Neither The ICC Nor The US Responds When The PA Falsifies Documents Or Destroys Evidence (Daled Amos) ~ EoZ

Wednesday, July 13, 2022

Neither The ICC Nor The US Responds When The PA Falsifies Documents Or Destroys Evidence (Daled Amos)

By Daled Amos

Abbas and the Palestinian Authority sometimes bend the truth.

Take for instance in May 3, 2017, when Abbas came to the White House and told then-President Trump about their inculcation of peace:

"Mr. President, I affirm to you that we are raising our children and our grandchildren on a culture of peace."

Palestinian Media Watch captures the moment in a video, along with examples of what the PA is actually teaching Palestinian children to say:

(The complete video is available at the above link)

It just goes to show you that when it comes to brainwashing their children to hate, the PA can really give Hamas and their videos a run for their money.

The dishonesty of Abbas and the PA goes further however, and extends to manipulating the law and distorting evidence.

On May 19, 2020, Abbas -- who has a history of threatening to quit and to annul the Oslo Accords -- did it again, claiming that the PA no longer saw itself as being obligated by its agreements and accords that it had signed with Israel.

Maurice Hirsch, Head of Legal Strategies at PMW, writes that on that day Abbas in fact proclaimed the end of the Oslo Accords:

The Palestine Liberation Organization and the State of Palestine are absolved, as of today, of all the agreements and understandings with the American and Israeli governments and of all the obligations based on these understandings and agreements, including the security ones.

[Wafa, Official PA News Agency, May 19, 2020, Official PA TV, May 19, 2020] [Emphasis added]

The day after Abbas made the announcement, Palestinian PM Shtayyeh released a press release:

“During the meeting, Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Shtayyeh confirmed the Palestinian government's full support to the decision announced yesterday by H.E. President Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian leadership that we are absolved of all signed agreements and understandings with the Israeli and American sides. The Prime Minister stressed that we would work on translating this decision on the ground.”

[Office of the PA PM, Press release, May 21, 2020 (http://www.palgov.ps/en/article/230/Remarks-by-Prime-Minister-Dr-Mohammad-Shtayyeh-During-the-Emergency-Cabinet-Meeting)]

And a week later Shtayyeh again confirmed that all agreements with Israel were null and void:

“Today, the Cabinet will finalize plans related to the leadership’s decision, headed by President Mahmoud Abbas, that Palestine is absolved of all agreements with Israel.”

[Office of the PA PM, Press release, June 1, 2020 (http://www.palgov.ps/en/article/231/Remarks-by-Prime-Minister-Dr-Mohammad-Shtayyeh-at-the-Weekly-Cabinet-Meeting) emphasis added]

And that got the attention of the ICC.

The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber requested information from Abbas “to provide additional information on this statement [by Abbas cancelling all agreements with Israel], including on the question whether it pertains to any of the Oslo agreements between Palestine and Israel.”

Sure enough, Abbas responded -- and lied to the ICC:

“Substantively, the Statement declares that if Israel proceeds with annexation, a material breach of the agreements between the two sides, then it will have annulled any remnants of the Oslo Accords and all other agreements concluded between them.”

[PA submission to ICC - PTC, June 4, 2020 https://www.icc-cpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2020_02277.PDF] [emphasis added]

Abbas lied, claiming it was merely a warning and not a declaration. Abbas knew that if he admitted that the PA actually annulled the Oslo Accords, the PA -- and his presidency -- would be null and void as well.

But as Hirsch points out, Abbas lied about something else -- his voluntary confession to a war crime.

During Abbas's original speech, he also proclaimed:

Currently, [the Israelis] have asked the banks not to pay the prisoners, [but] we will pay, no matter what they want. (literally: “against the will of their father.” emphasis added)

And he liked so much how that sounded that Abbas broadcast that excerpt on PA TV 5 times:

Abbas: “We vow to our honorable Martyrs and heroic prisoners – [The Israelis] have asked the banks not to pay the prisoners, [but] we will pay, no matter what they want."

[Official PA TV, Abbas’ original speech on May 19, 2020, broadcast on May 20, 2020]

However, when Abbas dutifully responded to the ICC request for the text of his speech -- he changed what he actually said:

Eighth: … We pledge to our honoured martyrs, our brave prisoners and our heroic wounded to remain faithful to our oath until victory, freedom, independence and return are achieved...

