← Back to context

Comment by YZF

4 months ago

[flagged]

The court has jurisdiction. Gaza is not part of Israel by any law.

It's a direct application of 1949 Geneva Conventions. Most Israeli legal scholars agree that Israel's defense does not work.

>The court has no jurisdiction.

It does have jurisdiction.

>So no, they were not solid.

They were and are solid.

>but that is through some incredibly weird legal gymnastics

No it isn't.

>by which somehow the non-existent state of Palestine

It definitely does exist.

>is a member giving the court authority

Yes, it joined the ICC in 2015.

> over its non-existent territory.

Its territory does in fact exist.

  • > It does have jurisdiction.

    Under its own rules and its own interpretation of Gaza governance. That doesn't make it some sort of legal or practical reality - I can make up a set of rules under which I'm the world leader, but it would have no effect.

    > It definitely does exist.

    This is a bit of a semantic question, but it doesn't really meet the criteria set out in the Montevideo Convention.

    > Yes, it joined the ICC in 2015.

    Not Hamas, which is the actual government of the territory in question (Gaza). The idea that an entity which never governed a territory, and has never been popular there, can grant a foreign court jurisdiction there is a bit absurd.