Connect with us

News

US Halts British Court Hearing on Diego Garcia Over Security Concerns

Published

on

US Halts British Court Hearing on Diego Garcia Over Security Concerns

The US government has obstructed a British court hearing from occurring in the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), citing security concerns. The BIOT Supreme Court was scheduled to hear a case regarding the alleged unlawful detention of migrants on Diego Garcia, a heavily restricted island hosting a UK-US military base.

Key Points:

  • Hearing Blocked: The US withdrew consent for lawyers representing the migrants to travel to Diego Garcia and announced it would not provide transport, accommodation, or food for hearing attendees until security concerns were resolved. This decision came late Thursday, just hours before the journey from the UK was set to begin.
  • UK-Based Hearing: Due to the US intervention, a hearing is now being held in the UK to determine the next steps.
  • Historical Background: The Chagos Islands, including Diego Garcia, were separated from Mauritius by the UK in 1965 to create the BIOT. Over 1,000 residents were evicted to establish the military base. Agreements signed in 1966 allowed US use of the territory for an initial 50 years, extended by 20 years, now set to expire in 2036.
  • Legal Dispute: Mauritius, which gained independence from the UK in 1968, claims the islands as its own. The United Nations’ highest court has ruled that the UK’s administration of the territory is “unlawful” and should end.
  • US Control: The US controls most personnel, resources, accommodation, and transport on Diego Garcia. The US military commander has the authority to deny access to areas under US military operation for security reasons.
  • Security Concerns: The specific nature of the US security concerns is unclear, but they are believed to be related to a planned “site visit” during the hearing, which would have included the migrant camp and other island areas.

The BIOT official website states that access to the islands is restricted to individuals connected to the military facility or the Territory’s Administration, underscoring the area’s sensitivity and restricted nature.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Downing Street Indicates UK Would Arrest Netanyahu if He Visits

Published

on

Downing Street Indicates UK Would Arrest Netanyahu if He Visits

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could face arrest if he enters the United Kingdom, following an international arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC), according to indications from No 10.

A spokesperson for UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak declined to comment on the specifics of Netanyahu’s case but affirmed that the government is committed to fulfilling its “legal obligations.”

The ICC issued arrest warrants on Thursday for Netanyahu, alongside former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, citing alleged war crimes in Gaza. As a signatory to the ICC treaty, the UK is obligated to enforce such warrants.

Advertisement

Under the International Criminal Court Act 2001, the UK government must transmit ICC arrest requests to a judicial officer, who then determines whether to endorse the warrant for execution within the country.

“The government would fulfil its obligations under the act and its legal obligations under both domestic and international law,” the spokesperson said, emphasizing the UK’s commitment to its treaty obligations.

When asked if Netanyahu would be detained upon arrival in the UK, the spokesperson refrained from commenting on “hypotheticals.” However, the legal framework leaves little room for discretion if a visit occurs, given the binding nature of the treaty.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Judge Delays Sentencing for Donald Trump for the Third Time

Published

on

Judge Delays Sentencing for Donald Trump for the Third Time

A New York judge has delayed the sentencing of President-elect Donald Trump for a third time as legal battles over his conviction remain unresolved. Trump’s attorneys continue to press for his conviction to be dismissed, citing presidential immunity and potential interference with his upcoming duties as president.

Originally scheduled for sentencing on November 26, Trump was convicted in May on 34 felony fraud charges. The Manhattan District Attorney, who led the prosecution, opposes efforts to overturn the conviction but has suggested delaying sentencing until after Trump’s second presidential term.

Justice Juan Merchan, presiding over the case, has paused all proceedings to review legal briefs from both sides. These submissions are due in December, but no new sentencing date has been set.

Advertisement

With Trump’s inauguration looming on January 20, the court faces increasing pressure to decide whether the conviction will stand or if sentencing will proceed.

Trump’s legal team argues that his conviction undermines the principle of presidential immunity, asserting that legal proceedings during his term would interfere with his ability to govern effectively. Critics, however, have pushed back, asserting that no one, including the president, is above the law.

This legal standoff marks another chapter in the contentious relationship between Trump and the judiciary, as the nation watches closely to see how the case unfolds in the lead-up to his second inauguration.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas Commander Over War Crimes

Published

on

ICC Issues Arrest Warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas Commander Over War Crimes

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif, accusing them of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The ICC’s pre-trial chamber stated that there are “reasonable grounds” to believe all three men bear responsibility for atrocities committed during the conflict between Israel and Hamas. These include allegations of murder, persecution, torture, and the use of starvation as a weapon of war.

For Netanyahu and Gallant, the charges stem from Israel’s military response to Hamas’s deadly October 7, 2023, attack, which left 1,200 Israelis dead and 251 abducted to Gaza. Gaza’s Hamas-led health ministry reports over 44,000 deaths during Israel’s subsequent military campaign.

Advertisement

The ICC accuses Deif, Hamas’s military leader, of orchestrating crimes such as murder, extermination, rape, and hostage-taking during the initial attack. Despite Israel’s claim that Deif was killed in an airstrike in July, the ICC included him in the warrants.

Reactions

  • Israel dismissed the ICC’s decision as “antisemitic” and reaffirmed its stance that the court lacks jurisdiction over the matter, as Israel is not a signatory to the ICC.
  • Hamas hailed the warrants for Israeli leaders as a “historic precedent,” while rejecting the charges against its own commander.
  • United States condemned the ICC’s actions, while European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell called for respecting and implementing the court’s decisions.

The warrants raise questions about enforcement, as neither Israel nor Hamas recognize the ICC, and compliance depends on the court’s 124 member states. The development marks a pivotal moment in international law’s attempt to address the human toll of the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict.

Continue Reading

Trending