7 apr 2011
Letter from correspondent
An amazing magic trick by Israel. Now you see it...now you don't.
Judge Goldstone wrote:
Simply put, the laws of armed conflict apply no less to non-state actors such as Hamas than they do to national armies. Ensuring that non-state actors respect these principles, and are investigated when they fail to do so, is one of the most significant challenges facing the law of armed conflict. Only if all parties to armed conflicts are held to these standards will we be able to protect civilians who, through no choice of their own, are caught up in war.
I wonder if Judge Goldstone would also agree that non-state actors have the right to defend their population against foreign occupation using proportional responses. If he does, I wonder as to what Judge Goldstone suggests a proportionate response from Hamas could look like?
Because in my opinion offering to renew a ceasefire is quite a proportional response to caging in a civilian population under military occupation and causing the majority of children to become anemic. I wonder if he also agrees that international law protects civilians in non-state regions from foreign aggression. I'm also curious as to how Judge Goldstone's opinion has changed on the legality of dropping white phosphorous on schools and hospital or on what the military purpose of destroying chickens and flour mills is.
How has Judge Goldstone's opinion on incinerating policemen at a graduation ceremony changed. Perhaps he feels that they are legitimate targets because they are within the Hamas organization. Would he then also agree that an IDF soldier sitting in a cafe is also a legitimate military target for a suicide bombing and that any Israeli civilians killed would be tragic but not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy by Hamas?
Hamas is no angel, they receive NO sympathy from me. But they appear to be much more efficient than Israel at not killing civilians using makeshift rockets and suicide bombings even though Israel is using state of the art U.S weaponry. Perhaps Israel should get some pointers from Hamas on how to avoid civilian deaths. And as far as I know Hamas hasn't prevented freedom of movement or the oportunity to have a future for Israeli civilians. Funny how opinions can change. It's like magic.
http://fwd4.me/zBB
Goldstone to face libel suit
MK Danny Danon enlists help of Jewish-American lawyers to file libel lawsuit against South African judge following his retraction of his Gaza war report. MK Danon: Report is '2010 version of blood libel'.
Judge Richard Goldstone is expected to stand trial for libel following his retraction of his Operation Cast Lead report, in which he accused Israel of war crimes.
Knesset Member Danny Danon (Likud), currently in the United States, has enlisted the help of a number of Jewish-American attorneys who agreed to file a lawsuit against the South African judge at no charge.
A petition will be filed with a New York District Court next week, in which the plaintiffs will demand a formal apology and a symbolic financial compensation for the State of Israel. A second lawsuit may be filed in an Israeli court if Goldstone arrives in Israel.
Minimize the damage
The decision to file the lawsuit is a direct response to the judge's op-ed in the Washington Post in which he claimed his report caused significant damage to the State of Israel in the United Nations and internationally.
Despite his retraction, Goldstone announced he does not intend to try and nix the report.
"The Goldstone Report is the 2010 version of a blood libel. The twisted image Goldstone painted of the State of Israel caused damage, is still causing damage and will continue to damage Israel and its citizens for years to come. A public apology published in every country might lessen the harm already done," Danon explained.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4053408,00.html
Letter from correspondent
An amazing magic trick by Israel. Now you see it...now you don't.
Judge Goldstone wrote:
Simply put, the laws of armed conflict apply no less to non-state actors such as Hamas than they do to national armies. Ensuring that non-state actors respect these principles, and are investigated when they fail to do so, is one of the most significant challenges facing the law of armed conflict. Only if all parties to armed conflicts are held to these standards will we be able to protect civilians who, through no choice of their own, are caught up in war.
I wonder if Judge Goldstone would also agree that non-state actors have the right to defend their population against foreign occupation using proportional responses. If he does, I wonder as to what Judge Goldstone suggests a proportionate response from Hamas could look like?
Because in my opinion offering to renew a ceasefire is quite a proportional response to caging in a civilian population under military occupation and causing the majority of children to become anemic. I wonder if he also agrees that international law protects civilians in non-state regions from foreign aggression. I'm also curious as to how Judge Goldstone's opinion has changed on the legality of dropping white phosphorous on schools and hospital or on what the military purpose of destroying chickens and flour mills is.
How has Judge Goldstone's opinion on incinerating policemen at a graduation ceremony changed. Perhaps he feels that they are legitimate targets because they are within the Hamas organization. Would he then also agree that an IDF soldier sitting in a cafe is also a legitimate military target for a suicide bombing and that any Israeli civilians killed would be tragic but not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy by Hamas?
Hamas is no angel, they receive NO sympathy from me. But they appear to be much more efficient than Israel at not killing civilians using makeshift rockets and suicide bombings even though Israel is using state of the art U.S weaponry. Perhaps Israel should get some pointers from Hamas on how to avoid civilian deaths. And as far as I know Hamas hasn't prevented freedom of movement or the oportunity to have a future for Israeli civilians. Funny how opinions can change. It's like magic.
http://fwd4.me/zBB
Goldstone to face libel suit
MK Danny Danon enlists help of Jewish-American lawyers to file libel lawsuit against South African judge following his retraction of his Gaza war report. MK Danon: Report is '2010 version of blood libel'.
Judge Richard Goldstone is expected to stand trial for libel following his retraction of his Operation Cast Lead report, in which he accused Israel of war crimes.
Knesset Member Danny Danon (Likud), currently in the United States, has enlisted the help of a number of Jewish-American attorneys who agreed to file a lawsuit against the South African judge at no charge.
A petition will be filed with a New York District Court next week, in which the plaintiffs will demand a formal apology and a symbolic financial compensation for the State of Israel. A second lawsuit may be filed in an Israeli court if Goldstone arrives in Israel.
Minimize the damage
The decision to file the lawsuit is a direct response to the judge's op-ed in the Washington Post in which he claimed his report caused significant damage to the State of Israel in the United Nations and internationally.
Despite his retraction, Goldstone announced he does not intend to try and nix the report.
"The Goldstone Report is the 2010 version of a blood libel. The twisted image Goldstone painted of the State of Israel caused damage, is still causing damage and will continue to damage Israel and its citizens for years to come. A public apology published in every country might lessen the harm already done," Danon explained.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4053408,00.html
6 apr 2011
Bahar asks the Lords to reject law granting immunity to Israeli war criminals
Deputy Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council Ahmed Bahar has strongly condemned the British House of Commons' approval of a law limiting the UK's power to prosecute Israeli war criminals who step foot in the country, and he has called on the House of Lords, which will review the law next, to reject it.
