1. Demands an immediate ceasefire for the month of Ramadan respected by all parties leading to a lasting sustainable ceasefire, and also demands the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access to address their medical and other humanitarian needs, and further demands that the parties comply with their obligations under international law in relation to all persons they detain;Israel's UN ambassador Gilad Erda reacted:
Gilad Erdan, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Israel, questioned why the Security Council “discriminates” among victims, recalling that it condemned the deadly attack on a concert hall in Moscow on Friday, but failed to condemn the Nova music festival massacre of 7 October.“Civilians, no matter where they live, deserve to enjoy music in safety and security, and the Security Council should have the moral clarity to condemn such acts of terror equally, without discrimination,” he said.“Sadly, today as well, this Council refused to condemn the 7 October massacre; this is a disgrace,” he added.Mr. Erdan further noted that for the past 18 years, Hamas initiated ceaseless attacks against Israelis, launching "thousands and thousands of indiscriminate rockets and missiles against civilians”.He added that while the resolution failed to condemn Hamas, it did “state something that should have been the driving moral force”.“This resolution denounces the taking of hostages, recalling that it is in violation of international law,” he said, underscoring that taking innocent civilians hostage is a war crime.“When it comes to bringing the hostages home, the Security Council must not settle for words alone, but take action, real action,” he said.
Rule 96. The taking of hostages is prohibited.Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions prohibits the taking of hostages. It is also prohibited by the Fourth Geneva Convention and is considered a grave breach thereof....The International Convention against the Taking of Hostages defines the offence as the seizure or detention of a person (the hostage), combined with threatening to kill, to injure or to continue to detain the hostage, in order to compel a third party to do or to abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the hostage. The Elements of Crimes for the International Criminal Court uses the same definition but adds that the required behaviour of the third party could be a condition not only for the release of the hostage but also for the safety of the hostage. It is the specific intent that characterizes hostage-taking and distinguishes it from the deprivation of someone’s liberty as an administrative or judicial measure.Although the prohibition of hostage-taking is specified in the Fourth Geneva Convention and is typically associated with the holding of civilians as hostages, there is no indication that the offence is limited to taking civilians hostage. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the Statute of the International Criminal Court and the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages do not limit the offence to the taking of civilians, but apply it to the taking of any person. Indeed, in the Elements of Crimes for the International Criminal Court, the definition applies to the taking of any person protected by the Geneva Conventions.
Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism today at Amazon! Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. Read all about it here! |
|