Gentlemen members of the
International Criminal Court – Org. of the United Nations
From my consideration:
As a prior clarification, I treat you as “gentlemen” because my education demands it, and in no way because you deserve the respectful title of gentlemen. I cannot write the titles that you actually deserve publicly for the reason mentioned; My education imposes certain restrictions on me.
Reading the Statute that governs (or should govern) the constitution of that Court and the rights and duties, I find contradictions that I consider serious, especially with regard to what you do and what according to the statutes you should do. I go on to detail.
“CHAPTER I – ORGANIZATION OF THE COURT
Article 2
The Court will be made up of a body of independent judges, chosen regardless of their nationality from among people of high moral character, who possess the qualifications required in their respective countries for appointment to the highest judicial positions, or are jurisconsults of recognized competence in international affairs. . law."
Here I find myself with a breach. And in triplicate:
- Not all judges are independent, and that is demonstrated by their attitudes.
- not all were chosen regardless of their nationality, and
- Not all of them were chosen from people of high morals.
“Article 4
1. The members of the Court will be elected by the General Assembly and by the Security Council from a list of persons designated by the national groups in the Permanent Court of Arbitration, in accordance with the following provisions.
2. In the case of Members of the United Nations not represented on the Permanent Court of Arbitration, candidates will be nominated by national groups designated for this purpose by their governments under the same conditions as those prescribed for members of the Permanent Court of Arbitration by Article 44 of the Convention Hague of 1907 for the peaceful settlement of international disputes.
3. The conditions under which a State which is a party to the present Statute but is not a Member of the United Nations may participate in the election of the members of the Court shall be fixed, in the absence of special agreement, by the General Assembly. Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council.”
In this article concepts collide. On the one hand, the voters are members of the General Assembly and the Security Council. On the other hand, these voters must choose people of “high morality” (art.2 item c). We see that a very high (too) percentage of voters They are not qualified because they are not people of high morality, or represent countries where the morality of the rulers is at rock bottom. Look how many dictatorial countries and how many theocracies vote. Take note of how many countries respect human rights. It can be said that there is no continent where all countries respect human rights and are democratically governed, perhaps with the exception of the Australian continent if we do not thoroughly analyze the political situation of all its small islands.
“Article 6
Before making these nominations, (candidates) It is recommended that each national group consult its highest court of justice, its faculties and schools of law, and its national academies and national sections of international academies dedicated to the study of law.”
In the enormous number of dictatorships that make up the United Nations and the Security Council, is there any evidence that this article is complied with? In the majority, courts of justice, faculties and academies do not even exist or function as such, independent of the dictator.
“Article 9
In each election, the voters will take into account not only that the people to be elected must individually possess the required qualities, but also that as a whole they will represent the main forms of civilization and the main legal systems of the country. the world should be secured.”
This article seems taken from a fairy tale. Look how much insurance we can have in countries like the following, which we will name a few as examples.
Russia – Invading Ukraine with its army, taking away entire cities and massacring its population, all under the eternal rule of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Their “democratic elections” are laughable.
Iran – Main terrorist organization worldwide, a theocracy that murders all dissidents, homosexuals, and women who do not wear the veil according to what its “morality police” dictates. If the Russian elections are something to laugh at, these are something to cry about.
Syria – Ruled by a murderous dictator who even uses chemical weapons against his population. 600.000 murdered and millions displaced.
Saudi Arabia – Theocratic family dictatorship that is unaware that something called human rights exists elsewhere.
Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, China, Yemen, and many others that have a voice and vote in the United Nations.
“Article 10
2. Any vote of the Security Council, whether for the election of judges or for the appointment of members of the conference provided for in article 12, shall be carried out without any distinction between permanent and non-permanent members of the Security Council.
Non-permanent members have the same rights as others. Imagine the votes where the majority are dictatorships: “The non-permanent seats are divided into five from among the States of Africa and Asia, one from among the States of Eastern Europe, two from among the States of Latin America and the Caribbean, and two from among the States of Western Europe and other states. "
“Article 38
1. The Court, whose function is to decide in accordance with international law the controversies submitted to it, will apply:
C. the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;”
Something stronger appears here. I wonder: Who has the right and under what concepts can they define which nations are civilized and which are not?
Is Syria murdering half a million of its inhabitants a civilized nation?
Will they publicly hang homosexuals and dissidents (more than 800 last year), and sponsor terrorism on all continents, is it a civilized nation?
Is Qatar financing all Islamic terrorist groups a civilized nation?
Russia trying to devour Ukraine, is it a civilized nation?
Is Yemen massacring half of its population a civilized nation?
Are Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, sending missiles to murder civilians in Israeli territory, civilized nations?
