‘Civil society globally did a fantastic job in supporting Gaza; but governments in West are evil'
In an exclusive interview, Mr. Sourani, who founded the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) in 1995, shares the current scenario of his and his organisation's efforts to prosecute Israel for 'genocide' at the International Court of Justice.
Mr. Sournai, who is currently in Cairo, Egypt, expressed severe disappointment with Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC), adding that Mr. Khan had 'failed' the people of Gaza. It is to note that, since 2015, Sourani has led the Palestinian legal team representing victims at the ICC.
In a conversation with Al-Jazeera in April 2024, it was mentioned that you and a team of lawyers from the PCHR were working on prosecuting Israel for 'genocide' at the ICJ. Where does this stand in the present-day?
The ICJ, as you know, is a court for the states. Since January 2015, we have been trying our best and have invested in making a case move at the ICC. But, there was an incredible amount of political pressure from the U.S., especially from the then Donald Trump-led administration. Penalties were warned on anyone who would try to bring the U.S. or Israel to the ICC, at any political level. This lasted till March 2021, when the ICC chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, decided to open an investigation. However, when Karim Khan took over as the new chief prosecutor of the ICC, he did not move anywhere.
If I may interrupt, can you elaborate on why things did not move after Karim Khan took over?
We do not know, but he was talking about restructuring the court, and the investigation into Palestine and budget deficits, among others. His priorities were very confusing to us, and he refused to meet us, even in principle, for a long period of time. When the October 7, 2023, attacks took place in Israel, we tried to meet Khan on numerous occasions. He already had the decision made by Fatou Bensouda to go ahead with the investigation. All Khan had to do was to ensure the investigation went ahead, but he did not do that. He continued to refuse a meeting with us, including with his investigative team. That is when we decided to think of the ICJ, and to open the dialogue channels with Ireland and South Africa, and the latter was open to the idea. We were lucky that South Africa…took over the case at the ICJ and challenged Israel while accusing the latter of the most serious crime of genocide.
Coming back to Karim Khan, there has been recent news that he was reportedly warned to be 'destroyed', along with the ICC, if the arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant were not withdrawn. As a human rights lawyer, how do you perceive this?
Despite the first Trump-led administration deciding that it would sanction anyone who tried to demand accountability [from the U.S. or Israel], Bensouda was incredibly courageous to challenge that. She formed the investigative body and had a meeting with us, and the investigation was simply supposed to proceed. We have documented war crimes dating back to 2014 – including crimes against humanity and persecution. However, after Khan took over, he refused to meet. It is very strange that a prosecutor, and his team, who cannot visit the place [Gaza], had no interest in meeting the lawyers who had documentation of the situation. Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine erupted. Soon after, he opened an office in Kyiv and began the investigation in Ukraine with 37 investigators. But, he did not move with respect to our file. We warned them [Khan and his team] after the October 7th attacks that there is obvious evidence of plans to carry out a genocide in Gaza. Still, they did not want to meet or listen. Only after making the case at the ICJ did Khan ask to meet us, and we were reluctant. I told Khan that he was partly responsible for the blood, pain and suffering of Gaza, after October 7th. Maybe if Khan had held any Israelis accountable, according to the files he had, then they [Israel] would not have thought of doing genocide. He promised to move forward, but only after he went to Israel and met the Israeli victims… Later, he delivered the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant, but is that enough? These warrants are related to starvation and food, and not to genocide.
Do you feel that Karim has failed you [and the people of Gaza]?
Definitely. By waiting two years after taking over [to initiate action], he failed us… I do not want more than what he did for Ukraine. In one year, he had a warrant against Putin. I am damn sure that if Israel had been informed that they could be held accountable, they would have thought many times before doing what they are doing now… This is the most well-documented conflict in history, this is a genocide that was broadcast and live-streamed, and the world has been watching it?
Speaking of war crimes, do you feel that the world and the media has turned its back on Gaza?
I think the civil society, globally, did a fantastic job on [supporting] Gaza. I am very proud that the crème-de-la-crème of American universities and the generation of tomorrow stood fair, and they tried their best to voice the voiceless. They were able to speak truth to power. This includes people in London, Tokyo, Delhi and Paris, among others. It is obvious, the solidarity and support for Palestine. Our problem is not with the people…but the government's, in the U.S. and Europe, are evil. How can they support a criminal, belligerent occupation, and call a genocide a right to self-defence? I am appalled, the behaviour is selective.
I also noticed that you were no longer based in Gaza, a place that you were not willing to leave at any cost. What made you leave Gaza?
