German court overturns speech ban on British-Palestinian surgeon Ghassan Abu Sitta
The Administrative Court of Berlin found that authorities had no legal grounds to impose the prohibition.
Dr. Abu Sitta, who gained international prominence for his work in Gaza hospitals following the escalation of the genocide in October 2023, had been denied entry to Germany in April 2024 when he attempted to attend the Palestine Congress in Berlin.
Authorities had alleged that he sympathized with Hamas and posed a risk of committing a criminal offense or endangering Germany's democratic order.
However, the Berlin Administrative Court's decision stated there was no reasonable expectation that Dr. Abu Sitta's statements would constitute a criminal offense or threaten public safety. The court found no statements by Abu Sitta since October 7, 2023, that were of a criminal nature or indicated support for terrorist organizations.
The ruling also highlighted Dr. Abu Sitta's status as a historical eyewitness whose testimony has been heard by the International Criminal Court, emphasizing that this should have been considered by German authorities alongside his right to freedom of expression.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Roya News
7 hours ago
- Roya News
At least 20 Palestinians killed in stampede at Gaza aid site
At least 20 Palestinians were killed on Wednesday at an aid distribution site run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, in what the US- and 'Israeli'-backed organization claimed was a deadly crowd surge incited by armed individuals. GHF stated that 19 people were trampled and one person was fatally stabbed during the chaos. The group accused elements affiliated with Hamas of deliberately triggering the unrest. 'We have credible reason to believe that elements within the crowd, armed and affiliated with Hamas, deliberately fomented the unrest,' GHF said in a statement. Hamas rejected the accusation as 'false and misleading,' claiming that GHF guards and 'Israeli' soldiers sprayed people with pepper gas and opened fire. GHF denied the allegation, stating that 'at no point was tear gas deployed, nor were shots fired into the crowd,' adding that pepper spray was used 'only to safeguard additional loss of life.' Palestinian health officials said 21 people died from suffocation. The incident comes as the UN reported at least 875 deaths near Gaza aid sites over the past six weeks, mostly around GHF distribution points. Most fatalities were reportedly caused by gunfire, which locals have blamed on 'Israeli' forces. The 'Israeli' military has acknowledged civilian harm near aid sites and said new instructions were issued. The GHF operates independently of the UN-led aid system, relying on US private security and logistics firms. While 'Israel' accuses the UN mechanism of allowing Hamas to intercept aid, Hamas denies the claim. The UN has criticized the GHF model as unsafe and lacking neutrality.
Roya News
7 hours ago
- Roya News
ICC rejects 'Israel's' request to suspend Netanyahu, Gallant arrest warrants
Judges at the International Criminal Court (ICC) on Wednesday rejected 'Israel's' request to cancel the arrest warrants issued for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, pending a review of 'Israel's' challenge to the court's jurisdiction over the genocide in Gaza. In a decision published on the court's website, the judges also turned down 'Israel's' request to suspend the broader investigation into alleged atrocities committed in the Palestinian territories, according to Reuters. The ICC issued arrest warrants on November 21 for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al-Masri, known as Mohammed Deif, a senior Hamas military leader, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity during the Gaza war. In February, the court said it had withdrawn the warrant for Deif following credible reports of his death. 'Israel' rejects the ICC's jurisdiction, denies committing war crimes in Gaza, and is challenging the arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant. 'Israel' argues that an ICC Appeals Chamber decision in April, which instructed the Pre-Trial Chamber to review 'Israel's' objections to jurisdiction, nullifies the legal basis for the arrest warrants. However, the judges dismissed that reasoning, stating Wednesday that the arrest warrants remain valid while 'Israel's' jurisdictional challenge is still under review. There is currently no timeline for a ruling on the matter. In June, the United States imposed unprecedented sanctions on four ICC judges in response to the warrant against Netanyahu. Two of the sanctioned judges were among those who ruled to reject 'Israel's' request.
