logo
Court to decide whether former dictator Assad can be stripped of immunity

Court to decide whether former dictator Assad can be stripped of immunity

Irish Examiner3 days ago
France's highest court is ruling on Friday on whether it can strip the head of state immunity of Bashar Assad, the former leader of Syria now in exile in Russia, because of the brutality of the evidence in accusations against him collected by Syrian activists and European prosecutors.
If the judges at the Cour de Cassation lift Assad's immunity, it could pave the way for his trial in absentia over the use of chemical weapons in Ghouta in 2013 and Douma in 2018, and set a precedent to allow the prosecution of other government leaders linked to atrocities, human rights activists and lawyers say.
Assad has retained no lawyers for these charges and has denied he was behind the chemical attacks.
A ruling against Assad would be 'a huge victory for the victims', said Mazen Darwish, president of the Syrian Centre for Media which collected evidence of war crimes.
500,000 The number of people believed to have died in Syria's 13-year civil war
'It's not only about Syrians, this will open the door for the victims from any country and this will be the first time that a domestic investigative judge has the right to issue an arrest warrant for a president during his rule.'
He said the ruling could enable his group to legally go after regime members, like launching a money laundering case against former Syrian central bank governor and minister of economy, Adib Mayaleh, whose lawyers have argued he had immunity under international law.
For over 50 years, Syria was ruled by Hafez Assad and then his son, Bashar. During the Arab Spring, rebellion broke out against their tyrannical rule in 2011 across the country of 23 million, igniting a brutal 13-year civil war that killed more than half a million people, according to the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights.
Millions more fled to Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and Europe.
The Assad dynasty manipulated sectarian tensions to stay in power, a legacy driving renewed violence in Syria against minority groups despite promises that the country's new leaders will carve out a political future for Syria that includes and represents all its communities.
The ruling stripping Assad's immunity could set a 'significant precedent' that 'could really set the stage for potentially for other cases in national jurisdictions that strike down immunities,' said Mariana Pena, a human rights lawyer at the Open Society Justice Initiative, which helped bring the case to court.
As the International Criminal Court has issued arrests warrants for leaders accused of atrocities — like Vladimir Putin in Ukraine, Benjamin Netanyahu in Gaza, and Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines — the French judges' ruling could empower the legal framework to prosecute not just deposed and exiled leaders but those currently in power.
The Syrian government denied in 2013 that it was behind the Ghouta attack, an accusation the opposition rejected as Assad's forces were the only side in the brutal civil war to possess sarin.
The United States subsequently threatened military retaliation, but Washington settled for a deal with Moscow for Assad to give up his chemical weapons' stockpile.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Spending on infrastructure makes sense, cutting VAT on hospitality is quite mad
Spending on infrastructure makes sense, cutting VAT on hospitality is quite mad