No mention that Abbas proudly boasted that he was going to continue his pay-for-slay policy.

Why not?

Because 5 months earlier, on December 5, 2019, the The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) came out with its Report on Preliminary Examination Activities, detailing its preliminary examination into situations under consideration for possible investigation. While Israel was one of those under consideration -- so too was the Palestinian Authority:

According to this, the ICC was considering the PA not only for the crime against humanity of torture -- but also for the possible Rome Statute crime of paying stipends to families of Palestinian terrorists (pay-for-slay).

But it's not as if Abbas really had anything to worry about. I asked Lt. Col Hirsch if Abbas faced any backlash for falsifying the document he gave to the PA. He confirmed:

The Prosecutor said nothing. While the court referred to the document, it said nothing about the fact that the version submitted was falsified.

For that matter, the ICC seemed equally unconcerned with the torture and pay-for-slay policy of the PA as well. When the ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda opened the formal investigation into war crimes

Ms Bensouda said there was a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes were committed in the context of the war, and that charges could be filed against Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel and members of Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. [emphasis added]

While Hamas and "other Palestinian armed groups" were mentioned, it was 'in the context of war.' There was no mention of the torture and terrorist payments conducted by the PA. That would be the same PA that happily met with Bensouda to help her prepare for declaring the investigation of Israel.

Photo by WAFA, the official PA news agency, showing PA Prime Minister Shtayyeh meeting with ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda in February, 2020

It is not surprising then to find another example of the PA's disregard for truth and the law when it comes to the investigation into the death of Shireen Abu Akleh -- and how it is ignored.

It took nearly 2 months before the PA finally turned over the alleged bullet that it claims killed Abu Akleh. What are we supposed to make of that delay?

According to JNS:

the bullet had no “chain of custody,” so the P.A. could not prove it was the same bullet that killed Akleh. As evidence, it would be inadmissible in any American court. The fact that the P.A. waited so long to release the bullet, even though it was too damaged to be of any use, also casts doubt on its credibility.

But leave it to The Washington Post to spin the Palestinian delay in handing over the bullet in a positive light:

The Palestinian Authority on Saturday said it has given the bullet that killed Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh to American forensic experts, taking a step toward resolving a standoff with Israel over the investigation into her death...It signaled that both sides may be working to find a solution to the deadlock.

The fact that the PA has falsified a document to the ICC in the past, might justify a more skeptical view.

On the issue of the nature of the damage done to the bullet, leading physicist and ballistic expert Nahum Shahaf is suspicious:

"the bullet underwent a severe transformation at the hands of a hammer that created a deep depression in its back, which cannot be formed by the projectile's movement alone"...Regarding alterations made to the bullet prior to the PA allowing foreign experts to analyze it, Shahaf says he can detect streaks of crushing as well as an internal depression, which can only be produced by a hammer of enormous weight. The squeezing in question was performed on the back of the bullet and not its front, which smashes on impact. [emphasis added]

This makes the conclusion reached by the US on the incident rival the ICC when it comes to treating the Palestinian Authority with kid gloves. Based in part on the damaged, unverified bullet, the US came to the conclusion that the bullet was likely fired from the Israeli position, but not intentionally. How it was possible to reach this conclusion -- which left neither the PA nor Israel happy -- is unclear. But some kind of conclusion was necessary to try and resolve the issue before Biden's arrival in the Middle East was necessary.

And like the ICC, no official US condemnation of the delay in delivering the bullet or of the unexplained damage to the bullet was forthcoming.

Neither the falsification of a document nor the destroying of evidence by the PA merits a response.

But there is hope for some kind of justice:

The U.N. Committee against Torture (CAT) — a subsidiary of the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) — convenes today in Geneva, where it will investigate instances of enforced disappearances, violent interrogations and the holding of the remains of Israeli soldiers, among other issues. In addition to investigating the Palestinian Authority, the committee will also probe Botswana, Nicaragua and the United Arab Emirates.

In accordance with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Palestinian Authority was required to submit a report detailing its adherence to the convention.

Not surprisingly, there is no mention of the Palestinian record on human rights -- only on Israel.

Also noted in the article: