Category Archives: HUMAN RIGHTS

South Africa requests ICJ emergency orders to halt “unspeakable” Gazan genocide


An article from Pearls and Irritations

“Israel is now massacring desperate, starving Palestinians seeking to obtain food for their slowly-dying children.” The situation in Gaza is now so terrifying as to be unspeakable, writes South Africa in an urgent request for the International Court of Justice to issue additional provisional measures to stop Israel’s genocide.

South Africa today filed an urgent request with the International Court of Justice for the indication of additional provisional measures and the modification of the Court’s Order of 26 January 2024 and decision of 16 February 2024 in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel), according to the ICJ in a press release dated 6 March.

In its request, South Africa states that it is “compelled to return to the Court in light of the new facts and changes in the situation in Gaza — particularly the situation of widespread starvation — brought about by the continuing egregious breaches of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide . . . by the State of Israel . . . and its ongoing manifest violations of the provisional measures indicated by this Court on 26 January 2024”.

It requests the Court to indicate further provisional measures and/or to modify the provisional measures indicated it its Order of 26 January 2024, pursuant to Article 41 of the Statute of the Court and Article 75, paragraphs 1 and 3, and Article 76, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Court, respectively, “in order urgently to ensure the safety and security of 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza, including over a million children”. It urges the Court to do so without holding a hearing, in light of the “extreme urgency of the situation”.

The situation in Gaza described by the ICJ as “perilous” on 16 February, “is now so terrifying as to be unspeakable… justifying — and indeed demanding — the indication of further provisional measures of protection,” argued South Africa.

South Africa’s has requested that the ICJ make the following additional provisional measures and modification to existing measures:

1. “All participants in the conflict must ensure that all fighting and hostilities come to an immediate halt, and that all hostages and detainees are released immediately.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

Presenting the Palestinian side of the Middle East, Is it important for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

2. “All Parties to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide must, forthwith, take all measures necessary to comply with all of their obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

3. “All Parties to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide must, forthwith, refrain from any action, and in particular any armed action or support thereof, which might prejudice the right of the Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts, or any other rights in respect of whatever judgment the Court may render in the case, or which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve.

4. “The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address famine and starvation and the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in Gaza, by: (a) immediately suspending its military operations in Gaza; (b) lifting its blockade of Gaza; (c) rescinding all other existing measures and practices that directly or indirectly have the effect of obstructing the access of Palestinians in Gaza to humanitarian assistance and basic services; and (d) ensuring the provision of adequate and sufficient food, water, fuel, shelter, clothing, hygiene and sanitation requirements, alongside medical assistance, including medical supplies and support.

5. “The State of Israel shall submit an open report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to all provisional measures ordered by the Court to date, within one month as from the date of this Order.”

“Palestinian children are starving to death as a direct result of the deliberate acts and omissions of Israel — in violation of the Genocide Convention and of the Court’s Order. This includes Israel’s deliberate attempts to cripple the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (‘UNRWA’), on whom the vast majority of besieged, displaced and starving Palestinian men, women, children and babies depend for their survival,” write South Africa.

The latest death toll from Israel’s assault on Gaza stands at 30,717 people killed, including more than 12,300 children and 8,400 women. More than 72,156 Palestinians have been injured.


– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

Last Days of Hearings at the International Court of Justice on the Israeli Occupation of Palestine


An article from the United Nations Regional Information Centre for Western Europe

The advisory opinion requested by the United Nations General Assembly from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2022 led to hearings that began on 19 February (read more about the first few days of the hearing in our first article and continued until 26 February, with 52 states and three international organisations  presenting their opinions.

Photo copyright ICJ

Iran Criticises “Inaction” of the Security Council

The Islamic Republic of Iran highlighted the “seriousness” of the situation in Gaza on 22 February, pointing to “the inaction or insufficient action of the Security Council, if not the main, is one of the main causes of the prolonged occupation of the Palestinian territories. All the atrocities and crimes committed by the Israeli régime in the past almost 80 years are a consequence of such inaction. Even today, the Security Council is paralysed due to the stalemate caused by a certain permanent Member.”

Iran called for an end to cooperation in all its forms, whether “political, military, economic, or other”, with Israel to prevent it from “continuing its prolonged occupation,” as well as for the “complete termination of all its military operations in the Gaza Strip.”

Iraq and Jordan Demand End of Occupation

Iraq argued for the ICJ’s jurisdiction in the ongoing procedure, noting that the Court had already issued an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the construction of the wall in the Occupied Territories  in 2004.
In this opinion, the Court had determined that “the construction of the wall and the regime associated with it created on the ground a ‘fait accompli’ that could become permanent and, as such, amount to a de facto annexation,” in violation of the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

Baghdad also called for “the respect (…) under any circumstance or in any place” for the opinion rendered by the ICJ on 26 January in the context of South Africa’s complaint against Israel for “genocide” in Gaza, “in order to stop the systematic killing machine against the Palestinian people.”

Speaking for Jordan, Ayman Safadi, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, spoke of the horrors of war in Gaza, where “children are operated on without anaesthesia.” He stated that “in Gaza, Palestinians are dying by Israel’s war. They are also dying from hunger and lack of medication, as Israel prevents the delivery of food and medicine in violation of international humanitarian law and in defiance of the provisional measures you have ordered. This aggression has to end and end immediately. Israel is acting and has been allowed to act in complete disregard of international law. That cannot continue.”

Asserting that “the occupation is illegal and inhumane,” he urged the Court to “rule that the Israeli occupation, the source of all evil, must end.”

13 Additional Countries Discuss Reparations

Visibly moved, Ali Ahmad Ebraheem S. Al-Dafiri, Ambassador of Kuwait to the Netherlands, stated that “the unprecedented violence in Gaza is a result of 57 years of illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories, and it must stop.” Kuwait also demanded an end to the occupation and a negotiated two-state solution along the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital. It added that “the occupying Power is under the obligation to make full reparation for the injury caused by its occupation and discriminatory policies and practices.”

Lebanon highlighted that the ICJ had already affirmed in 2004 in its opinion on the construction of the wall that Israel was “obliged to return the lands, orchards, olive groves, and other real property seized to any natural or legal person.” Lebanon added that Israel “is also obliged to cease its violation of the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people, to end its occupation of the Palestinian territories, and to recognise the State of Palestine. And to provide reparations.”