Irish Times

time32 minutes ago

  • Irish Times

Spending on infrastructure makes sense, cutting VAT on hospitality is quite mad

Looking at the performance of the economy over the last 18 months, things look pretty good, as long as you aren't looking for somewhere to live. On to an already buoyant economy, last year's election budget ploughed in more money, equivalent to more than 1 per cent of national income. With full employment, this served to further drive up domestic demand, and also house prices. It hasn't made us much better off, even if it proved popular and garnered a few votes. As election budgets go, it could have been worse. The election budget of 1977 was the biggest culprit in the economic misery of the 1980s, and the election budget of 2007 pushed the economy and house prices to new heights, leaving it even further to fall in the ensuing financial crisis. By these standards last year's election splurge, while ill-conceived, was much less damaging. This year, with no election in sight, it should be time for wiser counsels to prevail in government. While we are seeing continuing growth in the economy, the Department of Finance provides a much more sombre assessment of what is to come due to US president Donald Trump 's wrecking ball. READ MORE Tariffs and a possible trade war would directly affect Ireland, with possibly more serious consequences stemming from the damage done to the wider European Union economy. While this downbeat assessment calls for fiscal caution, instead of heeding their own advice, the Government plans to increase expenditure next year by more than 7 per cent, while national income may rise by 5 per cent. This might be acceptable if they also planned a big increase in taxes , to avoid stimulating an already fully employed economy. However, without tax increases it will add to inflationary pressures. [ What did the summer economic statement really tell us about Budget 2026? Opens in new window ] The Government also, correctly, has highlighted the huge deficit in infrastructure in Ireland stemming from the economic success of the last decade. In countries such as Germany, Italy and Greece, more older people die each year, vacating their homes, than new young households are formed. As a result, these countries don't need a big increase in housing or in related infrastructure. In contrast, with our rapidly growing population, we need to invest in more housing, water and energy, as being provided now in the updated National Development Plan (NDP). [ We need to confront the reality that the housing shortage can't be solved Opens in new window ] While the Government has the money to spend on building more infrastructure, this will work only if a range of other complementary policies are implemented. Firstly, while spending money on infrastructure makes sense, in a fully employed economy we need to redirect resources from other sectors to building and construction. For example, the plan to cut VAT on catering and accommodation is quite mad. The latest data shows that that sector is booming. Instead we need to free up resources for new building by spending less in other economic sectors. In sectors that are already thriving, it could make more sense to raise taxes than to lower them, to encourage redirection of labour to our most urgent problem, housing . David McWilliams on how 'big incentives' to build could save Dublin city Listen | 36:51 The NDP sensibly provides funding to build new wires to link homes and businesses with electricity generation. There is also funding for a long overdue metro for Dublin , and to bring water from the Shannon to Dublin to tackle the knife-edge water supply in the capital. However, these projects will get under way only if the planning and regulatory systems are dramatically reformed. It has already taken five years for planners to consider a verdict on the metro. Countries such as Spain would have built the metro in that time, instead of merely scrutinising the plans. The North-South electricity interconnector was announced 20 years ago, while planning delays on both sides of the Border mean it will be 2032 before it finally happens. Once started, the actual construction will just take months to complete, not the decades spent in planning. The need to pipe water from the Shannon to Dublin was established over a decade ago, yet it could be many more years before it is delivered under the present planning system. In the 19th century, specific legislation was enacted to build our railway system. As Michael McDowell has suggested, a similar legislative approach should be taken today to developing key infrastructure. [ There is a way to unblock Ireland's infrastructural logjam Opens in new window ] We need to enact a specific legal mandate, in the overriding national interest, to drive forward critical projects and avoid the endless round of planning applications, appeals and judicial reviews. Had we done that for the metro, it would have been finished a decade ago. But unless the planning system is reformed, I'm unlikely during my lifetime to ride the metro or drink Shannon water from my tap.

What sparked conflict between Cambodia and Thailand – and will it lead to all-out war?
What sparked conflict between Cambodia and Thailand – and will it lead to all-out war?

Irish Independent

time40 minutes ago

  • Irish Independent

What sparked conflict between Cambodia and Thailand – and will it lead to all-out war?

