Legal assessments of the Gaza flotilla raid

http://dbpedia.org/resource/Legal_assessments_of_the_Gaza_flotilla_raid an entity of type: Abstraction100002137

Many legal assessments of the Gaza flotilla raid were published subsequent to the event. International law experts (and non-lawyers) differed over the legality of the action by Israel. The force necessary to respond to violent resistance and whether the force that was used was proportionate were disputed. The issue of possible violation of international law was discussed at the UN Security Council. The United States blocked a draft resolution criticizing Israel proposed by Turkey, the Palestinians, and Arab nations. rdf:langString
Plusieurs opinions légales à propos de l'abordage de la flottille pour Gaza ont été publiées à la suite de l'évènement. Des experts en droit international (et des non juristes) s'opposent quant à la légalité de l'action israélienne. La question d'une violation éventuelle du droit international a été discutée au Conseil de sécurité des Nations unies. rdf:langString
rdf:langString Avis juridiques sur l'abordage du Mavi Marmara
rdf:langString Legal assessments of the Gaza flotilla raid
xsd:integer 27601146
xsd:integer 1108482435
xsd:integer 30
rdf:langString "text"
rdf:langString Many legal assessments of the Gaza flotilla raid were published subsequent to the event. International law experts (and non-lawyers) differed over the legality of the action by Israel. The force necessary to respond to violent resistance and whether the force that was used was proportionate were disputed. Approximately one year after the event, the UN investigative committee for the 2010 Flotilla to Gaza concluded that (1) the blockade was legal, based on the principle of self-defense, (2) Israel was "justified in stopping vessels even outside its territorial waters," (3) Israel's decision to board the vessels with such force was "excessive," (4) Israeli forces "faced significant, organized and violent resistance from a group of passengers" that required them to use force for their own protection, and (5) the loss of nine lives was "unacceptable." It recommended that Israel immediately report its use of force to the United Nations Security Council for resolution as specified in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Some, such as law experts Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz, Chicago Law School Professor Eric Posner, and Johns Hopkins International Law and Diplomacy Professor Ruth Wedgwood, said that the naval blockade, the boarding in international waters, and the use of force were in accord with long-standing international law. Dershowitz compared the blockade with the U.S. blockade of Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis and Posner with the Coalition blockade of Iraq during the first Gulf War. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the National Lawyers Guild's International Committee, Istanbul Bilgi University's Law Department Dean Turgut Tarhanlı and other experts have concluded that the blockade was itself illegal, or agreed with University of Dundee international law professor Robin Churchill that the boarding on the high seas was illegal even if the blockade were lawful, or agreed with international law professor Said Mahmoudi that the use of force was disproportionate and the raid was therefore illegal even if the blockade and the boarding in international waters were lawful. An investigation by a panel of legal experts convened by the UN determined that the use of force by the Israeli military was disproportionate, that the Israeli military violated international law, and found clear evidence sufficient for war crimes prosecutions under the Fourth Geneva Convention - which defines humanitarian protections for civilians in a war zone and prohibits total war. The issue of possible violation of international law was discussed at the UN Security Council. The United States blocked a draft resolution criticizing Israel proposed by Turkey, the Palestinians, and Arab nations.
rdf:langString Plusieurs opinions légales à propos de l'abordage de la flottille pour Gaza ont été publiées à la suite de l'évènement. Des experts en droit international (et des non juristes) s'opposent quant à la légalité de l'action israélienne. Selon certains, tels les experts Professeur Alan Dershowitz (Harvard Law School); Professeur Eric Posner (Chicago Law School) et Professeur Ruth Wedgwood (Johns Hopkins International Law and Diplomacy), le blocus naval, l'abordage en eaux internationales et l'usage de la force étaient en accord avec une ancienne loi internationale.Dershowitz a comparé ce blocus avec celui de Cuba par les États-Unis pendant la Crise des missiles de Cuba et Posner avec le blocus de l'Irak par les forces de la Coalition pendant la Guerre du Golfe. Pour d'autres tels le Haut Commissaire pour les Droits de l'Homme des Nations unies, le Comité international de la Croix-Rouge, le Comité International de la Ligue Nationale des Juristes et Turgut Tarhanlı, doyen du département de Droit de l'Université Bilgi d'Istanbul, le blocus était illégal, ou avec Robin Churchill, professeur de Droit international, de l'Université de Dundee, que l'abordage en haute mer était illégal, ou avec Said Mahmoudi, professeur de Droit international, que l'usage de la force n'était pas proportionnel et par conséquent illégal. Les deux bords conviennent généralement qu'Israël devait répondre seulement en faisant un usage de force mesurée face à une résistance violente. Que la force utilisée fut proportionnée est contesté par quelques-uns. La question d'une violation éventuelle du droit international a été discutée au Conseil de sécurité des Nations unies.
xsd:nonNegativeInteger 56434

data from the linked data cloud