Similarly, Libya, Syria, Malaysia, Ireland, Namibia, Oman, Indonesia, Slovenia, Tunisia, Spain, and the Maldives advocated for reparations through restitution or compensation. In total, 19 countries advocated for reparations during the six days of hearings.

The United Kingdom urges the ICJ not to respond to the request for an advisory opinion.

On 23 February, the United Kingdom reiterated many of the arguments previously made in writing by the United States, Canada, Fiji, Hungary, and Zambia, arguing for respect for the existing framework within the Security Council to allow for a negotiated solution to progress.
London went further, asking the Court not to issue a ruling due to the way the questions posed by the General Assembly were formulated. These two questions amount to “taking the entire Palestine question to be looked at by the highest court in the globe,” as stated by the United States.

According to the United Kingdom, the Court cannot interfere in a dispute between two parties, as mentioned in its 1975 advisory opinion on Western Sahara, without the consent of both parties.

Furthermore, the Court could “draw legal conclusions on an incorrect factual basis” due to not only the ongoing conflict but also the extent of the documentation required: “the entire factual record stretching back some 57 years and a United Nations dossier spanning nearly 30,000 pages.”

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

Presenting the Palestinian side of the Middle East, Is it important for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

Finally, the United Kingdom believes that the framework established by the Security Council, with resolutions 242 and 338, envisions Israel’s withdrawal from the Occupied Territories through negotiation, not a judicial decision.

… while many countries defended the Court’s jurisdiction

Ireland condemns the 7 October attacks but believes that “these limits have been exceeded by Israel in its military response to the Hamas attack.”

Rossa Fanning, Attorney General of Ireland, stated that his country “believes that clarification now, by this Court, of the international law issues raised by the prolonged occupation of the Palestinian territory will assist in providing a stable foundation upon which to build a just resolution” of the conflict.

“Several States have suggested that this request for an advisory opinion is an attempt to resolve a bilateral dispute without the consent of one of the parties to that dispute. We very much regret that Israel has chosen not to engage with the subject matter of the request. (…) However, in our view, the issue of the Occupied Palestinian Territory is directly of concern to the United Nations itself, and it goes much further than a mere bilateral dispute.”

The ICJ’s jurisdiction was defended by many States, including Norway, which emphasised a situation of “de facto annexation” in the Palestinian Territories, Pakistan,  Spain,  Japan, and China, which expressed its support “for the just cause of the Palestinian people.”  Switzerland stated that “Israel has legitimate security concerns, but also the obligation to respect international law.”

Abdel Sattar Issa, Ambassador of Lebanon to the Netherlands, argued that “asking the Court not to intervene, not to give its advisory opinion in the name of a bilateral negotiation process to be protected, a political solution to be preserved, is a perverse argument that creates antagonism between the political and the legal when they are, in any society, including the international society, two complementary elements in dialectical relation. Law frames the political, prevents its drift, whether at the public or private level. Law guarantees a minimum of justice in relations.”

Similarly, Syria defended the Court’s jurisdiction at a time when “the Palestinian people find themselves with no real protection.” Ammar Al Arsan, Head of the Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the European Union in Brussels, stated, “We are here today to make sure that they – the occupiers – do not get away with impunity.”

“There is no peace process,” according to Indonesia.

Indonesia went further in opposing the argument made by the United States that the Court’s advisory opinion could impact a negotiated peace process: “First, there is no viable peace process to be undermined. Israel has been consistently obstructing a negotiated two-state solution that is in line with international law and relevant United Nations resolutions. (…)

After all, negotiation with someone holding a gun against your head is not a negotiation at all (…). Just last November, Prime Minister Netanyahu even boasted, “I’m proud that I prevented the establishment of a Palestinian State”.

This argument was echoed by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which includes 57 States: “Are there ongoing negotiations between Israel and Palestine? The truth about this matter is that there are none. It is a myth that has been artificially maintained for a long time, but which, in light of events, has collapsed by the admission of the parties involved.”

Qatar advocates for labelling of Israel’s practices as “apartheid.”

Qatar’s position, outlined by Mutlaq Bin Majed Al-Qahtani, ambassador to the Netherlands, highlighted a “growing perception in some quarters that international law applies to some, but not to others. That some peoples are seen as deserving of security, freedom and self-determination, but others are not. Some children are deemed worthy of the law’s protection, but others are killed in their thousands. Qatar rejects such double standards.”

Qatar denounced violence that has become “part of the fabric of life for Palestinians even before the beginning of the occupation in 1967. And Gaza has always paid the highest price. In the 15 years before 7 October, Israeli military campaigns killed 5,365 Palestinians in Gaza, the majority of whom were undisputedly civilians.”

The ambassador mentioned the increase in violence in the West Bank and “the systematic persecution of human rights organisations and journalists,” referring to the death of Shireen Abu Akleh from the Qatari channel Al Jazeera, “murdered by Israeli forces on 11 May 2022.”

Qatar urged the ICJ to label the occupation of the Palestinian Territories as an apartheid regime, an argument advanced by 25 participants in the hearings, so that the “the international community, including the General Assembly, can activate similar mechanisms for bringing about an end of the occupation as it did with the apartheid régime in South Africa. This is the surest path to truth, justice, and, yes, reconciliation.”

Three international organisations speak out.

On 26 February, the last day of hearings, the Arab League called for an end to the occupation and the “immediate” withdrawal of all Israeli settlers from the Occupied Territories.

The OIC concluded its presentation with these words: “The unfounded and unpunished violence that Israel exercises over the Palestinians leads to more violence in response. It is a vicious cycle, that of vengeance, which is always to the advantage of the strongest. This is the deadly cycle of violence that tragically unfolds before our eyes. To break it, an impartial third party, affirming the common standard with authority, is needed.”

Finally, the African Union (AU) declared that “Israel’s aggression against Gaza is nothing but a shameful attempt to create a new Nakba ⎯ , a new catastrophe aimed at erasing the Palestinian presence in Palestine.”

The Court has entered into deliberation before issuing an advisory opinion that will be given at a later date.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

World Court to Review 57-Year Israeli Occupation


An article from Human Rights Watch

An unprecedented number of countries and international organizations are expected to participate in the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) oral hearings on Israel’s occupation beginning February 19, 2024, Human Rights Watch said today (February 16). Fifty-two countries and three international organizations will participate in the oral proceedings, more than in any other case since the world’s highest court began functioning in 1946.

The broad participation in the hearings and the many written submissions reflect growing global momentum to address the decades-long failure to ensure respect for international law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

“The International Court of Justice is set for the first time to broadly consider the legal consequences of Israel’s nearly six-decades-long occupation and mistreatment of the Palestinian people,” said Clive Baldwin, senior legal adviser at Human Rights Watch. “Governments that are presenting their arguments to the court should seize these landmark hearings to highlight the grave abuses Israeli authorities are committing against Palestinians, including the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution.”

The oral proceedings stem from a December 2022 request by the United Nations General Assembly for an advisory opinion  by the court on the legal consequences of Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The court has the opportunity to address the prolonged occupation, to consider Israel’s practices and policies violating international legal prohibitions against racial discrimination, including the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution, and to appraise the legal responsibilities of other countries and the UN to address violations of international law arising from the occupation.

Although ICJ advisory opinions are non-binding, they can carry great moral and legal authority and can ultimately become part of customary international law, which is legally binding on states.

These proceedings, which will last six days, are distinct from the case brought  by South Africa to the same court alleging that Israel  is violating the Genocide Convention amid the hostilities between Israeli forces and Palestinian armed groups that escalated following the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks.

The General Assembly first asked the ICJ for an advisory opinion related to the Occupied Palestinian Territory in December 2003. In July 2004, the ICJ’s advisory opinion  found that the route of Israel’s separation barrier violated international law and that it should be dismantled.

(Click here for the French version of this article.)

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

Presenting the Palestinian side of the Middle East, Is it important for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

The December 2022 request to the court is wider in scope. The General Assembly asked the court to give its opinion on the “legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation” of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including “its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures,” and on the legal consequences of the occupation and Israel’s practices for all states and the UN.

The request provides the court the opportunity to evaluate the situation two decades after its last advisory opinion on the Occupied Palestinian Territory and provide guidance on the law, including the continued application of international humanitarian law and human rights law. The court could also assess Israel’s conduct under international human rights law, including prohibitions on racial discrimination, and international criminal law, including the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution.

The ICJ adjudicates disputes between states and issues advisory opinions on international law. It lacks jurisdiction over the conduct of non-state armed groups like Hamas. The International Criminal Court (ICC), by contrast, addresses serious international crimes allegedly committed by individuals, including members of armed groups. The ICC prosecutor confirmed that since March 2021 his office has been conducting an investigation into alleged atrocity crimes committed in Gaza and the West Bank since 2014, and that the court has jurisdiction over international crimes committed by all parties in the current hostilities between Israel and Palestinian armed groups.

Human Rights Watch has documented that Israeli authorities are committing the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution  against Palestinians. Given that the responsibilities  of an occupying power toward the rights of the occupied population increase over time, Human Rights Watch has also called for Israel to provide Palestinians in the occupied territory with rights at least equal to those it grants its own citizens, in addition to the protections of international humanitarian law.

The ICJ is composed  of 15 judges elected by the UN General Assembly and Security Council for nine-year terms. Fifty-seven states and international organizations had filed a written statement  in the proceedings in July 2023, before the October escalation in hostilities. Fifteen states and international organizations filed additional written comments in October and November 2023. Among those participating in the oral proceedings are Palestine, South Africa, Belgium, Brazil, the United States, Russia, France, China, Namibia, Pakistan, Indonesia, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the African Union. Israel submitted a written statement and chose not to participate in the oral hearings.

The ICJ will issue its legal opinion at a date to be determined. Past practice suggests that the opinion will be issued before the end of 2024.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

USA: 200+ Unions Launch Network to Push for Gaza Cease-Fire


An article by Brett Wilkins from Common Dreams ( licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Seven national and over 200 local labor unions in the United States on Friday announced  the establishment of a coalition to promote a cease-fire in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

(Click on image to enlarge)

The American Postal Workers Union (APWU), the Association of Flight Attendants, the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, the National Education Association, National Nurses United (NNU), the United Auto Workers (UAW), and the United Electrical Workers (UE), and 200 local unions and labor organizations launched the National Labor Network for Cease-fire (NLNC) to “end the death and devastation” in Gaza.

The coalition says it represents more than 9 million union workers—”more than half the labor movement in the United States.”

“The war between Israel and Hamas has continued unabated since Hamas brutally attacked Israel on October 7, killing 1,163 people, and taking 253 hostages,” NLNC said in a statement.

“Israel responded with an onslaught that has killed over 28,000 Palestinians and left over 67,000 others injured,” while “1.7 million Palestinians have been displaced, and humanitarian aid remains mostly blocked from those in need,” the coalition added.

NLCN is calling for:

° An immediate cease-fire in Gaza between Israel and Hamas;
° Restoration of basic human rights;
° The immediate release of hostages taken by Hamas;
° Unimpeded full access for humanitarian aid; and
° A call for a cease-fire by U.S. President Joe Biden.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

Presenting the Palestinian side of the Middle East, Is it important for a culture of peace?

(continued from left column)

In his strongest statement yet, Biden—who has been dubbed “Genocide Joe” by some activists for his staunch support for Israel—said  Friday that he has called for a “temporary cease-fire” during private phone calls with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Leaders of the seven unions—most of which have already called for a cease-fire—issued statements underscoring the imperative for peace.

“The UAW has a long tradition of calling for peace and justice for working-class people across the globe, and we live that tradition today,” UAW president Shawn Fain said. “In that spirit, we call for an immediate end to the U.S. government’s funding and support of this brutal assault on Gaza.”

Carl Rosen, UE’s president, said: “The support for a cease-fire is overwhelming. We can’t stand by in the face of this suffering. We cannot bomb our way to peace. We express our solidarity with all workers and our common desire for peace in Palestine  and Israel.”