He said the approval was in response to Israeli pressure and called the move surrender to Zionist domination and arrogance that seeks to keep the Zionist entity above international law and moral principles and humanitarian norms and conventions. He also tagged the approval a a stain on the conscience of British democracy.
The law, he said, implies that Israeli officials that committed war crimes during the 2008-9 aggression against the Gaza Strip would escape from justice, and it would encourage them to commit more crimes against humanity in Palestine.
Bahar called on the House of Lords to reject the law, also calling upon Arab and Muslim communities in England as well as rights groups to lobby the House of Commons to retract the law.
Separately, Bahar spoke the same day as children marched on Palestinian Child Day near the PLC headquarters in Gaza, as was staged by the Gaza ministry of sports and youth.
There he called on United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to follow the situation concerning Gaza children as Israel has boosted aggression in the past two weeks killing scores including several innocent children.
The same day, Bahar received the family of Omar Awad, a Palestinian man held in the UAE, at PLC headquarters as they asked for help in having the prisoner released.
He explained that the PLC had sent a cable to the president of the UAE national council to intervene with the executive authority to release the businessman.
He was arrested two months back while returning to the West Bank after carrying out business in the UAE.
http://fwd4.me/z6P
Goldstone says he won't seek nullification of Gaza war report
Goldstone makes clear in Associated Press interview that he feels only one correction needs to be made in the war report regarding 'intentionality on the part of Israel.'
South African jurist Richard Goldstone said Tuesday that he did not plan to seek nullification of his highly critical UN report on Israel's 2008-2009 offensive in the Gaza Strip and asserted that claims to the contrary by Interior Minister Eli Yishai were false.
The 2009 Goldstone report initially concluded that both Israel and Hamas had committed potential war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during three weeks of fighting. The findings that Israeli forces had intentionally fired at Palestinian civilians triggered outrage in Israel and a personal campaign against Goldstone, who is Jewish.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Goldstone said that Yishai had called him on Monday to thank him for an op-ed piece published Friday in The Washington Post in which the judge wrote that new information had come to light that made him rethink his central conclusions.
Goldstone said, however, that he never discussed the report with Yishai in the telephone conversation. Israeli leaders have called for the report to be retracted since it was issued in 2009.
"There was absolutely no discussion about the Goldstone report on the call," the jurist said in a telephone interview from Stanford University in Palo Alto, California.
Goldstone said he thanked Yishai for calling and "stated that my concern was to work for truth, justice and human rights."
Goldstone did confirm that Yishai had invited him to visit Israel and that he had accepted but would be unable to travel there until July.
"I ended the conversation by expressing my love for Israel," Goldstone said, adding that Yishai spoke in Hebrew which was translated for the judge.
In the Post article, Goldstone lauded Israel for conducting dozens of investigations into alleged wrongdoing. In particular, he sighted evidence that a deadly strike that killed more than 20 members of a Palestinian family resulted from faulty intelligence and was not an intentional attack.
Nevertheless, Goldstone said, he did not intend to seek the report's nullification.
"As appears from the Washington Post article, information subsequent to publication of the report did meet with the view that one correction should be made with regard to intentionality on the part of Israel," the judge said.
"Further information as a result of domestic investigations could lead to further reconsideration, but as presently advised I have no reason to believe any part of the report needs to be reconsidered at this time."
Yishai told Army Radio station that he phoned Goldstone to express his appreciation for Goldstone's "courageous" reconsideration of his charges, and to invite him to tour Israel's southern communities that have sustained years of Palestinian rocket fire.
Yishai said Goldstone "as a Jew understands well the story of the Jewish people's suffering ... and it is very important for him to come and see this."
The minister added that Goldstone promised him he would take additional steps to retract his UN report.
Also speaking on Army Radio, Danny Gillerman, a former Israeli ambassador to the UN who also participated in the phone call, quoted Goldstone as saying he was ready to take steps to change the status of the report, but first wanted to "wait for the dust to settle" following his op-ed article in the Post.
The Geneva-based Human Rights Council has said it will continue to treat the report as a legitimate working document. Spokesman Cedric Sapey told the AP on Monday that Goldstone would have to submit a formal request for the report to be withdrawn.
Last month, a majority of the council's 47 members voted to pass the report up to the General Assembly, recommending the powerful UN Security Council be asked to submit it to prosecutors at the International Criminal Court.
Such a move is unlikely to pass the Security Council, where Israel's strongest ally, the United States, has veto power. But the mere suggestion of bringing war crimes charges has infuriated Israel.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Mark Toner had welcomed Goldstone's article that said he subsequently determined Israel had not intentionally attacked civilians.
"We've made clear from when the Goldstone Report was initially presented and maintained ever since that we didn't see any evidence that the Israeli government had intentionally targeted civilians or otherwise engaged in any war crimes; and now that we see that Justice Goldstone has reached the same conclusion," Toner said Monday.
"I can say that we remain concerned and we'll continue working to an end to the what we believe is an anti-Israel bias in the Human Rights Council," Toner said.
Israel attacked the Gaza Strip in December 2008 in response to years of persistent rocket fire from militants in Gaza at southern Israel.
Some 1,400 Palestinians, including hundreds of civilians, and 13 Israelis were killed during the campaign.
Israel has blamed Hamas for the heavy civilian toll, saying the militant group staged attacks from heavily populated residential areas, as well as mosques and schools.
http://fwd4.me/z4V
Where now for the Goldstone report?
In short, there are no new facts which could possibly have lead Richard Goldstone to change his mind.
In an op-ed in the Washington Post Richard Goldstone, former South African Constitutional Court judge and Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, expresses misgivings about the central finding of the UN Human Rights Council Fact Finding Mission Report on the Gaza Conflict of 2008-9 (named after its chairman, "the Goldstone report") that Israel's indiscriminate attacks on civilians were intentional.
The op-ed makes strange reading.
It states that the Goldstone report would have been a different document "had I known then what I know now" but fails to disclose any information that seriously challenges the findings of the Goldstone Report.