I did not leave Gaza willingly, my house was bombed. I have been a lawyer for the last 43 years, and one of my missions is to document these war crimes. I was checking whether the targeting against me was deliberate or not. My colleagues and I concluded that yes, this was deliberate. I was advised by my friends from across the world not to stay a minute longer in Gaza, because they believed that targeting was deliberate. They said that nobody will make use of you if you are dead. On the other hand, my wife and son refused to separate from me and leave for Egypt. At that time, it was 'mission impossible' to leave Gaza. But some friends intervened and got me out of there. For the first time, I feel that I am not in the right place [because I am away from Gaza].
You did mention that you had proper documentation of the alleged war crimes. Can you walk us through the testimonies of the victims, which you have gathered?
We have had a real dilemma since the latest war broke out, because we never used to document anything partly. I can assure you that whether it's in 2008, 2009, 2012, 2014, 2017 and more, we have documented every war crime – crimes against humanity, persecution – in full. But, in this war, it was 'mission impossible' to document everything. Firstly, it was extremely dangerous, so I asked everyone in my team to stay home. We decided to do selective documentation, what that means is that we had to be selective in how many places we could cover. But wherever we covered, we did it in full. We documented attacks against shelters, UNRWA schools and hundreds of people have been killed, among many other war crimes. We have major samples on every type of crime that was committed.
Do you ever plan to return to Gaza, given that there is an alleged threat to your life?
Definitely, that is the first thing on my agenda. I am a deep-rooted Gazan, my family has lived in Gaza for the last seven centuries. I chose to be in Gaza, even when I was offered work in places across the world. I know that Gaza is not the most beautiful place in the world, but that is where I belong and feel my humanity. And there is a cause and case that I am working for. I have a team in Gaza, 45 of them, they continue to document starvation, bombings, killings and displacement. We have lost three of our staff members so far, and many of our staff members have also lost their family members… Not a for second will I comprise on returning to Gaza, no matter what the price will be.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
20 minutes ago
- First Post
UK PM Starmer to convene cabinet over Gaza amid calls to recognise Palestinian state
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is expected to recall his cabinet next week to address the crisis in Gaza, following mounting pressure from Labour MPs to recognise a Palestinian state read more British Prime Minister Keir Starmer will convene a cabinet meeting next week, a government source said on Sunday, most likely to discuss the situation in Gaza after coming under growing pressure to recognise a Palestinian state. The Financial Times, which initially reported the story, said ministers, currently in a summer recess until September 1, would reconvene to discuss Gaza. Starmer's office did not immediately reply to a Reuters request for comment. The recall comes after Starmer said on Friday the British government would recognise a Palestinian state only as part of a negotiated peace deal, disappointing many in his Labour Party who want him to follow France in taking swifter action. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday France would recognise a Palestinian state, a plan that drew strong condemnation from Israel and the United States, after similar moves from Spain, Norway and Ireland last year. More than 220 members of parliament in the UK, mostly Labour members representing about a third of the House of Commons, wrote to Starmer on Friday urging him to recognise a Palestinian state. Successive British governments have said they will formally recognise a Palestinian state when the time is right, without setting a timetable or specifying the necessary conditions. Starmer's approach has been complicated by the arrival in Scotland on Friday of U.S. President Donald Trump, with whom he has built warm relations. In foreign policy terms, Britain has rarely diverged from the United States. Israel has been facing growing international criticism, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government rejects, over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
The Hindu
20 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Decoding the Jan Suraaj Party hype
Last year, Prashant Kishor transitioned from his consultant role into the dynamic arena of electoral politics. With Bihar going to the polls in October, it will be intriguing to observe how a strategist, believed to have masterminded some important political successes, will perform when he contests an election himself. Mr. Kishor, leader of the Jan Suraaj Party (JSP), points out four factors which makes the BJP a formidable electoral force: its Hindutva ideology that serves as an emotional anchor, Narendra Modi's grand narrative of India becoming a global superpower, the creation of millions of direct beneficiaries through welfare schemes, and the sheer financial and organisational strength of the party. Mr. Kishor has asserted that to defeat BJP, one would need to defeat it at least on three of the four accounts. So, how well placed is the JSP to challenge the BJP on these factors? First, ideologically, the BJP's Hindutva claim isn't just a political position; it has become an emotional ecosystem that gives people identity, purpose, and a sense of belonging to something larger than themselves. The JSP's approach has been to focus on Bihar's regional identity and development aspirations while staying studiously secular. It is intellectually honest, sure, but could it be politically naïve given that religious identity in contemporary politics has become increasingly