At least 34 people have been killed and more than 200,000 displaced as the countries, both popular tourist destinations, fight over a smattering of contested border temples. Thailand has struck ­Cambodian targets with F-16 fighter jets in ­response to what it said were ­Cambodian rockets fired into four Thai provinces. Today, both leaders will meet for peace talks in Malaysia, even as both sides accused each other of ­launching fresh artillery strikes across contested areas yesterday. Here's what you need to know about the conflict. Why are Thailand and Cambodia fighting? The disputes boil down to differing interpretations of colonial-era maps drawn more than a century ago by the French − who once colonised Cambodia − and by Siam (modern-day Thailand). The maps had conflicting delineations of the 817km border, particularly around a series of important ancient temples. The ambiguity led to a legal battle at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 1962, which ruled that the 11th-century temple Preah Vihear belonged to Cambodia. While a disgruntled Thailand withdrew from the temple itself, it continued to maintain a claim on the surrounding area. But in 2008, tensions flared again when Cambodia sought to register the ancient temple as a Unesco World Heritage Site, prompting strong objections from Thailand. Small skirmishes and a renewed war of words followed, with clashes between the countries killing 20 people and displacing thousands. In 2011, Cambodia returned to the ICJ, which again ruled in its favour. However, the court did not rule on all of the disputed zones and, in turn, Thailand rejected the court's jurisdiction. 'Cambodia won at the ICJ and Thailand has been very unhappy about it ever since,' Phil Robertson, a Bangkok-based analyst and director of Asia Human Rights and Labour Advocates, said. 'There are antiques [in the temples], and there are issues of cross-border trade − there have always been issues. Neither side wants to be seen giving away an inch of territory to the other,' he added. 'It's like political suicide.' What caused the most recent clash? Violence in the region had largely subsided since 2013, but ­tensions flared again in May after a ­Cambodian soldier was killed during a skirmish on the border. ADVERTISEMENT Relations have slowly deteriorated since, in what has become a tit-for-tat dispute. Despite both countries saying they had agreed to de-escalate, both sides have amassed troops on the border. Last week, three Thai soldiers were injured, with one losing their foot, when a landmine in a contested area exploded. Thailand accused Cambodia of recently deploying the mines, saying the Russian-made devices were not part of its arsenal. Cambodia denied the 'baseless' accusations, stating that the unexploded ordnance were remnants of 20th-century wars. On Wednesday, five more Thai ­soldiers were wounded by an explosion, with one losing a leg. In response, Thailand closed all of its northeastern land crossings with Cambodia, withdrew its ambassador from Phnom Penh, and expelled the Cambodian ambassador in Bangkok. Early on Thursday, Cambodia responded in kind, announcing that it had expelled the Thai ambassador and recalled all Cambodian staff from its Bangkok embassy. The country also declared that diplomatic relations with Thailand had been downgraded to the lowest level. Cambodia has also banned Thai movies and TV shows, stopped the import of Thai fuel, fruits and vegetables, and boycotted some of its neighbour's international internet links and power supply. What happened on Thursday? On Thursday morning, clashes broke out along the Thai-Cambodian border, with much of the fighting centred around a 1,000-year-old Khmer-Hindu temple called Prasat Ta Muen Thom. Both sides accused the other of opening fire first. According to reports, shots were heard at around 8.20am from an area about 200 meters east of Prasat Ta Muen Thom. Thai soldiers said they had earlier detected the sound of a drone and spotted six armed ­Cambodian soldiers. Ongoing clashes have since been reported in at least six locations along the disputed border. According to the Thai army, Cambodia fired two BM-21 rockets at the Thai province of Surin. Thailand, meanwhile, hit back with F-16s. What has happened since? Civilian deaths have since been reported on both sides. Yesterday, Thailand reported a new death of a soldier, bringing the total number of fatalities to 21, mostly civilians. Cambodia said 13 people have been killed. Could this escalate into a ­full-blown war? Most analysts believe that prolonged conflict is unlikely, as previous exchanges of fire have all dissipated relatively quickly. However, they note that events over the last few months have fanned nationalist sentiment at home, ­especially in Thailand, where the dispute has had major political ramifications. Paetongtarn Shinawatra, ­Thailand's prime minister, was suspended after leaked audio of a call with Hun Sen, the Cambodian de facto leader. In the call, Ms Paetongtarn criticised her own military and kowtowed to the Cambodian, calling him 'uncle'. The two families, both political dynasties, had previously been considered close. Now, the scandal threatens the Shinawatra clan's three decades of dominance of Thai politics. It also means that the Thai government fears being seen as weak, according to analysts. 'With Thai soldiers wounded by Cambodian landmines in apparent violation of the Ottawa Treaty, and now with the latest reports of injured Thai civilians and fatalities, the pressure on Thai political as well as military leaders is mounting,' said Tita Sanglee, a Thai-based associate fellow at the ISEAS−Yusof Ishak Institute, a think-tank in Singapore. 'Continued restraint may no longer be viable as it risks escalating a crisis of public trust. So, as things stand, I don't see de-escalation coming soon. The real question is how far the fighting might go,' she said. Mr Robertson added: 'I don't see ­either side interested in ­c­ompromising at this point… I think the fight is on. Unless there's some sort of mediation, I don't think either side wants to give any leeway to the other. The Thai government is already facing problems connected to the phone call with Hun Sen… so they can't be seen as weak.' He also said that Mr Sen may also be using the situation to boost his son, who has so far largely struggled to step out of his father's shadow. It may also prove a distraction from a struggling economy at home. 'I think Hun Sen is whipping it up, in part, to create an atmosphere so his son can become a wartime leader,' Mr Robertson said. China, which has influence in both countries, has expressed deep concern about the developments and hopes that both sides will address ­issues through dialogue and ­consultations. The foreign spokes­person also said China intends to play a constructive role in promoting peace. Europe, the US or ASEAN − a regional bloc of 11 south-east Asian countries − may also intervene to encourage both sides to de-escalate. What's next? Thai and Cambodian leaders will meet in Malaysia today for talks to end the fighting, a Thai ­government spokesperson said. It follows ­pressure from Donald Trump, who suggested he would not move forward with trade agreements with either country if the hostilities ­continued.