I now turn to a final consideration. Except for some honorable exception that makes clear your way of thinking and acting as an entity, Nothing good can be expected from you, both because of the countries that you represent, the way in which you are elected, and especially because of what the Secretary General of the United Nations has proven to be. Antonio Guterres. Add to that your own record as a criminal court, that YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING in the wars that exist today, much more important in number of deaths than that of Israel against Hamas terrorism, and that you and your prosecutor do not take into account, but They do worry that Israel might kill a few more terrorists to free the hostages in Gaza.
INVESTIGATE HAMAS
INVESTIGATE HEZBOLLAH
INVESTIGATE THE HUTIES
INVESTIGATE THOSE WHO GOVERN THE COUNTRIES FROM WHICH THEY BOMB US DAILY
GIVE US THE HOSTAGES THAT ARE HELD BY HAMAS AND ISLAMIC JIHAD, IN GAZA, IN SOME TUNNEL.
DELIVER US TO Ismail Haniya · Yahya Sinwar · Mohamed Deif, TO WHOM WE ENSURE A FAIR TRIAL LIKE ADOLF EICHMANN HAD
AFTER THAT, MAYBE WE WILL RECOGNIZE THAT YOU EXIST.
Mauricio Aliskevicius
State of Israel
The author forgot to mention one of the points that can be most bloody, even anti-Semitic, and that is that these international tribunals or courts normally require that the complaints have first gone through all the courts of the state or where the accused is located, and they usually be several judicial ranks until reaching the highest judicial levels that all civilized democratic countries have. It is the so-called principle of complementarity before initiating criminal proceedings in the ICC. This means that, in principle, the ICC will prioritize national processes before getting involved itself. Only when a state has exhausted all its domestic judicial remedies and is deemed unable or unwilling to try an accused fairly will the ICC begin its own investigation. There are several compelling reasons for this, among which is respecting the sovereignty of states, thus preserving the capacity of the ICC as a last resort, not a first resort. Although I am not a legal expert nor do I know how judicial powers are distributed between Israel and Palestine, which is not yet a sovereign state, this complaint could also be considered a contempt for Israel's democracy. A few days ago, the Attorney General of Israel Gali Baharav-Miara spoke about this very thing, recalling that in Israel there is a judicial system that is very capable of judging all complaints that are presented, on the other hand, as is the case in most democratic states. Western countries, not like what happens in the banana republics of Iran, Syria or Palestine.
Precisely the judicial system of Spain, one of the countries that is currently making itself known the most against Israel, could well be more typical of a banana republic than of a Western democracy. In Spain, the Judges for Democracy association is the very minority association of Spanish judges who defend doing things as in normal democracies in other countries, or it would almost be the same to say that they are the judges of the socialists, while the rest or the vast majority of Spanish judges are "apolitical or independent", that is, those who do not want to harm themselves or flagellate themselves by losing any scrap or crumbs left to them by the other judges that they must all know very well. According to recent articles published in the left-wing press, the judges that everyone knows are 33% of the Spanish judges from the ultra-Catholic sect of Opus, plus the many other fascist judges and those from other ultra-Catholic sects that there must surely be. The Opus normally does not advertise on the streets, or not if they are not going to get some benefit, no one has to know who is from the Opus, they are not distinguished unless someone has a gift that can identify those who believe themselves to be Catholic saints. living. In regions like Navarra, highly penetrated by this sect, news about grotesque sentences have been common, for example accusing women perhaps only for being feminists, or releasing sexists, even murderers who are similar to them, as was the case of the psychiatrist José Diego Yllanes Vizcay. The highest Spanish courts and judicial bodies are also always with political disputes, until recently they became completely unusable for years due to this, because the two majority parties intend to place their judges with similar interests and thus ensure that they will win the sentences that favor them. . These quarrels of the Spanish judges have reached the Strasbourg Court or Court of Human Rights of the European Union, another pantomime court almost modeled on the ICC, where after some very dirty quarrels in the end the Opus Dei judge won the place reserved for Spain. María Elósegui Itxaso, curiously, it seems that they also scammed the Europeans by giving a place to women, this judge being as feminist and homophobic as the judges of Iran are.
I appreciate your addition to my letter. It's good that people see that beans are cooked everywhere.
A lot of talk, Mau. They are a zoo of stupid sons of bitches. Shitty Islamists. Don't waste your time on that garbage.
Telling truths is never wasting time. I just don't go down to the level of my opponent.
I hope that this letter is translated and actually read by members of the International Court because leaving it only in Aurora Digital does not make sense.
This letter has already been read at least where I know of it: New York, Mexico, Uruguay, probably in other places. The important thing is that there are many people who read that there is another point of view that differs from the person or entity to whom the letter is addressed.