APWU president Mark Dimondstein said that “as a union that stands for equality, social justice, human and labor rights, we unite with unions and people of goodwill around the world in calls for a cease-fire, for justice and peace. The cries of humanity call for nothing less.”

Bonnie Castillo, the NNU’s executive director, asserted that “nurses cannot allow our patients and our colleagues to continue suffering from the traumas of war.”

“We vow to protect and heal all people, and it’s our duty to speak up for every human being’s right to a life free of violence,” she added. “We’re calling for a cease-fire now before one more life is lost, before one more family faces injuries or illnesses.”

The NLCN’s formation follows last week’s cease-fire call  by the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest labor federation.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

A Working Class Victory on Colombia’s Horizon


An article by Omar Ocampo in (Content licensed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License)

The Seventh Committee of the House of Representatives voted to approve 16 of the 98 articles of the landmark Labor Reform bill right before the start of winter recess. The bill will now advance to a second round of legislative debates that will resume next month.

This is great news for the workers movement: Labor reform represents one of the three flagship policy proposals of the Petro-Márquez administration that seeks to equitably transform society. The bill will not only restore the labor rights that were rescinded a little over twenty years ago by a far-right government — it will go a step further and expand these rights.

The road to reform thus far has not been easy. Since the bill was first introduced last March, it predictably encountered fierce opposition from the business community and its political representatives. Those corporate stakeholders argued that the bill distributes benefits to an already privileged class of formalized and unionized workers.

But as researcher Santiago Garcés Correa highlighted in an article for the magazine 100 Días, such depictions do not accurately portray the lived experiences of the Colombian working-class. Petro’s labor reform platform is a reflection of workers’ daily grievances and struggles.

Over the past few years, pro-reform advocates have organized sit-ins, work stoppages, and protests — both at a local and national level — against the increased prevalence of subcontracting, outsourcing, and anti-union corporate practices.

Palmosan S.A.S., a palm oil company in Santander, for example, fired 48 of its employees after its workforce formed a trade union, Sintrapalmosan, and voted to go on a strike when the company refused to negotiate a list of labor demands. The strike ended after six months with the signing of a collective agreement between both parties, but Palmosan only relented after the Ministry of Labor intervened in the dispute and a district court ruled in the union’s favor.

While all workers recognize the need for reform, some sectors felt differently about the solutions at hand. Despite such a difficult and unfavorable environment for organizing, workers in the digital platform sector initially expressed their disapproval of the Labor Reform bill.

Simón Borrero Posada, the CEO of the super-app Rappi — an on-demand delivery service popular in Colombia — gave a series of interviews rife with misleading statements. Posada asserted that the Labor Reform bill would force the company to hire digital platform workers full-time, thus eliminating the flexibility that so many rappitenderos currently enjoy. The problem with this statement? No such stipulation existed in the reform bill.

Still, five hundred Rappi employees organized a small protest in the capital city of Bogotá in March of 2023. Their principal demand was a rejection of a forced full-time contract. The corporate media took full advantage of the spectacle and pushed the narrative that workers and employers share an interest in rejecting the Labor Reform bill.

Right-wing opposition parties — led by Cambio Radical and el Centro Democrático — kept up the pressure and mobilized more than 90,000 of their supporters in street demonstrations to register their discontent with Petro’s entire reform agenda.

(Article continued in right column)

Question(s) related to this article:
The right to form and join trade unions, Is it being respected?

What is happening in Colombia, Is peace possible?

(Article continued from left column)

By the time the Labor Reform bill reached the Seventh Committee of the House of Representatives in June, it was dead on arrival. Lawmakers did not even get the opportunity to debate the bill since the committee failed to reach quorum. As a result, the Labor Reform bill was shelved, amounting to a major setback for the Petro-Márquez administration and allied reformers.

To the surprise of many, a slightly modified version of the Labor Reform bill was filed at the end of August and, when properly debated, it advanced to the next stage of the legislative process. 

The business community still objects to the increased labor costs attendant to the expansion of workers’ rights and claim this will hinder the formalization of the informal sector. In other words, it will discourage business owners from hiring workers who currently “operate outside of the regulatory and tax systems.” But formalization will not occur significantly unless dignified employment and social protection programs are offered. 

The 16 approved articles of the Labor Reform bill are substantive. Night shifts will now begin at 7:00 PM instead of 9:00 PM (Article 15). People who work on Sundays and holidays will now have their overtime pay rate increased (Article 19). 

Employers who discriminate on the basis of sex, gender identity, race, age, economic background, and health history will face drastic penalties (Article 21). Digital platform food delivery workers will receive social security through health and pension contributions by the platform companies for whom they work (Article 30). 

Colombia will offer new training programs for rural work (Article 37). And migrants will bear the same labor rights as citizens (Article 42). 

Right before the New Year, a scandal erupted at a tuna factory in Cartagena. Van Camp’s, a firm operated by Seatech International, was making women workers feel obligated to wear diapers on the job — bathroom breaks are tallied and deducted from their pay.  

The Labor Minister Gloria Inés Ramírez publicly denounced the multinational firm, which has denied the allegations and threatened legal action against the minister. Colombia’s right-wing opposition has rallied to the firm’s defense, but testimonies from employees seem to confirm the minister’s public declarations. 

Besaiga Raga, who has worked for Seatech International for 13 years, said that many of her colleagues are “choosing to put on a disposable diaper” because they “cannot afford to forfeit the little that they earn to the company” by taking a bathroom break.

“It is not easy to go to the restroom,” added Berky Arrieta Garcia. “There are not enough toilets for the number of women who work there. Sometimes it takes 20-25 minutes, even up to half an hour, because we have to form a queue to go to the toilet.”

The Van Camp’s diaper debacle — still playing out — exemplifies why higher labor standards are urgently needed in Colombia. The Labor Reform bill is a crucial means of improving the bargaining position and labor conditions of Colombian workers. And its advancement in Congress is an overdue victory that the Colombian working-class should achieve and celebrate in 2024.

The author, Omar Ocampo, is a researcher for the Program on Inequality and the Common Good at the Institute for Policy Studies.

