by Sarah Ben Nun
“You don't need a UN report to tell people what happened. If you're in court, you have the evidence," Anne Herzberg, a human rights lawyer.
 |
While the UN blacklisting of Hamas in its annual report on conflict-related sexual violence on Thursday may have symbolic or declarative gains, the concrete moving-of-the-needle is much murkier, Anne Herzberg, a human rights lawyer and the legal advisor to NGO Monitor, told The Jerusalem Post in an interview on Thursday.
“You don't need a UN report to tell people what happened. If you're in court, you have the evidence - I don't need it filtered through a UN official to know that someone has been the victim of egregious international crimes,” said Herzberg.
A New York Times report this week attempted to explain why there have not been any indictments by the prosecution against terrorists who perpetrated sex crimes that day.
Per the NYT, hundreds of Palestinians were arrested on October 7, and about 200 are in detention today. Since then, security forces have detained around 2,700 Palestinians from Gaza, the report notes.
Most of the cases are shrouded in secrecy, with little access or updates as to the status of indictments.
Issue with evidence collection method
Part of the problem was the evidence collection method from right after the attacks, which was chaotic and unsystematic.Attorney Moran Gaz, a senior former prosecutor who managed some of the cases, along with Yisrael Beytenu MK Yulia Malinovsky, told Ynet, “The standard legal system would not have been the right framework to deal with such a massive volume of evidence.”
The CRSV blacklist lists state security forces, non-state armed groups, and extremist organizations that are credibly suspected of committing patterns of rape, sexual slavery, forced prostitution, forced pregnancy, or other forms of sexual violence in armed conflict.
The mandate began around 2010. The goal is to name parties and press them into compliance, update sanctions committees, and be used in general to guide peace negotiations. Examples include Boko Haram, ISIS, and Al-Shabaab.
What the blacklist means, Herzberg explained, is that the groups will be more closely monitored by the UN.
The October 7 massacre attack took place nearly two years ago; per Herzberg, Hamas should’ve been on the list much sooner than now.
As well, now “there will be extreme pressure placed on the Secretary-General to add the IDF to the list for next year…” so, the efforts may have backfired, she explained.
“What was accomplished by getting Hamas on that list?”
Herzberg explained that she understands why, to some, it may be better than nothing, but noted that such reports are often weaponized against Israel - that it is a double-edged sword belonging to an organization that doesn’t always deserve the legitimacy it gets.
"I just think the value is minimal. I don't think the people behind this effort are, I certainly don't think they have any bad intentions, I just think they're naive and don't really understand the system."
“That is the danger. These UN bodies don't deserve any legitimacy or credibility… Why are we giving them credit that they don't deserve” on these issues, she asked.
Additionally, “now, when we do have extensive and legitimate criticisms against these bodies,” the counter-argument will be, ‘Well, they put Hamas on the list, so they can't possibly be biased.’
Hamas is already a sanctioned entity by the EU, the US, and many countries, and the sentiment is bolstered by a UN resolution from 2001 against terrorist financing.
“There are already a host of mechanisms, there can be lawsuits,” and there is the military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, she said.
With all these simultaneous efforts, “I don't really see what this report is doing to move the needle… There may be individual victims who will feel justified by it, but it's not moving the needle for anything concrete; it's not getting them money, It's not getting perpetrators put in jail.”
Sarah Ben Nun
Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-864261
No comments:
Post a Comment