It claims that investigations published by the Israeli military and recognised by a follow-up UN Committee Report chaired by Judge Mary McGowan Davis, which appeared in March, "indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy", but the McGowan Davis report contains absolutely no such "indication" and instead seriously questions Israel's investigations, finding them to be lacking in impartiality, promptness and transparency.
Goldstone expresses "confidence" that the officer responsible for perhaps the most serious atrocity of Operation Cast Lead (Israel's codename for its assault on Gaza) -- the killing of 29 members of the al-Samouni family -- will be properly punished by Israel despite the fact that the McGowan Davis report provides a critical assessment of Israel's handling of the investigation into this killing.
Finally he claims that the McGowan Davis report finds that Israel has carried out investigations "to a significant degree", but in fact this report paints a very different picture of Israel's investigations of 400 incidents which have resulted in two convictions, one for theft of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months imprisonment and another for using a Palestinian child as a human shield which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months!
In short, there are no new facts which exonerate Israel and which could possibly have led Goldstone to change his mind. What made him change his mind therefore remains a closely guarded secret.
The Goldstone report was not the only fact-finding report on Operation Cast Lead. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the League of Arab States (whose mission I chaired) all produced thorough reports on the conflict.
In all reports, including the Goldstone report, there were accounts of the killings of civilians by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in a cold, calculated and deliberate manner. But the principal accusation levelled at Israel was that in its assault on Gaza it used force indiscriminately in densely populated areas and was reckless as to the foreseeable consequences of it actions which resulted in at least 900 civilian deaths and 5,000 wounded.
In terms of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court it is a war crime to intentionally direct attacks against a civilian population (article 8(2)(b)(i)). Such an intention need not be premeditated: it suffices if the person engaging in such action meant to cause the consequence of his action or "is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events"(article 30).
Goldstone's op-ed may be interpreted to mean that he is now satisfied (although there is no evidence to support this) that Israel did not as a matter of policy deliberately and in a premeditated manner target civilians and that where the calculated killing of civilians occurred this was without the blessing of the Israeli military and political leadership.
But he could not possibly have meant that Israel did not "intentionally target civilians as a matter of policy" in the legal sense of intention. That Israel's assault was conducted in an indiscriminate manner with full knowledge that its consequences would be the killing and wounding of civilians is a matter of public record fully substantiated by the Goldstone Report and other equally credible reports.
In his op-ed Goldstone declares that Hamas's indiscriminate firing of rockets into Israel, which resulted in the killing of four civilians, was an "intentional" targeting of civilians and consequently a war crime. But how he can suggest that the indiscriminate bombing and shooting of Palestinians in Gaza by the IDF, which resulted in nearly a thousand civilian deaths, was not "intentional" is a mystery.
Goldstone does not, like his critics, describe his op-ed piece as a retraction of the Goldstone report. This is not surprising. Richard Goldstone is a former judge and he knows full well that a Fact Finding Report by four persons, of which he was only one, like the judgment of a court of law, cannot be changed by the subsequent reflections of a single member of the committee.
This can be done only by the full committee itself with the approval of the body that established the Fact Finding Mission - the UN Human Rights Council. And this is highly unlikely in view of the fact that the three other members of the Committee - Professor Christine Chinkin of the LSE, Ms Hina Jilani, an advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and Colonel Desmond Travers, formerly an officer in the Irish Defence Force - have indicated that they do not share Goldstone's misgivings about the report.
Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council and that the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur and Libya.
Doubtless the General Assembly will refer the Goldstone report to the Security Council, despite Goldstone's op-ed, but it will end there as the customary United States veto will ensure that Israel remains unaccountable.
The Goldstone report is a historical milestone. It is a credible, reasoned, comprehensive and thoroughly researched account of atrocities -- war crimes and crimes against humanity -- committed by Israel in the course of Operation Cast Lead and of war crimes committed by Hamas in the indiscriminate firing of rockets into Israel. It is a serious attempt to secure the accountability of a state that has for too long been allowed by the West to behave in a lawless manner.
That the credibility of the Goldstone report has been undermined by Richard Goldstone's strange op-ed in the Washington Post cannot be denied.
Although the Report was authored by four experts with the backing of a team from the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights it has undoubtedly come to be associated with the name of Richard Goldstone. Inevitable the misgivings he has expressed about his own role in the Report will weaken its impact as an historical record of Operation Cast Lead.
Already the Israeli Government has expressed delight at what it construes to be a retraction of the Report and demanded both a contrite apology from Goldstone and a refutation of the Report by the United Nations. Predictably the US Department of State has welcomed Goldstone`s op-ed and one fears that European governments will find in it an excuse to justify their continued support for Israel.
Richard Goldstone has devoted much of his life to the cause of accountability for international crimes. It is sad that this champion of accountability and international criminal justice should abandon this cause in such an ill-considered but nevertheless extremely harmful op-ed.
John Dugard is Professor of Law, University of Pretoria; Emeritus Professor, University of Leiden; former UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
http://fwd4.me/z4K
Hezbollah condemns Goldstone's turn
Hezbollah has condemned UN prosecutor Richard Goldstone's latest stance to express doubt about some of the evidence regarding Israel's crimes during the Gaza war.
Goldstone took his own report on the Gaza war crimes by Israel in a The Washington Post op-ed back, emboldening Tel Aviv to call on the UN to retract the damning report.
The retreat by Judge Richard Goldstone from his previous stances of condemning the Zionist entity for committing war crimes during the war on Gaza in 2008 is a reward for this enemy, Hezbollah said on Tuesday in a statement obtained by Press TV.
The Lebanese resistance movement said the move would encourage Israel to carry on with its ongoing crimes against the Palestinian people -- crimes which it said are being renewed every day in different parts of the Palestinian territories.
Hezbollah further described Goldstone's The Washington post article as a flimsy attempt to make the Zionist entity look innocent of the crimes against humanity that were committed during the assault on Gaza, which would help Israel flee with impunity and improve its image.
This is a process of misleading the international public opinion and pressuring the international community into continuing its double standards in support of the Zionist enemy, the statement stated.
Hezbollah strongly condemns these pro-Zionist stances and puts them at the disposal of the Arab governments which should come to realize now that rights which do not come with force to protect them become subject to manipulation by judges and law experts who put their personal interests and benefits above their commitment to justice and above efforts to uphold the norms of international law and the principals of human rights.