– – – – – –

If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

BDS Movement: Act Now Against These Companies Profiting from the Genocide of the Palestinian People


An article from the BDS Movement

The Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), the largest coalition in Palestinian society that is leading the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, salutes activists, organizations and institutions worldwide that have expressed meaningful solidarity with our urgent struggle to stop Israel’s unfolding genocide in Gaza by escalating boycott and divestment campaigns. The spreading boycotts of complicit Israeli and multinational corporations can be effective if done strategically.  

Below is a detailed guide of our targeted consumer boycotts, divestment and pressure campaigns. Help us spread the word to maximize our impact!

(Click on image to enlarge)

Ending all state, corporate and institutional complicity with Israel’s genocidal regime is more urgent than ever. Our lives and livelihoods literally depend on it.

Targeted Boycotts vs. Non-targeted Boycotts

People of conscience around the world are rightfully shattered, enraged, and sometimes feeling powerless. Many feel compelled to boycott any and all products and services of companies tied in any way to Israel. The proliferation of extensive “boycott lists” on social media is an example of this. The question is how to make boycotts effective and actually have an impact in holding corporations accountable for their complicity in the suffering of Palestinians? 

The BDS movement uses the historically successful method of targeted boycotts inspired by the South African anti-apartheid movement, the US Civil Rights movement, the Indian anti-colonial struggle, among others worldwide. 
We must strategically focus on a relatively smaller number of carefully selected companies and products  for maximum impact. We need to focus on companies that play a clear and direct role in Israel’s crimes and where there is real potential for winning, as was the case with, among others, G4S, Veolia, Orange, Ben & Jerry’s and Pillsbury. Compelling huge, complicit companies, through strategic and context-sensitive boycott and divestment campaigns, to end their complicity in Israeli apartheid and war crimes against Palestinians sends a very powerful message to hundreds of other complicit companies that “your time will come, so get out before it’s too late!”

Many of the prohibitively long lists going viral on social media do the exact opposite of this strategic and impactful approach. They include hundreds of companies, many without credible evidence of their connection to Israel’s regime of oppression against Palestinians, making them ineffective.

That being said, all peaceful popular efforts, including boycott and divestment, to hold all genuinely complicit corporations (and institutions) accountable for supporting Israel’s grave violations of Palestinian rights are justified and called for. It is perfectly legitimate, for instance, to boycott companies whose Israeli branch or franchise has supported Israel’s unfolding genocide in Gaza, some of which we mention below in the grassroots organic boycott targets section.

Also, a company or product may make perfect sense as a boycott target in one context or city but not another. This context-sensitivity is a key principle of our movement. Regardless, we all have limited human capacity, so we’d better use it in the most effective way to achieve meaningful, sustainable results that can truly contribute to Palestinian liberation. We therefore call on our supporters to strengthen our targeted campaigns and boycott the complicit companies named on our website to maximize our collective impact.

The following are the current top priority boycott targets of the global BDS movement.

We have split these targets into four sections:

1. Consumer boycott targets – The BDS movement calls for a complete boycott of these brands carefully selected due to the company’s proven record of complicity in Israeli apartheid.

2. Divestment targets – The BDS movement is pressuring governments, institutions and investment funds to exclude and divest from as many complicit companies as practical, especially weapons manufacturers, banks, and companies listed in the UN database  of business involved in Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise, as well as the WhoProfits  and AFSC Investigate  databases of companies enabling the occupation. Below we give some of the targets we are campaigning against.

3. Pressure (non-boycott) targets – The BDS movement actively calls for pressure campaigns against these brands and services due to their complicity in Israeli apartheid. We have not, on strategic grounds, called for a boycott of these brands and services, instead we strategically call on supporters and institutions to mount other forms of pressure on them until they end their complicity in Israeli apartheid.

4. Organic boycott targets – The BDS movement did not initiate these grassroots boycott campaigns but is in support of them due to these brands openly supporting Israel’s genocide against Palestinians.

1. Consumer boycott targets:


Siemens (Germany) is the main contractor  for the Euro-Asia Interconnector, an Israel-EU submarine electricity cable that is planned to connect Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory to Europe. Siemens-branded electrical appliances are sold globally.


Since 2018 we have called for a boycott of PUMA (Germany) due to its sponsorship  of the Israel Football Association, which governs teams in Israel’s illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian land. In a major BDS win in December 2023, PUMA leaked news to the media that it will not be renewing its contract when it expires in December 2024. We continue to call for #BoycottPUMA until it ends its complicity in Israeli apartheid.


Carrefour (France) is a genocide enabler. Carrefour-Israel has supported Israeli soldiers partaking in the unfolding genocide of Palestinians in Gaza with gifts of personal packages. In 2022, it entered a partnership  with the Israeli company Electra Consumer Products and its subsidiary Yenot Bitan, both of which are involved in grave violations against the Palestinian people.


When Russia invaded Ukraine, insurance giant AXA (France) took targeted measures against it. Yet, as Israel, a 75-year-old regime of settler-colonialism and apartheid, wages a genocidal war on Gaza, AXA continues to invest  in Israeli banks financing war crimes and the theft of Palestinian land and natural resources.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

(continued from left column)

Hewlett Packard Inc (HP Inc)

HP Inc (US) provides  services to the offices of genocide leaders, Israeli PM Netanyahu and Financial Minister Smotrich.


SodaStream is actively complicit in Israel’s policy of displacing the indigenous Bedouin-Palestinian citizens of Israel in the Naqab (Negev) and has a long history of racial discrimination against Palestinian workers.


Ahava cosmetics has its production site, visitor center, and main store in an illegal Israeli settlement in the occupied Palestinian territory.


RE/MAX (US) markets and sells property in illegal Israeli settlements built on stolen Palestinian land, thus enabling Israel’s colonization of the occupied West Bank.

Israeli produce in your supermarkets

Fruits, vegetables, and wines misleadingly labeled as “Product of Israel” often include products of illegal settlements on stolen Palestinian land. Israeli companies do not distinguish between the two, and neither should consumers. Boycott produce  from Israel in your supermarket and demand their removal from shelves.

2. Divestment targets:

Elbit Systems
Elbit Systems  is apartheid Israel’s largest arms company. It “field-tests” its weapons on Palestinians, including in Israel’s ongoing genocidal war on Palestinians in Gaza. On top of building killer drones, Elbit makes surveillance technology for Israel’s apartheid wall, checkpoints and Gaza fence, enabling apartheid. The US and EU use Elbit’s technology to militarize their borders, violating refugee and indigenous peoples’ rights.

