Kuala Lumpur Tribunal to Deliver Judgment on Charges of Genocide against the State of Israel

KUALA LUMPUR, 24 November 2013The fifth day of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal (KLWCT) hearing on genocide and war crimes charges against the State of Israel and Amos Yaron,

The Amicus Curiae’s submission.

Amicus Curiae Jason Kay submitted that genocide requires a decrease in population of the victim/group. He quoted Article 2 of the Genocide Convention 1948 pointing out that the acts that constitute genocide includes acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethical, racial or religious group.  This includes killing members of the group, causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group, and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

He stressed that when one talks about ‘massive killing’ it should mean many hundreds of thousand to millions. He submitted that the murder of 3,000 people in the Sabra and Shatilla massacre could not be considered massive killing unlike i.e. the killing of 800,000 people in Rwanda in 100 days and the systematic killing of the Jews by Nazi Germany.

On the charge against Amos Yaron, the Amicus Curiae submitted that none of the witnesses identified Yaron in any way as directly responsible for the deaths that took place in Sabra and Shatilla in September 1982. He argued that the Kahan Commission had cited that Yaron had told the Phalangists of the location of the terrorists in the camps and not to harm the civilian population.

With regard to Cast Lead Operation, the Amicus referred to the Israeli reports that did not find any wrong doing on the part of IDF. Also reference was made to Goldstone’s article that said that if he had access to further evidence he would have had a different conclusion for the UN report prepared by him (Goldstone). On the subject of the Wall, the amicus submitted that the wall/fence was primarily motivated by security considerations to protect the lives of the Israelis in the area. The decision to erect the fence was made to new rise in Palestinian terrorism in 2002.

In reference to Plan Dalet, the amicus submitted that the plan was not aimed at ethnic cleansing and that it was entirely defensive. Amicus proceeded to submit that the Palestinians are supporters of Hamas, whose numerous acts could be considered crimes against humanity and war crimes.

The Prosecution submitted that they would adopt their earlier submission and responded to the Amicus Curiae submission. According to the prosecution, the law has been clearly addressed on state liability and the specific intent. On the Palestinian population, the prosecution submitted that population is not a numbers game. On ethnic cleansing, the Prosecution submitted that while ethnic cleansing does not necessarily equate to genocide but it can amount to genocide.

He further added that the Operation Cast Lead investigation by the Israeli military had been criticised and that the Goldstone article was an after thought for which there is no evidence why it occurred.

On the issue of the Wall, the prosecution submitted that it was evident that the 190 km long Wall is clearly in the Occupied Territories and that the ICJ had rejected the security and necessity argument.

On the subject of water as submitted by Amicus that there was a Olympic-sized swimming pool in Gaza indicating that the water issue was exaggerated, the prosecution stressed that the tribunal should adhere to the International Committee of Red Cross (ICRC) and United Nations reports on the dire water issues faced by the Palestinians.

On the issue of attacks and suicide bombing by Palestinians against Israelis as presented by the Amicus, the prosecution submitted that it does not take away the fact that genocide has happened. In addition, the prosecution submitted that the 730 checkpoints hindered movement and affected the everyday lives of the Palestinians. And to response to the Amicus that the day-to-day life in Gaza was not as difficult as portrayed, the prosecution replied that whilst life had not come to a standstill in Gaza, in the long run it is not going to be habitable if the current Israeli blockade and attacks continued.

After the submission from the Prosecution and Amicus Curiae, the Tribunal adjourned to deliberate on the evidence and submissions that were presented during the five days and will deliver its judgement on Monday afternoon.

The judges of the Tribunal are headed by retired Malaysian Federal Court judge Tan Sri Dato Lamin bin Haji Mohd Yunus Lamin, who also served as an ad litem judge at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Republic of Yugoslavia. The other judges in the Tribunal include notable names such as Tunku Sofiah Jewa, practising lawyer and author of numerous publications on International Law, Prof Salleh Buang, former Federal Counsel in the Attorney-General Chambers and prominent author, and Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi, prominent academic and professor of law, Dato’ Saari Yusof, former Appeal Court judge, Mr John Philpot, a senior litigation lawyer from Canada and Tunku Intan Mainura from the Faculty of Law, UiTM and a specialist in international law.

The Tribunal will adjudicate and evaluate the evidence presented as in any court of law. The judges of the Tribunal must be satisfied that the charges are proven beyond reasonable doubt and deliver a reasoned judgement.

In the event the tribunal convicts any of the accused, the only sanction is that the name of the guilty will be entered in the Commission’s Register of War Criminals and publicised worldwide. The tribunal is a tribunal of conscience and a peoples’ initiative.

The prosecution for the trial is led by Prof Gurdial S Nijar, prominent law professor and author of several law publications and Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Abdul Aziz Bin Abdul Rahman, senior barrister, and assisted by a team of lawyers.

The trial, which is open to the public, is being held from November 20 to 25, 2013 at the premises of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War (KLFCW) at 88, Jalan Perdana, Kuala Lumpur.

Live feed of the tribunal hearing is also available on www.criminalisewar.org


at Malaysian time GMT +8.

The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCC) versus the State of Israel

Members of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCC) are: Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Dr. Denis Halliday, Mr. Musa Ismail, Dr. Zulaiha Ismail, Dr. Yaacob Merican, Dr.  Hans von Sponeck.

Dr. Denis Halliday, former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations and Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, Editor of Globalresearch.ca and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization were present in Kuala Lumpur throughout the proceedings. 

This important judicial process has received very little coverage in the Western media.  Global Research will be publishing several reports following the judgment on November 25, 2013.

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]