Khaberni
8 hours ago
- Khaberni
Why Does Israel Intervene in Syria? - A British Newspaper Answers
Khaberni -In today's press review, we discuss several topics: The first relates to the Israeli bombing of Syria, the motives behind this bombing; then we move on to Turkey, its democratic path, and what the United States and the West need to do in this regard; before concluding the tour by talking about Afghanistan and the secret smuggling of thousands of its citizens to Britain, in an attempt to understand the reasons and consequences of that step. We begin our tour from the British newspaper "The Conversation", with an article titled "Why Does Israel Bomb Syria?", by Ali Mamouri, a researcher specializing in Middle East affairs. The researcher noted that the Druze are a religious minority estimated to number about a million or slightly more, concentrated in mountainous areas stretching between Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan. Mamouri pointed out that the Druze population in Syria is close to 700,000 (out of about 23 million Syrians), with most of them living in the al-Suwayda Governorate in the south of the country - which is considered their traditional stronghold. Since the 2011 demonstrations against the Assad regime, the Druze have maintained a degree of independence and self-rule, and have succeeded in defending their land against various threats, including what is known as the Islamic State and other jihadist groups. Since the overthrow of the Assad regime last year, the Druze - along with other minorities such as the Kurds in eastern Syria, and the Alawites in the west - advocate for a federal, decentralized system, which would grant them more autonomy. However, the transitional government in Damascus pushes towards central governance and seeks to tighten its grip on the entire Syrian region, according to Mamouri, who adds: "This fundamental difference has led to recurrent clashes between Druze forces on one side and forces loyal to the government in Damascus on the other." Despite the temporary truce, tensions remain heated, and with the basic cause of the dispute still in place, many observers expect a resurgence of clashes in the near future. But "Why does Israel intervene?", the article's author sees that the fall of the Assad regime paved the way for Israel to expand its influence in southern Syria, noting that this Israeli intervention remains driven by two main reasons, according to the researcher: one is securing its northern borders, as Israel fears a power vacuum in southern Syria, seeing it as a potential threat, especially from the formation of militias hostile to it on its northern borders. For this reason, the Israeli Air Force carries out extensive attacks targeting the infrastructure of the Syrian army. The second main reason behind the Israeli intervention, according to the researcher, is support for the establishment of a federal system in Syria – something sought by the Kurds and the Druze. According to the author, "A Syria divided by sects and ethnicities is a way for Israel to maintain dominance in the region, from the viewpoint of some Israeli policymakers." He adds: "The logical path to this goal is for the various minorities in Syria to achieve self-rule under a federal system." We move on to the American magazine "Newsweek", where we read an article titled "What can Washington do to slow down the authoritarian transformation in Turkey?" - by researchers Sinan Sidy and Taylor Stapleton. The researchers begin by noting that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is tearing apart democracy in his country, becoming bolder day by day through imprisoning his political opponents, as well as beginning an endeavor to prevent about half of the main opposition party's members from sitting in parliament. The researchers were surprised by the support from both the United States and Europe for Turkey's strongman, in a way that threatens the emergence of a new comprehensive authoritarian regime on the outskirts of Europe. The researchers highlighted that Brussels, the capital of the European Union, views Ankara as a key security partner in the face of the growing Russian threat, while Washington believes that Turkey can rely on stabilizing Syria and achieving peace in Ukraine, and even in mediating between Israel and Iran. The researchers saw that such "enthusiastic" support from Erdogan's Western allies is enough to unleash his hand for further consolidation of his regime in Turkey. According to the researchers, democracy in Turkey differs from other democracies; "Yes, elections are held, but Erdogan manipulates their atmosphere in such a way that he secures victory." The researchers saw that Erdogan emptied Turkish civil society of its content and restricted freedom of press and expression; thus, there are few who dare to criticize him, and these often end up in the depths of prisons. The researchers noted Erdogan's decline in popularity, despite all the measures he takes; "However, lack of popularity is not a sufficient reason for an authoritarian ruler to lose elections... After 23 years in power, Erdogan boldly embraces undemocratic methods." The researchers pointed out that Erdogan denies his electoral competition against the Republican People's Party, referring to his arrest on March 19 of Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu on charges related to corruption. The researchers concluded saying, "Turkey today seems devoid of anyone who can curb Erdogan, making pressure from Turkey's foreign allies necessary, not just to save democracy in Turkey but also to maintain the security of the West." The researchers believe that Washington should maintain a ban on F-35 jet sales to Turkey, "As supplying these jets poses a threat by arming an ally on its way to becoming an adversary, plus the possibility that the secrets of the capabilities of these jets could reach Erdogan's friends in Russia, China, and Iran." Washington should also consider restricting sales of Turkey-made weapon systems - like drones - to entities approved by the U.S. Department of Defense, according to the researchers. The European Union, according to the researchers, should suspend ongoing negotiations regarding the reform of the Customs Union agreement with Turkey, and should require Turkey to improve human rights conditions and enhance democratic governance before increasing trade exchange between the two sides. We conclude our tour from the British "Daily Mail", with an editorial titled "Smuggling Afghans Can Only Be Evil." The newspaper commented on a data breach incident that the UK Ministry of Defense experienced in 2022, describing the incident as a "scandal that should never have happened." The article noted that a British military officer inadvertently leaked a list of 33,000 Afghans who had applied for asylum in the United Kingdom seeking safe haven. This leak left these Afghans and their families - about 100,000 people - prime targets for Taliban attacks. A year after the leak, the then Conservative government launched a secret mission to evacuate these Afghans to a safe place. So far, about 18,500 Afghans - harmed by the leak - have been secretly smuggled into the United Kingdom, according to the newspaper. Overall, it was decided to rescue 23,900 Afghans, in a mission that will cost about seven billion pounds sterling of taxpayer money. The Daily Mail believed that the Ministry of Defense was justified in doing everything possible to save the lives of people it had put at risk – due to the leak. "Yet, this catastrophic mistake has resulted in thousands of Afghans, who perhaps did not deserve asylum, being brought into Britain," according to the newspaper. The Daily Mail considered it "deeply concerning that the British Ministry of Defense seems incapable of securing data. What if such an incident occurred during a war? If confidential details about operations and movements of forces fell into the hands of the enemy, it would undoubtedly have disastrous consequences." The worst aspect of this incident is the ability of British ministers to suppress the matter and withhold the news from the public. The government's justification at the time was that any announcement about the matter might aid the Taliban in retaliating. "But, why couldn't the real reason be that the ministers were keen to hide the number of Afghans who needed to be smuggled into Britain in a secret operation, as well as the cost of this operation," according to the Daily Mail. The newspaper pointed out that the decision to obscure was lifted yesterday by a court ruling. The Daily Mail saw that such a kind of official secrecy, which the British governments enjoy, is a violation of the principle of open justice and a corruption of democracy, as well as leaving a frightening impact on freedom of expression.