In April 2009, Goldstone led an independent fact-finding mission mandated by the UN Human Rights Council to investigate reports of international human rights and humanitarian law violations during the December 2008-January 2009 offensive, which killed more than 1,400 Palestinians -- mostly civilians.
It is not clear yet how and why the retired South African judge has given a second thought on his 575-page detailed report in which he had accused Israel of using "disproportionate force, and deliberately targeting civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure, and using people as human shields" during the war against Gaza.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/173238.html
OIC will continue to back Goldstone report
The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) based in Jeddah has said it will continue to support the Goldstone report that condemned Israel for committing war crimes during the last war on Gaza after Goldstone, who headed the probe leading to the UN report, has retracted accusations against Israel.
The OIC said that the report was rife with facts on the field and that Goldstone's recent statements cannot change the fact that Israeli leaders are guilty of committing war crimes against Gazan civilians, as laid out in the report.
[The OIC] will continue to adhere to the report's contents that were adopted by the Human Rights Council in Geneva, the OIC said on its official website.
The OIC had already pushed the UNHRC to adopt the report and played a key role in having the report referred to the UN Security Council.
The OIC which enjoys a permanent delegation in the UN, also started the emergency meeting in the executive committee gathering ministers of its member states in the wake of the 2008 Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip and called for the fact-finding mission that produced the report to be formed.
http://fwd4.me/z3e
UN Human Rights Council refuses to retract Goldstone report
The UN Human Rights Council said in a statement that it would not retract the Goldstone report on the Israeli war on Gaza Strip in late 2008 and early 2009.
An official UNHRC spokesman said in a press release on Monday that UN reports could not be cancelled because of articles in the press.
The statement followed the publication of an article in the Washington Post by Richard Goldstone, who headed a committee probing the war and issued a report on it, in which he said that results of his report would be different if he had access to the information he had known now.
European human rights groups had asked the UNHRC to declare a clear stance toward Goldstone's press statement.
Palestinian officials criticized Goldstone and accused him of bowing to "Zionist pressures".
http://fwd4.me/z3f
Rizqa: Goldstone has no right to withdraw the UN report on Gaza war
Political advisor to the Palestinian premier Yousuf Rizqa said that Richard Goldstone has no right to back away from the UN report on Gaza war because it belongs to the international organization which adopted and endorsed it.
In a press release, Rizqa stressed that Goldstone is one member of the UN fact-finding committee and has no legal or personal right to nullify the report, noting that the article he wrote reflected only his personal opinion.
"Goldstone's new position resulted from pressures made by the Zionist lobby in South Africa, America and the Zionist entity; he was also exposed to severe criticism and became an outcast among the Jewish community following his report and the enmity towards him has increased after he submitted a condemnation of the Jews," the Palestinian official highlighted.
http://fwd4.me/z3g
Bahar asks the Lords to reject law granting immunity to Israeli war criminals
Deputy Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council Ahmed Bahar has strongly condemned the British House of Commons' approval of a law limiting the UK's power to prosecute Israeli war criminals who step foot in the country, and he has called on the House of Lords, which will review the law next, to reject it.
He said the approval was in response to Israeli pressure and called the move surrender to Zionist domination and arrogance that seeks to keep the Zionist entity above international law and moral principles and humanitarian norms and conventions. He also tagged the approval a a stain on the conscience of British democracy.
The law, he said, implies that Israeli officials that committed war crimes during the 2008-9 aggression against the Gaza Strip would escape from justice, and it would encourage them to commit more crimes against humanity in Palestine.
Bahar called on the House of Lords to reject the law, also calling upon Arab and Muslim communities in England as well as rights groups to lobby the House of Commons to retract the law.
Separately, Bahar spoke the same day as children marched on Palestinian Child Day near the PLC headquarters in Gaza, as was staged by the Gaza ministry of sports and youth.
There he called on United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to follow the situation concerning Gaza children as Israel has boosted aggression in the past two weeks killing scores including several innocent children.
The same day, Bahar received the family of Omar Awad, a Palestinian man held in the UAE, at PLC headquarters as they asked for help in having the prisoner released.
He explained that the PLC had sent a cable to the president of the UAE national council to intervene with the executive authority to release the businessman.
He was arrested two months back while returning to the West Bank after carrying out business in the UAE.
http://fwd4.me/z6P
Goldstone says he won't seek nullification of Gaza war report
Goldstone makes clear in Associated Press interview that he feels only one correction needs to be made in the war report regarding 'intentionality on the part of Israel.'
South African jurist Richard Goldstone said Tuesday that he did not plan to seek nullification of his highly critical UN report on Israel's 2008-2009 offensive in the Gaza Strip and asserted that claims to the contrary by Interior Minister Eli Yishai were false.
The 2009 Goldstone report initially concluded that both Israel and Hamas had committed potential war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during three weeks of fighting. The findings that Israeli forces had intentionally fired at Palestinian civilians triggered outrage in Israel and a personal campaign against Goldstone, who is Jewish.
In an interview with The Associated Press, Goldstone said that Yishai had called him on Monday to thank him for an op-ed piece published Friday in The Washington Post in which the judge wrote that new information had come to light that made him rethink his central conclusions.
Goldstone said, however, that he never discussed the report with Yishai in the telephone conversation. Israeli leaders have called for the report to be retracted since it was issued in 2009.
"There was absolutely no discussion about the Goldstone report on the call," the jurist said in a telephone interview from Stanford University in Palo Alto, California.
Goldstone said he thanked Yishai for calling and "stated that my concern was to work for truth, justice and human rights."
Goldstone did confirm that Yishai had invited him to visit Israel and that he had accepted but would be unable to travel there until July.
"I ended the conversation by expressing my love for Israel," Goldstone said, adding that Yishai spoke in Hebrew which was translated for the judge.
In the Post article, Goldstone lauded Israel for conducting dozens of investigations into alleged wrongdoing. In particular, he sighted evidence that a deadly strike that killed more than 20 members of a Palestinian family resulted from faulty intelligence and was not an intentional attack.
Nevertheless, Goldstone said, he did not intend to seek the report's nullification.