HD Hyundai/Volvo/CAT/JCB

Machinery from HD Hyundai (South Korea), Volvo (Sweden/China), CAT (US), and JCB (UK) has been used by Israel in the ethnic cleansing and forced displacement of Palestinians through the destruction of their homes, farms, and businesses, as well as the construction of illegal settlements on land stolen from them, a war crime under international law.

Barclays Bank (UK) holds more than £1 billion in shares of, and provides more than £3bn in loans and underwriting to nine companies whose weapons, components and military technology have been used in Israel’s armed violence against Palestinians.


Basque transport firm, CAF, builds and services the Jerusalem Light Rail (JLR), a tram line that serves Israel’s illegal settlements in Jerusalem. CAF benefits  from Israel’s war crimes on stolen Palestinian land.


US fossil fuel multinational Chevron is the main international corporation extracting gas  claimed by apartheid Israel in the East Mediterranean. Chevron generates billions in revenues, strengthening Israel’s war chest and apartheid system, and exacerbating the climate crisis.


Amnesty International has documented  high-resolution CCTV cameras made by the Chinese company Hikvision installed in residential areas and mounted to Israeli military infrastructure for surveillance of Palestinians. Some of these models, according to Hikvision’s own marketing, can plug into external facial recognition software.

TKH Security

Amnesty International has identified  cameras made by the Dutch company TKH Security used by Israel for surveillance of Palestinians. TKH provides Israeli police with surveillance technology that is used to entrench apartheid. 

3. Pressure (non-boycott) targets:

Google and Amazon (US)

As the Israeli military bombed homes, clinics, and schools in Gaza and threatened to push Palestinian families from their homes in occupied Jerusalem May 2021, Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud executives signed a $1.22 billion contract to provide cloud technology to the Israeli government and military. By supporting Israeli apartheid with vital technologies, Amazon and Google are directly implicated in its entire system of oppression, including its unfolding genocide in Gaza. Join the #NoTechForApartheid campaign. While the campaigns targeting these corporations have not called for boycotts, other forms of pressure have been adopted to force them to end their complicity.


Airbnb (US), (Netherlands) and Expedia (US) all offer rentals in illegal Israeli settlements built on stolen Palestinian land. While the campaigns targeting these corporations have not called for boycotts, yet, other forms of pressure have been adopted to force them to end their complicity.


The Disney-owned Marvel Studios (US) is promoting in the next Captain America film a “superhero” that personifies apartheid Israel. Both companies are therefore complicit in “anti-Palestinian racism, Israeli propaganda, and the glorification of settler-colonial violence against Indigenous people,” as Palestinian cultural organizations have stated.

4. Grassroots organic boycott targets:
McDonald’s (US), Burger King (US), Papa John’s (US), Pizza Hut (US), WIX (Israel), etc. are now being targeted in some countries by grassroots organic boycott campaigns, not initiated by the BDS movement, because these companies, or their branches or franchises in Israel, have openly supported apartheid Israel and/or provided generous in-kind donations to the Israeli military amid the current Israeli offensive against 2.3 million Palestinians in the occupied and besieged Gaza Strip–described by leading international scholars of international law as an “unfolding genocide.” If these grassroots campaigns are not already organically active in your area, we suggest focusing your energies on our strategic campaigns above.

Remember, all Israeli banks and virtually all Israeli companies are complicit to some degree in Israel’s system of occupation and apartheid, and hundreds of international corporations and banks are also deeply complicit. We focus our boycotts on a small number of companies and products for maximum impact.

Additional resources: To learn more about companies complicit in Israel’s abuses of Palestinian human rights visit Who Profits, Investigate, and the UN database of companies involved in Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise.

– – – – –


If you wish to make a comment on this article, you may write to with the title “Comment on (name of article)” and we will put your comment on line. Because of the flood of spam, we have discontinued the direct application of comments.

South Africa Initiates Case Against Israel at International Court of Justice


An article by Julia Conley in Common Dreams (licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

“No one knows apartheid like those who fought it before,” said  one Palestinian rights advocate on Friday in response to the news that South Africa has taken a “historic”  new step to hold Israel accountable for its relentless bombardment and violent yearslong occupation of Gaza—calling on the International Court of Justice to declare that Israel has breached its obligations under the Genocide Convention.

South Africans hold a Free Palestine March on December 16, 2023 in Eldorado Park, South Africa. (Photo by Laird Forbes/Gallo Images via Getty Images)

The Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) in South Africa said  it is “gravely concerned with the plight of civilians caught in the present Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip due to the indiscriminate use of force and forcible removal of inhabitants” and called on the ICJ to take action to force Israel to “immediately cease” its current attacks on Gaza’s 2.3 million residents.

The motion was filed as the death toll in Gaza surpassed 21,500 people and tens of thousands of displaced residents fled an Israeli ground offensive, as airstrikes continued in southern Gaza.

Noting that South Africa has consistently condemned all attacks on civilians, including the assault by Hamas on southern Israel on October 7, the country’s representatives at the ICJ said Israel’s bombardment of Gaza is “genocidal in character because they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial, and [ethnic] group.”

“The acts in question include killing Palestinians in Gaza, causing them serious bodily and mental harm, and inflicting on them conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction,” reads the application filed at the ICJ.

South Africa took its latest action regarding Israel less than two weeks after President Cyril Ramaphosa announced  the government had submitted documents to the International Criminal Court (ICC) supporting its demand, made in November with several other countries, that the court investigate Israel for war crimes.

While the ICC prosecutes individuals and governments for committing war crimes, the ICJ operates under the United Nations to rule on disputes between countries. The ICJ’s orders are binding for Israel, as the country is a U.N. member state.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

(continued from left column)

South Africa has joined international human rights experts—including the U.N.’s top expert on human rights in occupied Palestine—in saying Israel’s blockade of Gaza and violent treatment of those in the enclave and the West Bank is a form of apartheid, comparing Israeli policies to the racial segregation that was imposed for nearly five decades by the white minority that controlled South Africa.

