this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
World News
32319 readers
817 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Please note that the court does not state that Israel did not take measures to ensure that.
The order was to stop genocide. The other option was to throw the case out.
The language is purposely broad for legal reasons, but apparently, people are taking it's broadness as a win for Israel.
This was definitely not a win for Israel.
No, the court did not recognize that there is genocide, thus it cannot give the order to stop. The court recognized that there might be a genocide, thus the case will proceed. The other two options were - there is no genocide (through the case away) and there is genocide. But none of these options were realized.
The court also reminded that there shouldn’t be genocide (but without stating that there is)