Quds News: ICJ rules by overwhelming majority:
⭕️ Israel must halt attacks on Palestinians
⭕️ Halt incitement against Palestinians as a group
⭕️Ensure Humanitarian aid
⭕️Preserve evidence
⭕️ Submit response to the court within 1 month
⭕️ All parties bound by international humanitarian law
⭕️Calls for release of Hamas held hostages in Gaza @israel @palestine
https://x.com/qudsnen/status/1750863344511209937?s=12&t=uM8me4uwdP7D0z4nanVVuw
https://nitter.net/qudsnen/status/1750863344511209937?s=12&t=uM8me4uwdP7D0z4nanVVuw
@Sherifazuhur @simon_brooke um, I'm getting very contradictory information on the first point at least. perhaps best to read the judgement.
@DetersHenning @Sherifazuhur @simon_brooke
Well, "There’s a new version of this post."
https://twitter.com/QudsNen/status/1750868389516513304
But who cares, as long as one can spread the original.
@dpwiz @Sherifazuhur @simon_brooke I think the confusion arises from the section of the judgement that demands that Israel refrains from "killing members of the group", but this is to be understood in the context of Article II of the Genocide Convention, where it refers to killings "with
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group".
@DetersHenning @dpwiz @Sherifazuhur bearing in mind that any member of the #Israeli armed forces who takes part in such attacks is personally liable for crimes against humanity – certainly if they travel abroad and very probably even if they don't – yes. But if you were an Israeli conscript, would you feel that "I was just obeying orders" was an adequate defence?
@simon_brooke @dpwiz @Sherifazuhur
I'm just saying that the judgement doesn't say what the first bullet point in the original post says it says. I'm not a lawyer, but that seems quite obvious. Everything else may or may not be as you say.
@Sherifazuhur While we're at it, why did you explicitly link the older version of the tweet instead of just the recent one?