in 2002, gave rise to hopes that those who commit war crimes,
crimes against humanity and genocide will be prosecuted by the new court
regardless of which side they were on in a conflict. In 2018, the crime
of aggression - defined as the planning, preparation, initiation or
execution of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and
scale, constitutes a violation of the Charter of the United Nations -
was added to the court's jurisdiction. But it didn't take long for the
high hopes for the ICC to be frustrated. A few signatories of the Rome
Statute formally declared they no longer intended to become State
Parties, thus nullifying their obligations. Among them were Israel, the
United States and the Russian Federation. Other major powers, like China
and India, did not even sign the statute. It also did not help the ICC’s
credibility that all 46 suspects it sought to prosecute in the first 20
years of its existence were Africans, including sitting heads of state.
This pattern was broken for the first time in June 2022, when the court
indicted three pro-Russian officials from the breakaway region of South
Ossetia who were accused of committing war crimes during the
Russia-Georgia war of 2008. A year later, in March 2023, the court made
the sensational move to issue an arrest warrant for Russian President
Vladimir Putin, just 29 days after Chief Prosecutor Khan asked for it.
The decision was, on merit, rather puzzling. Despite the lethality of
the war raging in Ukraine since February 2022 and reported attacks on
civilian targets, the warrant was issued for Putin's alleged "individual
criminal responsibility" for the "unlawful deportation of population
(children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from
occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation". In and of itself,
the warrant against a sitting president of a permanent member of the UN
Security Council could have signalled the independence of the ICC and
its volition to go where the evidence would take it. But given the overt
psychological war between the West and Russia, some saw the court's
decision as further evidence of the influence of its Western backers.
This perception could have been mitigated had the court demonstrated it
was bona fide by following the overwhelming evidence of war crimes and
crimes against humanity committed by Israel against the Palestinians. In
2018, the State of Palestine submitted a referral to the ICC "to
investigate, in accordance with the temporal jurisdiction of the court,
past, ongoing and future crimes within the court’s jurisdiction,
committed in all parts of the territory of the State of Palestine". It
took the court five years to determine in March 2023 that it could
initiate an "investigation into the Situation in the State of
Palestine". In November 2023, South Africa and five other signatories
made another referral to the ICC, after which Chief Prosecutor Khan
confirmed that the investigation launched in 2023 "remains ongoing and
extends to the escalation of hostilities and violence since the attacks
that took place on 7 October 2023". It took Khan no less than seven
months to recommend to the court's pre-trial chamber the issuance of
warrants of arrest for Netanyahu and Gallant, notwithstanding a rather
formidable amount of evidence of their personal responsibility in the
war crimes perpetrated in Gaza. He also made the same recommendation
with respect to three Hamas leaders, two of whom were subsequently
assassinated by Israel. Arguably, it took time and courage to seek the
arrest of Netanyahu, who has the support of the US and of Mossad,
Israel's infamous intelligence agency specialising in assassinations
abroad. In May, the British newspaper The Guardian revealed that Khan's
predecessor, Fatou Bensouda, had been threatened "in a series of secret
meetings" by Yossi Cohen, the then-head of Mossad and "Netanyahu's
closest allies at the time". Cohen tried to compel Bensouda <into
abandoning a war crimes investigation> and <is alleged to have told her:
'You should help us and let us take care of you. You don't want to be
getting into things that could compromise your security or that of your
family.'> If Bensouda was threatened and blackmailed for merely
investigating allegations of war crimes perpetrated before the current
genocidal war, one can only fathom the pressures and threats, real or
assumed, that Khan faced or feared. Now that he has done his duty, it is
for the three sitting judges of the pre-trial chamber to decide whether
to issue the warrants or not. Whether they face the same threats as
Bensouda is unknown, but they must be acutely aware that the very
credibility of the ICC also hangs in the balance if warrants of arrest
for Netanyahu and Gallant are not issued without further delay. The
glaring and extraordinary amount of evidence of war crimes, crimes
against humanity, genocide, and crime of aggression is such that were
they to abscond from their responsibility, they would ring the death
knell of the ICC.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not
necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.>>
Source:
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/10/13/the-iccs-credibility-is-hanging-by-a-thread
Women's
Liberation Front 2019/cryfreedom.net 2024