"As appears from the Washington Post article, information subsequent to publication of the report did meet with the view that one correction should be made with regard to intentionality on the part of Israel," the judge said.
"Further information as a result of domestic investigations could lead to further reconsideration, but as presently advised I have no reason to believe any part of the report needs to be reconsidered at this time."
Yishai told Army Radio station that he phoned Goldstone to express his appreciation for Goldstone's "courageous" reconsideration of his charges, and to invite him to tour Israel's southern communities that have sustained years of Palestinian rocket fire.
Yishai said Goldstone "as a Jew understands well the story of the Jewish people's suffering ... and it is very important for him to come and see this."
The minister added that Goldstone promised him he would take additional steps to retract his UN report.
Also speaking on Army Radio, Danny Gillerman, a former Israeli ambassador to the UN who also participated in the phone call, quoted Goldstone as saying he was ready to take steps to change the status of the report, but first wanted to "wait for the dust to settle" following his op-ed article in the Post.
The Geneva-based Human Rights Council has said it will continue to treat the report as a legitimate working document. Spokesman Cedric Sapey told the AP on Monday that Goldstone would have to submit a formal request for the report to be withdrawn.
Last month, a majority of the council's 47 members voted to pass the report up to the General Assembly, recommending the powerful UN Security Council be asked to submit it to prosecutors at the International Criminal Court.
Such a move is unlikely to pass the Security Council, where Israel's strongest ally, the United States, has veto power. But the mere suggestion of bringing war crimes charges has infuriated Israel.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Mark Toner had welcomed Goldstone's article that said he subsequently determined Israel had not intentionally attacked civilians.
"We've made clear from when the Goldstone Report was initially presented and maintained ever since that we didn't see any evidence that the Israeli government had intentionally targeted civilians or otherwise engaged in any war crimes; and now that we see that Justice Goldstone has reached the same conclusion," Toner said Monday.
"I can say that we remain concerned and we'll continue working to an end to the what we believe is an anti-Israel bias in the Human Rights Council," Toner said.
Israel attacked the Gaza Strip in December 2008 in response to years of persistent rocket fire from militants in Gaza at southern Israel.
Some 1,400 Palestinians, including hundreds of civilians, and 13 Israelis were killed during the campaign.
Israel has blamed Hamas for the heavy civilian toll, saying the militant group staged attacks from heavily populated residential areas, as well as mosques and schools.
http://fwd4.me/z4V
Where now for the Goldstone report?
In short, there are no new facts which could possibly have lead Richard Goldstone to change his mind.
In an op-ed in the Washington Post Richard Goldstone, former South African Constitutional Court judge and Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, expresses misgivings about the central finding of the UN Human Rights Council Fact Finding Mission Report on the Gaza Conflict of 2008-9 (named after its chairman, "the Goldstone report") that Israel's indiscriminate attacks on civilians were intentional.
The op-ed makes strange reading.
It states that the Goldstone report would have been a different document "had I known then what I know now" but fails to disclose any information that seriously challenges the findings of the Goldstone Report.
It claims that investigations published by the Israeli military and recognised by a follow-up UN Committee Report chaired by Judge Mary McGowan Davis, which appeared in March, "indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy", but the McGowan Davis report contains absolutely no such "indication" and instead seriously questions Israel's investigations, finding them to be lacking in impartiality, promptness and transparency.
Goldstone expresses "confidence" that the officer responsible for perhaps the most serious atrocity of Operation Cast Lead (Israel's codename for its assault on Gaza) -- the killing of 29 members of the al-Samouni family -- will be properly punished by Israel despite the fact that the McGowan Davis report provides a critical assessment of Israel's handling of the investigation into this killing.
Finally he claims that the McGowan Davis report finds that Israel has carried out investigations "to a significant degree", but in fact this report paints a very different picture of Israel's investigations of 400 incidents which have resulted in two convictions, one for theft of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months imprisonment and another for using a Palestinian child as a human shield which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months!
In short, there are no new facts which exonerate Israel and which could possibly have led Goldstone to change his mind. What made him change his mind therefore remains a closely guarded secret.
The Goldstone report was not the only fact-finding report on Operation Cast Lead. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the League of Arab States (whose mission I chaired) all produced thorough reports on the conflict.
In all reports, including the Goldstone report, there were accounts of the killings of civilians by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in a cold, calculated and deliberate manner. But the principal accusation levelled at Israel was that in its assault on Gaza it used force indiscriminately in densely populated areas and was reckless as to the foreseeable consequences of it actions which resulted in at least 900 civilian deaths and 5,000 wounded.
In terms of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court it is a war crime to intentionally direct attacks against a civilian population (article 8(2)(b)(i)). Such an intention need not be premeditated: it suffices if the person engaging in such action meant to cause the consequence of his action or "is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events"(article 30).
Goldstone's op-ed may be interpreted to mean that he is now satisfied (although there is no evidence to support this) that Israel did not as a matter of policy deliberately and in a premeditated manner target civilians and that where the calculated killing of civilians occurred this was without the blessing of the Israeli military and political leadership.
But he could not possibly have meant that Israel did not "intentionally target civilians as a matter of policy" in the legal sense of intention. That Israel's assault was conducted in an indiscriminate manner with full knowledge that its consequences would be the killing and wounding of civilians is a matter of public record fully substantiated by the Goldstone Report and other equally credible reports.
In his op-ed Goldstone declares that Hamas's indiscriminate firing of rockets into Israel, which resulted in the killing of four civilians, was an "intentional" targeting of civilians and consequently a war crime. But how he can suggest that the indiscriminate bombing and shooting of Palestinians in Gaza by the IDF, which resulted in nearly a thousand civilian deaths, was not "intentional" is a mystery.
Goldstone does not, like his critics, describe his op-ed piece as a retraction of the Goldstone report. This is not surprising. Richard Goldstone is a former judge and he knows full well that a Fact Finding Report by four persons, of which he was only one, like the judgment of a court of law, cannot be changed by the subsequent reflections of a single member of the committee.
This can be done only by the full committee itself with the approval of the body that established the Fact Finding Mission - the UN Human Rights Council. And this is highly unlikely in view of the fact that the three other members of the Committee - Professor Christine Chinkin of the LSE, Ms Hina Jilani, an advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and Colonel Desmond Travers, formerly an officer in the Irish Defence Force - have indicated that they do not share Goldstone's misgivings about the report.
