The report of the committee explicitly states that its sources of information were strictly limited to reports obtained through diplomatic channels from Turkey and Israel. So, it completely ignored the evidence gathered by other international organizations and formal UN fact finding missions. The Committee further admits that it had no mandate or means to gather the information required to make legal determinations concerning either the facts or the law: 5. It needs to be understood from the outset that this Panel is unique. Its methods of inquiry are similarly unique. The Panel is not a court. It was not asked to make determinations of the legal issues or to adjudicate on liability. 6. In particular, the Panel’s means of obtaining information were through diplomatic channels. The Panel enjoyed no coercive powers to compel witnesses to provide evidence. It could not conduct criminal investigations. The Panel was required to obtain its information from the two nations primarily involved in its inquiry, Turkey and Israel, and other affected States. The position is thoroughly understandable in the context of the Panel’s inquiry but the limitation is important. It means that the Panel cannot make definitive findings either of fact or law. But it can give its [uninformed] view.” — See pages 7-8 The inclusion of the statement that the blockade was legitimate and the implementation complied with the requirements of international law is neither a definitive finding of fact nor law and it is contradicted by official fact finding reports from other Secretariat officials.
Jordan foreign minister says to speak with Kerry on Israel-Palestinian conflict (Reuters)
from the article: Turkey President: Expulsion of Israeli envoy is just the first step
An American playwright has penned a gripping tale about an Israeli Arab killed in the October 2000 events — and his steadfast sister.02:58 02.05.16 | 0 comments