Britain to announce no early remedy for universal jurisdiction procedures used against Israelis
According to a report from the Times of London this morning, the British government is “in no hurry” to change the legal procedures under which Israelis have been targeted for “war crimes” using universal jurisdiction laws.
Plus ca change...
Several Israeli officials including former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni have in recent months cancelled visits to Britain after pro-Palestinian groups used the universal jurisdiction laws to get courts to issue arrest warrants against them. Universal jurisdiction means that warrants can be issued for alleged transgressions anywhere in the world and not just in the country over which the court would usually have jurisdiction.
According to the Times report, which was drawn from unnamed sources, the government will later today announce a consultation period on the subject, meaning that long delays to any remedy are highly likely:
“Today’s announcement…means that the issue will not be resolved until well after the election, expected in May… The delay is a victory for Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, who has argued that the legal point at stake is too important to rush. Clauses that could have been attached to the Crime and Security Bill now before Parliament have been drafted. Under one, the Attorney-General, not a magistrate, would have to authorise an arrest warrant.”
The Times may in fact be understating the matter. Given that opinion polls suggest that no party may get an overall majority in parliament at the forthcoming elections, the ensuing political chaos would probably push the matter down the political agenda significantly.
My interpretation is that the government is deliberately passing the buck; refusing to take swift and decisive action in the hope either that someone else will have to take responsibility for the decision after the election or at least that it will not have to do anything now that might be perceived as pro-Israeli and which might thus infuriate leftist and Muslim voters in what will inevitably be a knife-edge election.
Cowardice, pure and simple.
Tags: Israel
March 4th, 2010 at 10:21 am
We live in worrying times when representatives of a fellow democracy cannot come to our country without fear of arrest. Straw represents Blackburn, a constituency with a large Muslim population, a personal reason for his political expediency. This matter could be the only reason to vote Conservative, if they are prepared to do something.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:15 am
If the Times’s report is true, then Gordon Brown’s article in today’s Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/gordon-brown/7361967/Britain-must-protect-foreign-leaders-from-arrest.html) plumbs greater depths of cynicism than we’d thought even him capable of.
If he was hoping to attract whatever’s left of the Jewish vote, I hope the attempt fails spectacularly.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:21 am
Contradictory report on the Jerusalem Post website :-
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=170194
Not sure which to believe. I’d put nothing past this government.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:33 am
“The delay is a victory for Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, who has argued that the legal point at stake is too important to rush”
Jack Straw really means that the legal point at stake is too important NOT to rush.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:40 am
Or better still that the political point at stake is too important not too rush, as he contemplates his own political future. Never mind the injustice of it all.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:46 am
In the end Jack weighs up his own future after the coming election when deciding to act or not and does not act with integrity – a common trait these days.
March 4th, 2010 at 6:10 pm
They should come to the UK anyway and force the terrorist sympathisers to use their cards… and lose.
March 4th, 2010 at 11:59 pm
Today’s Times reports that Ministers will announce a consultation on “universal jurisdiction”. Effectively this means there will be no change in the law before the election which must be held by latest 6 May. Apart from Ministers, any Israeli who has served in the IDF risks arrest if they come to the UK.
This is just the latest in a long line of decisions hostile to Israel by this government:
- Failed to vote against Goldstone Report at UNHRC;
- Commenced arms embargo on Israel;
- Foreign Minister said Cast Lead ‘disproportionate’;
- The Charity Commission – led by a Labour Party activist – has failed to make War On Want and other Charities live up to their legal obligation to tell the truth about Israel;
- Promoted Ben Bradshaw to Cabinet after he said on Any Questions (January 23 2009) “I am afraid the BBC has to stand up to the Israeli authorities occasionally… Israel has a long reputation of bullying the BBC…”;
- Decided to talk to Hezbolla;
- Initiated separate labelling for West Bank settlement goods in supermarkets.
I believe that the Conservatives would have voted against Goldstone at the UN and that they would have changed Universal Jurisdiction to prevent a private individual being able to obtain an arrest warrant for visitors from abroad. I believe that Labour’s dependence on the Muslim vote and drift to the Left will mean that if re-elected to government, their hostility to Israel will certainly not reduce, and might even intensify.
I therefore endorse the Conservatives in the election. I do not believe that supporters of Israel have any other choice but to vote for the Conservatives. This applies in all seats since – although there are some Labour and LibDem candidates who are individually less hostile to Israel – what matters (in what promises to be a close election) is to get the Conservatives in with a working majority.
I urge all supporters of Israel to work for a Conservative government. To volunteer, please call +44 (0) 20 7222 9000 or contact your local constituency.
March 5th, 2010 at 10:49 am
I think you called this one right Robin. It’s yet another instance of the British government sacrificing its principles on the altar of the Muslim vote.
March 5th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Jonathan Hoffman quotes Ben Bradshaw: “I am afraid the BBC has to stand up to the Israeli authorities occasionally… Israel has a long reputation of bullying the BBC…” Ha! Apologies for being badly off topic but I have received a reply to a complaint I made following Robin’s post a while ago about Michael White’s comments on the BBC’s Breakfast programme. You will recall that White made the following statement which was not challenged by the presenter: “In Israel they murder each other a great deal. The Israeli Defence force murders people because they don’t like their political style and what they’ve got to say and it only means that people more extreme come in and take their place.” Speaking of Berlusconi, he also said: “[Berlusconi is] always changing the law to protect himself from prosecution but when politics breaks down, and murder of politicians is part of it – Lebanon’s another bad example – things only get worse.” (Perhaps Berlusconi should sue.) I complained to the Breakfast programme editors, received a weaselly reply, and wrote again to the Editorial Complaints Unit. Here are some extracts from their reply.
“I think it’s clear from that, although Michael White’s terminology is not as exact as it might be, what he is referring to when he mentions Israel, is its controversial policy of target killings of opponents it deems to be involved in terrorism. ..Overall, it seems clear to me that Michael White is, albeit in very imprecise terms, expressing the view that such killings are counter-productive and (by referring to them as murder) that they are illegitimate. ..[I]t does not seem to me that the presenters were required, in those circumstances, to prolong his digression by challenging him and opening up a debate about the merits and legitimacy of a policy of targeted killings…Given all of this, I do not feel that their failure to challenge the view he put forward was a serious breach of editorial standards.”
This is almost comical. How we have managed to get from politicians murdering each other to a policy of targeted killings of terrorists I do not know but needs must. Well, it clears up one mystery. Mossad murdered that Hamas operative in Dubai (allegedly) because “they did not like his political style and what he had to say”. Still, the BBC does say it was not a serious breach of editorial guidelines. I like that. Not serious but a breach nevertheless. Israel must have bullied them into it.
March 5th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
In response to Jonathan Hoffman. I’m moderately left-of-centre in my political views. When living in Israel I voted for the Ma’arach (Israel Labour Party). In England I’ve only voted Labour or not voted at all. But due to the government’s Middle-East policy and its PC approach to radical Islam in Britain, I’ll vote Conservative at the next election. Not with much enthusiasm. But they’re the least bad.
March 8th, 2010 at 9:02 am
What about government ministers with largely muslim voters? Should they take risks before an election?
Better get advice about this from the Muslim Council of Great Britain
March 8th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
Hooray ^-^