central to how people see themselves politically? Second, Mr. Kishor's 'Bihar Badlav (Bihar Change)' campaign is receiving traction. The messaging is positive: Bihar doesn't need to wait for Delhi's permission to prosper; the State has its own strengths and possibilities. What it needs is leadership that believes in those possibilities. This seems to be resonating with some voters. This narrative is distinct from the BJP's nationalism and the traditional Opposition's criticism. Whether it is enough remains to be seen. Third, pricking a hole in the BJP's beneficiary schemes may be tedious. When a farmer gets his PM Kisan installments, or when a woman gets her Ujjwala gas connection, or when a family gets healthcare through Ayushman Bharat, they are not just receiving benefits; they are entering into a relationship with the government that makes them stakeholders in its success. Can the JSP's promise be enough to attract the voters to vote for it? Fourth, the ability of the JSP to match the BJP's and RJD's organisational structure needs to be looked at. The JSP has been able to create some ground level connects via its leaders' padyatra, but this will be put to test particularly closer to elections. The BJP-led NDA has financial resources, RSS volunteers, sophisticated data analytics, and technological infrastructure that can micro-target individual voters. The RJD has decades of organisational depth and established networks across every village in Bihar and JSP has Mr. Kishor's strategic mind. Will that be enough to challenge the NDA and the Mahagathbandhan? Another important challenge for the JSP is about how the party will be able to challenge dynastic heirs such as Tejashwi Yadav and Chirag Paswan. What makes Mr. Yadav particularly formidable is his younger age, party's organisational strength, and experience. His welfare promises are specific and credible because he has the organisational capacity to deliver them. His focus on employment and migration directly addresses voters' primary concerns. And his consistent opposition to Nitish Kumar's alliance-hopping has given him a reputation for stability that the JSP, as a new entrant, cannot claim. The BJP may find it difficult to put up a young face given its present leadership in Bihar, but JD(U) might prop up a young face such as Nitish Kumar's son Nishant Kumar or Manish Verma, a former IAS officer. At this moment, the picture seems encouraging as the JSP is generating discussion and media attention, but also sobering, since Mr. Kishor may turn out to be an influential voice rather than a decisive force. In a fragmented electoral landscape, the JSP might eventually end up being a kingmaker if neither major alliance achieves a clear majority. This could provide it with disproportionate influence relative to its electoral performance and create opportunities for future growth. Sanjay Kumar is a Professor at the Centre for Studies of Developing Societies and Chandrachur Singh is a Professor of Political Science at Hindu College, University of Delhi. Views expressed are personal
The Hindu
20 minutes ago
- The Hindu
State for the stateless: on France and Palestinian statehood
France's decision to recognise Palestinian statehood, in September, reflects President Emmanuel Macron's deep frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the ongoing war on Gaza, as well as his willingness to adopt a more pro-active and constructive approach towards finding a durable solution. Of the 193 members of the UN, 147, including India, China and Russia, have already recognised the Palestinian state. But powerful western nations, with close ties to Israel, have always stopped short of granting official recognition even if professing support for a two-state solution. But this position began to shift after the Gaza war in October 2023, with more European countries taking formal steps towards its recognition. Last year, Spain, Ireland, Norway and Slovenia recognised Palestine's independence. If Mr. Macron follows through, France will be the first G-7 member nation to do so. Such a move may not have an immediate, direct impact on the peace process. That more western European countries are now ready to take irreversible measures in favour of Palestinian statehood, ignoring strong opposition from Tel Aviv and Washington, marks a clear change in sentiment towards one of the modern world's most contentious conflicts. Mr. Macron's announcement comes at a critical juncture for the Palestinians. The war has devastated the enclave with confirmed deaths reaching 60,000 in 21 months — roughly 2.5% of its total population. In the West Bank, settler violence has displaced tens of thousands of Palestinians. Israeli Ministers have openly threatened to ethnically cleanse Gaza and annex the West Bank. Images of starving and malnourished children, which came out of Gaza last week, have jolted global conscience. Even Israel's closest allies, including Britain, Canada and France, issued a rare joint statement, urging Mr. Netanyahu to 'immediately end the humanitarian catastrophe'. Under mounting pressure, Israel has announced 'tactical pauses' in its attacks. But this is far from sufficient. What Gaza urgently needs is a complete end to the bombings and shelling, and the full opening of its borders to humanitarian aid. Given that pressure is the only language Israel appears to understand, and with the Donald Trump presidency showing no willingness to apply it, Europe must do more. Efforts to end the war, which in terms of mass killings, devastation and displacement is comparable to the 1948-49 Nakba, must be accompanied by initiatives to ensure that such a catastrophe is never repeated. There should be concrete measures from the international community to pursue a durable political solution, which is the two-state solution. The first step in that direction is the recognition of Palestinian independence and statehood. France has promised to join, though belatedly, most member-countries of the UN in the statehood push. Other nations in the West must follow.