Last month, the government voted to suspend diplomatic ties  with Israel until Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government agrees to a permanent humanitarian cease-fire.

“South Africa has continuously called for an immediate and permanent cease-fire and the resumption of talks that will end the violence arising from the continued belligerent occupation of Palestine,” the government said Friday.

Journalist Jeremy Scahill was among those who recognized the significance of South Africa’s application at the ICJ, noting  that the country “fought for its own liberation against an apartheid regime supported for decades by the U.S.,” which is backing Israel’s assault on Gaza despite international outcry and protests within the United States.

“The U.N. Genocide Convention must be upheld. Israel must be held accountable,” said former U.N. human rights official Craig Mokhiber, who resigned  from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in October in protest of the U.N.’s failure to stop Israel’s massacre of civilians. “International law must be preserved.”

At the ICJ, South Africa called  for an expedited hearing on Israel’s actions and asked the court to indicate provisional measures under the Genocide Convention to “protect against further, severe, and irreparable harm to the rights of the Palestinian people.”

Article 2 of the Genocide Convention, adopted in 1948, states that genocide includes acts committed with the “intent to destroy, either in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.”

Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst, pointed out  Friday that “the three leading Israeli officials have declared the intent” to wipe out Gaza’s population.

Bishara noted that Israeli President Isaac Herzog said  in October that all civilians in Gaza are “responsible” for Hamas’ attack on southern Israel, days after Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said  the military would collectively punish the enclave’s population, who he called “human animals.”

Netanyahu also  said  this week that so-called “voluntary migration” of Gaza residents is the ultimate objective of Israel’s assault.

On Friday, the spokesperson for Israel’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, Lior Haiat, dismissed  South Africa’s motion as “baseless” and a “despicable and contemptuous exploitation of the court.”

Despite top officials’ recent statements, Haiat said the government has “made it clear that the residents of the Gaza Strip are not the enemy.”

Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine director for Human Rights Watch, called  South Africa’s move “a vital step to propel greater support for impartial justice.”

(Editor’s notes. As of January 4, South Africa was joined in their motion by Malaysia and Turkey and as of January 11 by Brazil and Colombia. As of January 11, readers are urged to watch the proceedings at United Nations Web TV.)

UN Asked to Submit its Call for “An Immediate Ceasefire in Gaza” for Signature by the Peoples of the World


A letter from Mouvement de la Paix

Dear Mr. Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations,

As an NGO member of the United Nations ECOSOC Commission, we took part in the meeting organized by the UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Mr Ryder, in Geneva at the beginning of November. We expressed our support for the UN’s efforts to bring about a political solution to current conflicts, and for the preparation of the UN’s Avenir 2024 plan.

At this meeting, we suggested that the UN, in the name of the United Nations and in the name of “We the Peoples”, take an initiative enabling the peoples of the world, outraged both by the massacres committed by Hamas on October 7, 2023 and by the carnage currently being committed by the Israeli government in Gaza, to demand that the Israeli government immediately cease bombing civilian populations.

If we have condemned the massacres committed by Hamas on October 7, 2023, it is not to accept that the government of Israel is currently committing, with the means of a State, a carnage that strikes civilian populations.

(continued in right column)

(click here for the article in French or click here for the article in Spanish.).)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

(continued from left column)

We have lent our support to the families of all the victims, whether Israeli or Palestinian, and it is in the name of our common humanity that we take the liberty of formulating a proposal to the UN and its Secretary-General.

Faced with a situation that is as unprecedented as it is monstrous and dangerous, we need to take decisions that will enable public opinion, “We the Peoples”, to support the UN’s demand for an immediate halt to the bombing of Gaza, and for emergency humanitarian aid.

We propose that the UN submit its call for “an immediate ceasefire in Gaza”, with the appropriate means and forms, for signature by the peoples of the world: an end to the bombardments which are affecting thousands of women and children, and the immediate implementation of permanent humanitarian aid to respond to the intolerable suffering of the population, and to deal with a catastrophic food and humanitarian crisis.

This appeal for support could be launched by the appropriate means and with the appropriate words, in all possible languages. Just a few days before International Human Rights Day, it would be a way of “proclaiming once again our faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person”, as proclaimed in the preamble to the United Nations Charter.

At the same time, we express our support for the work of the United Nations in building a world of peace.

Yours respectfully for Le Mouvement de la Paix

Roland Nivet, National Spokesman for Le Mouvement de la Paix

Paris, Friday, December 8, 2023

Israel-Palestine: The Role of International Justice


An article from the United Nations Regional Information Centre for Western Europe

In the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, international justice is being summoned, with several complaints lodged at the International Criminal Court (ICC) following the 7 October attack by Hamas in Israel and the response by Israeli Defense Forces in Gaza.

Public hearings have also been set for February 2024 by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the “legal consequences arising from Israel’s policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem,” within the framework of a request for an advisory opinion prior to the current conflict, emanating from the United Nations General Assembly.

Complaints filed so far include:

° Reporters Without Borders (RSF) submitted a complaint on 31 October to the ICC for “war crimes committed against journalists in Israel and Palestine,” citing the death of nine journalists, an Israeli killed during the attack on his kibbutz on 7 October, and eight Palestinians. The document mentions the destruction of 50 premises belonging to press organizations in Gaza. This is the third complaint since 2018 filed by RSF with the ICC following the death of journalists in Gaza. The most recent complaint, in 2022, was filed in conjunction with one by the Qatari channel Al Jazeera regarding the shooting death of its Palestinian journalist Shirin Abu Akleh in the West Bank.

° Nine Israeli families impacted by the Hamas attack on 7 October filed a complaint on 2 November at the ICC for “war crime, crimes against humanity, and genocide,” with their lawyer requesting the ICC consider issuing international arrest warrants against Hamas leaders.

° A third complaint for “genocide” in Gaza was filed on 8 November by a collective composed of a hundred jurists from several countries, including members of the bar in Algeria, private individuals, and representatives of associations, represented by the French lawyer Gilles Devers.

° Three Palestinian human rights organizations (Al-Haq, Al Mezan, and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights) filed a complaint on 8 November with the ICC for “war crimes,” “apartheid,” “genocide,” and “incitement to genocide,” requesting the issuance of arrest warrants against three Israeli leaders. The complaint cites “bombings on a densely populated area, the siege of Gaza, the forced displacement of the population of Gaza, the use of toxic gas, and the deprivation of necessities such as food, water, gasoline, and electricity.”