Last month the Goldstone report was referred to the General Assembly of the United Nations by the Human Rights Council with the request that it be referred by the Assembly to the Security Council and that the Security Council submit the matter to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, as it has done in the cases of Darfur and Libya.
Doubtless the General Assembly will refer the Goldstone report to the Security Council, despite Goldstone's op-ed, but it will end there as the customary United States veto will ensure that Israel remains unaccountable.
The Goldstone report is a historical milestone. It is a credible, reasoned, comprehensive and thoroughly researched account of atrocities -- war crimes and crimes against humanity -- committed by Israel in the course of Operation Cast Lead and of war crimes committed by Hamas in the indiscriminate firing of rockets into Israel. It is a serious attempt to secure the accountability of a state that has for too long been allowed by the West to behave in a lawless manner.
That the credibility of the Goldstone report has been undermined by Richard Goldstone's strange op-ed in the Washington Post cannot be denied.
Although the Report was authored by four experts with the backing of a team from the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights it has undoubtedly come to be associated with the name of Richard Goldstone. Inevitable the misgivings he has expressed about his own role in the Report will weaken its impact as an historical record of Operation Cast Lead.
Already the Israeli Government has expressed delight at what it construes to be a retraction of the Report and demanded both a contrite apology from Goldstone and a refutation of the Report by the United Nations. Predictably the US Department of State has welcomed Goldstone`s op-ed and one fears that European governments will find in it an excuse to justify their continued support for Israel.
Richard Goldstone has devoted much of his life to the cause of accountability for international crimes. It is sad that this champion of accountability and international criminal justice should abandon this cause in such an ill-considered but nevertheless extremely harmful op-ed.
John Dugard is Professor of Law, University of Pretoria; Emeritus Professor, University of Leiden; former UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
http://fwd4.me/z4K
Hezbollah condemns Goldstone's turn
Hezbollah has condemned UN prosecutor Richard Goldstone's latest stance to express doubt about some of the evidence regarding Israel's crimes during the Gaza war.
Goldstone took his own report on the Gaza war crimes by Israel in a The Washington Post op-ed back, emboldening Tel Aviv to call on the UN to retract the damning report.
The retreat by Judge Richard Goldstone from his previous stances of condemning the Zionist entity for committing war crimes during the war on Gaza in 2008 is a reward for this enemy, Hezbollah said on Tuesday in a statement obtained by Press TV.
The Lebanese resistance movement said the move would encourage Israel to carry on with its ongoing crimes against the Palestinian people -- crimes which it said are being renewed every day in different parts of the Palestinian territories.
Hezbollah further described Goldstone's The Washington post article as a flimsy attempt to make the Zionist entity look innocent of the crimes against humanity that were committed during the assault on Gaza, which would help Israel flee with impunity and improve its image.
This is a process of misleading the international public opinion and pressuring the international community into continuing its double standards in support of the Zionist enemy, the statement stated.
Hezbollah strongly condemns these pro-Zionist stances and puts them at the disposal of the Arab governments which should come to realize now that rights which do not come with force to protect them become subject to manipulation by judges and law experts who put their personal interests and benefits above their commitment to justice and above efforts to uphold the norms of international law and the principals of human rights.
In April 2009, Goldstone led an independent fact-finding mission mandated by the UN Human Rights Council to investigate reports of international human rights and humanitarian law violations during the December 2008-January 2009 offensive, which killed more than 1,400 Palestinians -- mostly civilians.
It is not clear yet how and why the retired South African judge has given a second thought on his 575-page detailed report in which he had accused Israel of using "disproportionate force, and deliberately targeting civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure, and using people as human shields" during the war against Gaza.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/173238.html
OIC will continue to back Goldstone report
The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) based in Jeddah has said it will continue to support the Goldstone report that condemned Israel for committing war crimes during the last war on Gaza after Goldstone, who headed the probe leading to the UN report, has retracted accusations against Israel.
The OIC said that the report was rife with facts on the field and that Goldstone's recent statements cannot change the fact that Israeli leaders are guilty of committing war crimes against Gazan civilians, as laid out in the report.
[The OIC] will continue to adhere to the report's contents that were adopted by the Human Rights Council in Geneva, the OIC said on its official website.
The OIC had already pushed the UNHRC to adopt the report and played a key role in having the report referred to the UN Security Council.
The OIC which enjoys a permanent delegation in the UN, also started the emergency meeting in the executive committee gathering ministers of its member states in the wake of the 2008 Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip and called for the fact-finding mission that produced the report to be formed.
http://fwd4.me/z3e
UN Human Rights Council refuses to retract Goldstone report
The UN Human Rights Council said in a statement that it would not retract the Goldstone report on the Israeli war on Gaza Strip in late 2008 and early 2009.
An official UNHRC spokesman said in a press release on Monday that UN reports could not be cancelled because of articles in the press.
The statement followed the publication of an article in the Washington Post by Richard Goldstone, who headed a committee probing the war and issued a report on it, in which he said that results of his report would be different if he had access to the information he had known now.
European human rights groups had asked the UNHRC to declare a clear stance toward Goldstone's press statement.
Palestinian officials criticized Goldstone and accused him of bowing to "Zionist pressures".
http://fwd4.me/z3f
Rizqa: Goldstone has no right to withdraw the UN report on Gaza war
Political advisor to the Palestinian premier Yousuf Rizqa said that Richard Goldstone has no right to back away from the UN report on Gaza war because it belongs to the international organization which adopted and endorsed it.
In a press release, Rizqa stressed that Goldstone is one member of the UN fact-finding committee and has no legal or personal right to nullify the report, noting that the article he wrote reflected only his personal opinion.
"Goldstone's new position resulted from pressures made by the Zionist lobby in South Africa, America and the Zionist entity; he was also exposed to severe criticism and became an outcast among the Jewish community following his report and the enmity towards him has increased after he submitted a condemnation of the Jews," the Palestinian official highlighted.
http://fwd4.me/z3g
5 apr 2011
Open Letter to Justice Richard Goldstone. By coalition of women for peace
Dear Justice Richard Goldstone,
The recent escalation in the Israeli army incursions into the Gaza strip is of grave concern to us at the Coalition of Women for Peace. The prospect of yet another flare out of large scale violence against civilians is alarming. Your recent comments on the Goldstone report are already interpreted by Israeli officials and the mainstream media channels as complete and full absolution of Israel's military conduct in its entirety. Yet, the conclusions drawn from your statement with respect to Israel's conduct during the Cast Lead military campaign and especially its aftermath are not backed by any new facts or findings. This seriously undermines the international, Israeli and Palestinian civil society struggle for accountability and against impunity from grave violations of human rights and humanitarian law.