Trump's deal with Europe sucks for Ireland and what the EU is importing
Trump's deal with Europe sucks for Ireland and what the EU is importing

Irish Daily Mirror

time3 hours ago

  • Irish Daily Mirror

Trump's deal with Europe sucks for Ireland and what the EU is importing

Europe is poised to embrace a surge of American vehicles and energy following Brussels securing an eleventh-hour trade agreement with Donald Trump, barely averting a transatlantic trade war. The pact, revealed on Sunday, means the European Union will now encounter a uniform 15 per cent levy on exports to the United States—cutting in half the 30 per cent rate previously threatened by the former president. In return, Mr Trump stated the EU had consented to eliminate tariffs completely on US goods entering the bloc. Nevertheless, in stark contrast to the EU's negotiations with the UK over Brexit, where complex matters such as implementing trade obstacles across the Irish Sea arose, this time Ireland's interests appear to have been relegated to the lower end of the bloc's priorities. How significant is Trump's agreement with Europe? Under the arrangement, the EU will purchase $750bn (£558bn) of energy from the United States and pledge an additional $600bn in investments into the world's largest economy. "We are agreeing that the tariff straight across for automobiles and everything else will be a tariff of 15pc," said Mr Trump, who has consistently advocated for Europe to purchase more American oil and gas. "We have the opening up of all the European countries, which were essentially closed. You were not exactly taking our autos, you weren't exactly taking our agriculture. Now it is open. "It is open for our companies to go in and do a good job." Europe is set to welcome a wave of American cars and energy after Brussels clinched a deal (Image: Getty) Mr Trump stated the agreement would provide Europeans with enhanced access to US pickup trucks and SUVs, with commerce between the two economies now poised to grow. "They [Europe] are going to make a lot of money with this," he said. "I think everybody is. And it is going to bring a lot of unity and friendship." Financial markets have been rattled in recent months by Mr Trump's fluctuating trade policies, with the tariff standoff generating uncertainty for global investors and governments. What does Trump hope to achieve with his Europe trade deal? Ms von der Leyen said the objective of the agreement was to "rebalance" trade flows between the two sides. "The starting point was an imbalance, a surplus on our side and a deficit on the US side, and we wanted to rebalance that," she said. "We wanted to do it in a way that trade goes on between the two of us, across the Atlantic. "The two biggest economies should have good trade flowing: rebalance, but enable trade on both sides, which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, which means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic. That was important to us." The agreement excludes steel and aluminium, which will still face higher tariffs of 50 per cent when exported to the US. British exports of the same materials face a reduced tariff of 25 per cent. Bad for Ireland: drugs firms left out of deal This exclusion could prove a major blow to Ireland, which depends heavily on its pharmaceutical exports. "We have to have them made in the US," Mr Trump declared. "We want them made in the US. Pharmaceuticals are very special. "We can't be in a position where we are relying on other countries. Europe is going to make pharmaceuticals, drugs and everything else for us too, a lot, but we are going to make our own." The Irish government has voiced concerns that looming US tariffs could deal a major blow to the country's pharmaceutical sector, which employs around 45,000 people. Ministers are particularly worried about the impact on multinational drug companies based in Ireland, following signals from Washington that the pharmaceutical industry may be the next target in a broader trade clampdown. While the EU's new trade agreement with Donald Trump excluded pharmaceuticals from immediate tariff hikes, the US has made clear that it still plans to address the sector in separate talks. Claus Vistesen, from Pantheon Macroeconomics, stated that the agreed 15 per cent tariff was less severe than many feared, and unlikely to alarm financial markets-but he warned it would still dent both the EU and US economies. "Trump is finding a middle ground," Mr Vistesen commented. "He is still shooting himself in the foot. US consumers will pay higher prices, and growth in trading partners will be lower than it would have otherwise been."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store