The ICC to investigate possible war crimes

The ICC has announced its intention to investigate possible war crimes committed in both Israel and Gaza, through its prosecutor, the British Karim Kahn.

During his visit to the Rafah crossing point on 29 October, located between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, Karim Kahn stated  in his declaration that “hostage-taking is a serious violation of the Geneva Conventions,” and called for the release of the 239 individuals held by Hamas.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

(continued from left column)

He also reminded Israel of its “obligation to comply with the laws of armed conflict,” stating that “impeding relief supplies may constitute a crime“. Referring to the presence of military advocate generals within the Israeli army, he declared: “They will need to demonstrate that any attack, any attack that impacts innocent civilians or protected objects, must be conducted in accordance with the laws and customs of war, in accordance with the laws of armed conflict.

And I want to be quite clear so there’s no misunderstanding: In relation to every dwelling house, in relation to any school, any hospital, any church, any mosque – those places are protected, unless the protective status has been lost. And I want to be equally clear that the burden of proving that the protective status is lost rests with those who fire the gun, the missile, or the rocket in question.”

In 2021 the ICC had already opened an investigation  into crimes committed within what it calls the “situation in Palestine,” starting from 13 June, 2014 (Gaza War, operation “Protective Edge”).

However, Israel is not among the 139 States that have signed the Rome Statute and disputes the ICC’s competence. On its part, the State of Palestine ratified the Rome Statute in 2015  and seized the ICC. It ruled in 2021 that its “territorial jurisdiction extends to the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, namely Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.”

An advisory opinion on “Israel’s policies and practices” requested from the ICJ

The International Court of Justice (ICJ), competent to deal with disputes between states, released a statement  on 23 October regarding a request for an advisory opinion submitted on 30 December 2022 by a resolution of the United Nations General Assembly prior to the outbreak of the current conflict.

This resolution, adopted by 87 states, with 53 abstentions and 26 votes against, concerns the “legal consequences arising from the policies and practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.”

The ICJ has scheduled public hearings for 19 February 2024 in The Hague, following the receipt of written reports  from numerous states. The two specific questions  posed by the UN General Assembly to the ICJ are as follows:

“What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and from its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures?”

“How do the policies and practices of Israel affect the legal status of the occupation, and what are the legal consequences that arise for all States and the United Nations from this status?”

Israel disputes the ICJ’s jurisdiction over this matter. The request for an advisory opinion stems from a report published in October 2022 by a commission of inquiry mandated by the UN Human Rights Council  and led by South African judge Navanethem Pillay. The report concluded that “There are reasonable grounds to conclude that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory is now unlawful under international law due to its permanence and the Israeli Government’s de-facto annexation policies”. The document was described as “partial and biased, disqualified by its hatred for the State of Israel” by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The ICJ, based in The Hague, serves as the principal judicial organ of the UN, with jurisdiction to settle legal disputes submitted to it by states and to give advisory opinions. Also located in The Hague, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent judicial body competent to try individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. It is governed by the Rome Statute, one of the United Nations treaties, which came into force in 2002. The UN Security Council may refer certain situations to the ICC’s prosecutor, and the relationship between the ICC and the UN is governed by a specific agreement.

BRICS Countries Call to End Israel’s Aggression in Gaza


An article from Telesur

A month and a half after the start of the Israeli offensive against the Palestinian people, the BRICS countries called for an immediate end to Israel’s aggression in the Gaza Strip.

The bloc made this request in a statement issued at the end of its summit to analyze the Gaza crisis, convened by Cyril Ramaphosa, the president of South Africa, the country that will preside over the BRICS this year.

“Israel’s actions clearly violate international law, including the United Nations Charter and the Geneva Convention,” Ramaphosa said, calling for an “immediate and complete ceasefire” to the Israeli occupation army’s siege of Gaza.

“The collective punishment of Palestinian civilians through the illegal use of force by Israel is a war crime. The deliberate denial of medicine, fuel, food and water to Gaza residents amounts to genocide,” he added.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi called on countries to declare Israel a terrorist regime and adopt a binding resolution at the United Nations against the Zionist State.

“The Zionist regime’s continued attacks on hospitals and medical centers, and religious sites, as well as the murder of women, children, doctors, and nurses, are all terrorist acts,” he said.

(continued in right column)

Question related to this article:

How can war crimes be documented, stopped, punished and prevented?

(continued from left column)

“It is necessary to declare this false regime as a terrorist regime and its Army as a terrorist organization,” added the Iranian president.

Russian President Vladimir Putin called for a “diplomatic solution” to Israel’s escalation against the Gaza Strip: “Russia’s position on the situation in Gaza is coherent and not opportunistic. Moscow insists on a diplomatic solution to the problem.”

The Russian leader indicated that the “efforts of the United Nations to guarantee the peaceful coexistence of the two States, Israel and Palestine, have been sabotaged, so that more than one generation of Palestinians has grown up in an atmosphere of injustice.”

Putin also blamed the United States for “monopolizing peace efforts in the Middle East”, blocking positive interventions from other international actors.

During his speech, Brazilian President Lula da Silva asked for action to prevent the Zionist escalation from spreading to other countries:

“The contribution of the BRICS, in its new configuration, together with all the actors in favor of self-control and de-escalation of war, is valuable and essential. Brazil does not believe that peace is achieved only with the force of arms,” he stressed.

“The high number of deaths, over 12,000 people, including 5,000 children, causes us great consternation. As the Secretary of the United Nations said, Gaza is becoming a children’s cemetery,” Lula said and once again defended the creation of the Palestinian State as a solution to the conflict.

“We cannot forget that the current war is also the result of decades of frustration and injustice, represented by the absence of a safe home for the Palestinian people,” he stressed.

Finally, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for an end to Israel’s “collective punishment” against Gaza, including forced displacement and deprivation of water and electricity.

“China believes that the conflict must end to prevent the death of more people. The international community must act with practical measures to prevent the conflict from spreading and endangering the stability of the region,” he said and called for the opening of humanitarian corridors.