You state that "we know more today about what happened in Gaza." Which new facts have been uncovered? We who monitor the Israeli government and the situation closely on the ground know that no information was brought out to contradict the meticulous documentation of the fact finding mission you headed. In fact, it is the international pressure generated by the publication of the Goldstone report that has forced Israel to launch a significant number of investigations in the first place. These investigations corroborate what the Israeli and Palestinian civil societies already know: Israel systematically fails to conduct thorough and impartial investigations meeting international standards. As a matter of fact, most investigations prompted by the Goldstone report have not been completed yet, and those which have been completed generated only three rather minor indictments of lower rank soldiers. Considering the scope of destruction and the civilians killed during operation Cast Lead, it cannot be said that those responsible for grave violations that amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity have been brought to justice.
A key contribution of the Goldstone report to the public comprehension of the Israeli/Palestinian reality has been its readiness to approach seriously the actual context of the outbreak of violence in Gaza. This is the persistent blockade imposed by Israel on the Gaza Strip, and its continued control on Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. The recommendations to Israel - carrying your distinguished signature as a world renowned jurist - clearly addressed the blockade on Gaza, calling on Israel to immediately cease the border closures and allow free passage of goods and people to and from the Strip. The report recommends that Israel release Palestinian political prisoners, and cease actions that limit the expression of dissent by civil society organizations. The innovation of the report was precisely its readiness to acknowledge the overwhelming responsibility of the powerful party in the conflict.
Israel ignored the report and its recommendations, and did not lift the blockade or stop the persecution of Palestinian civilians and human rights defenders. The only notable change in the status quo was the escalation, immediately following the publication of the Goldstone report, of government attacks and the campaign of de-legitimization of human rights organizations and civil society. The Israeli government is currently promoting legislation, which aims at curbing our freedom of expression, freedom of association and basic social and political liberties. This political persecution is further marginalizing and excluding Palestinian and Jewish women in Israel, who oppose the militarized political establishment.
The Goldstone report gave an official international force to the ever increasing demand to hold Israel accountable for grave violations of international law. Your statements undermine the credibility of the United Nations and its ability to effectively enforce international standards of conduct and international humanitarian and human rights law. Now more than ever the stakes are high for those struggling for accountability and against impunity in Israel/Palestine. Your statement raises the stakes further by granting Israel legitimacy it so desperately needs to continue its aggressive campaigns of repression of dissent on the domestic and international front.
Dear Justice Goldstone, we are asking you to do all that is in your power to enable the international community to hold Israeli leaders accountable. Only a serious commitment to accountability, which would end Israel's impunity can prevent the next war. As it stands now, your statement is already used to justify and legitimize future crimes, even before the next war has started.
Coalition of Women for Peace (Israel)
cwp@coalitionofwomen.org
www.coalitionofwomen.org
http://fwd4.me/z0q
Goldstone to visit Israel in July
Accepting Interior Minister Eli Yishai's invitation, South African judge says he would be honored to visit because he loves Israel, Jewish people.
South African Judge Richard Goldstone intends to visit Israel in July, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Tuesday. Goldstone said he would tour the southern city of Sderot and towns in the Gaza vicinity.
The announcement came after Interior Minister Eli Yishai invited Goldstone to visit Israel in a Monday evening telephone conversation. Goldstone recently retracted his findings on the Israel Defense Force's actions during Operation Cast Lead.
Yishai stressed that a visit to the Holy Land would show Goldstone the extent of the suffering that the Israeli public has been subjected to due to Hamas terrorist attacks. The judge's visit, Yishai said, would bear significance in light of the findings published as part of the controversial Goldstone Report.
Goldstone said that he would be honored to visit, noting that he loves both Israel and the Jewish people.
Israel's former ambassador to the UN, Dan Gillerman, who also took part in the telephone conversation, praised Goldstone for his courage in publishing the retraction, which was printed in the Washington Post this past Friday. He urged Goldstone to take additional measures to make sure that the UN Human Rights Council and other human rights organization take heed of his statement.
Goldstone suggested in response to first let the dust settle, but said that he would look into what goes on in the UN council.
Yishai sent two letters to Goldstone in recent weeks, the first of which criticized the judge for not taking a stance on the terror attacks in Itamar, Jerusalem and Gaza vicinity towns.
Yishai sent the second letter this past Sautrday, commending Goldstone for his audacity to admit his mistakes.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4052402,00.html
UN Human Rights Council stands by Goldstone Report
Council spokesman claims op-ed article expresses judge's personal views, not committee's; maintains nixing report would take majority vote.
The United Nations Human Rights Council stands by the Goldstone Report despite its author's admission that he now questioned his own findings: UNHRC spokesman Cedric Sapey told Yediot Ahronot Monday that the op-ed written by Richard Goldstone, published in the Washington Post on Friday, expressed the judge's personal opinion and did not represent the other committee members.
Sapey explained that the op-ed was not a formally binding document and therefore the committee was not going to respond to it. He further explained that if Goldstone were to send an official letter to the council president signed by the rest of the committee members then the council would take necessary measures.
According to Sapey, another possibility would be to introduce the issue at the next council meeting, by having the committee's member-nations draft a proposal to that effect.
However, a proposal to debunk the report can only be submitted during the council's general assembly meetings. Debunking the resolution altogether would require either a unanimous vote or a majority vote by the member-nations.
Sapey said the council has not been in touch with Goldstone, or other committee members recently. The Goldstone Committee, which was dispersed after the report was submitted.
The council spokesman emphasized that despite his surprise over Goldstone's op-ed article, he sees no reason for the council to reexamine its course of action or that of its other inquiry committees.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4052426,00.html
Open Letter to Justice Richard Goldstone. By coalition of women for peace
Dear Justice Richard Goldstone,
The recent escalation in the Israeli army incursions into the Gaza strip is of grave concern to us at the Coalition of Women for Peace. The prospect of yet another flare out of large scale violence against civilians is alarming. Your recent comments on the Goldstone report are already interpreted by Israeli officials and the mainstream media channels as complete and full absolution of Israel's military conduct in its entirety. Yet, the conclusions drawn from your statement with respect to Israel's conduct during the Cast Lead military campaign and especially its aftermath are not backed by any new facts or findings. This seriously undermines the international, Israeli and Palestinian civil society struggle for accountability and against impunity from grave violations of human rights and humanitarian law.
You state that "we know more today about what happened in Gaza." Which new facts have been uncovered? We who monitor the Israeli government and the situation closely on the ground know that no information was brought out to contradict the meticulous documentation of the fact finding mission you headed. In fact, it is the international pressure generated by the publication of the Goldstone report that has forced Israel to launch a significant number of investigations in the first place. These investigations corroborate what the Israeli and Palestinian civil societies already know: Israel systematically fails to conduct thorough and impartial investigations meeting international standards. As a matter of fact, most investigations prompted by the Goldstone report have not been completed yet, and those which have been completed generated only three rather minor indictments of lower rank soldiers. Considering the scope of destruction and the civilians killed during operation Cast Lead, it cannot be said that those responsible for grave violations that amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity have been brought to justice.
A key contribution of the Goldstone report to the public comprehension of the Israeli/Palestinian reality has been its readiness to approach seriously the actual context of the outbreak of violence in Gaza. This is the persistent blockade imposed by Israel on the Gaza Strip, and its continued control on Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. The recommendations to Israel - carrying your distinguished signature as a world renowned jurist - clearly addressed the blockade on Gaza, calling on Israel to immediately cease the border closures and allow free passage of goods and people to and from the Strip. The report recommends that Israel release Palestinian political prisoners, and cease actions that limit the expression of dissent by civil society organizations. The innovation of the report was precisely its readiness to acknowledge the overwhelming responsibility of the powerful party in the conflict.
Israel ignored the report and its recommendations, and did not lift the blockade or stop the persecution of Palestinian civilians and human rights defenders. The only notable change in the status quo was the escalation, immediately following the publication of the Goldstone report, of government attacks and the campaign of de-legitimization of human rights organizations and civil society. The Israeli government is currently promoting legislation, which aims at curbing our freedom of expression, freedom of association and basic social and political liberties. This political persecution is further marginalizing and excluding Palestinian and Jewish women in Israel, who oppose the militarized political establishment.
The Goldstone report gave an official international force to the ever increasing demand to hold Israel accountable for grave violations of international law. Your statements undermine the credibility of the United Nations and its ability to effectively enforce international standards of conduct and international humanitarian and human rights law. Now more than ever the stakes are high for those struggling for accountability and against impunity in Israel/Palestine. Your statement raises the stakes further by granting Israel legitimacy it so desperately needs to continue its aggressive campaigns of repression of dissent on the domestic and international front.
Dear Justice Goldstone, we are asking you to do all that is in your power to enable the international community to hold Israeli leaders accountable. Only a serious commitment to accountability, which would end Israel's impunity can prevent the next war. As it stands now, your statement is already used to justify and legitimize future crimes, even before the next war has started.
Coalition of Women for Peace (Israel)
cwp@coalitionofwomen.org
www.coalitionofwomen.org
http://fwd4.me/z0q
Goldstone to visit Israel in July
Accepting Interior Minister Eli Yishai's invitation, South African judge says he would be honored to visit because he loves Israel, Jewish people.
South African Judge Richard Goldstone intends to visit Israel in July, Yedioth Ahronoth reported Tuesday. Goldstone said he would tour the southern city of Sderot and towns in the Gaza vicinity.
The announcement came after Interior Minister Eli Yishai invited Goldstone to visit Israel in a Monday evening telephone conversation. Goldstone recently retracted his findings on the Israel Defense Force's actions during Operation Cast Lead.
Yishai stressed that a visit to the Holy Land would show Goldstone the extent of the suffering that the Israeli public has been subjected to due to Hamas terrorist attacks. The judge's visit, Yishai said, would bear significance in light of the findings published as part of the controversial Goldstone Report.
Goldstone said that he would be honored to visit, noting that he loves both Israel and the Jewish people.
Israel's former ambassador to the UN, Dan Gillerman, who also took part in the telephone conversation, praised Goldstone for his courage in publishing the retraction, which was printed in the Washington Post this past Friday. He urged Goldstone to take additional measures to make sure that the UN Human Rights Council and other human rights organization take heed of his statement.
Goldstone suggested in response to first let the dust settle, but said that he would look into what goes on in the UN council.
Yishai sent two letters to Goldstone in recent weeks, the first of which criticized the judge for not taking a stance on the terror attacks in Itamar, Jerusalem and Gaza vicinity towns.
Yishai sent the second letter this past Sautrday, commending Goldstone for his audacity to admit his mistakes.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4052402,00.html
UN Human Rights Council stands by Goldstone Report
Council spokesman claims op-ed article expresses judge's personal views, not committee's; maintains nixing report would take majority vote.
The United Nations Human Rights Council stands by the Goldstone Report despite its author's admission that he now questioned his own findings: UNHRC spokesman Cedric Sapey told Yediot Ahronot Monday that the op-ed written by Richard Goldstone, published in the Washington Post on Friday, expressed the judge's personal opinion and did not represent the other committee members.
Sapey explained that the op-ed was not a formally binding document and therefore the committee was not going to respond to it. He further explained that if Goldstone were to send an official letter to the council president signed by the rest of the committee members then the council would take necessary measures.
According to Sapey, another possibility would be to introduce the issue at the next council meeting, by having the committee's member-nations draft a proposal to that effect.
However, a proposal to debunk the report can only be submitted during the council's general assembly meetings. Debunking the resolution altogether would require either a unanimous vote or a majority vote by the member-nations.
Sapey said the council has not been in touch with Goldstone, or other committee members recently. The Goldstone Committee, which was dispersed after the report was submitted.
The council spokesman emphasized that despite his surprise over Goldstone's op-ed article, he sees no reason for the council to reexamine its course of action or that of its other inquiry committees.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4052426,00.html
