Gabriel Helou

On October 2 nd , 2018, Jamal Khashoggi entered the Saudi Consulate General in Istanbul, Turkey, to pick up marriage documents - wherefrom he never reemerged. He was murdered at the Consulate by a team of 15 members, which included a forensic expert. According to reports, his body was then dismembered. Saudi Arabia’s official version about Khashoggi’s death has changed with each passing day. Nevertheless, all leaks and reports lead to one same conclusion: the killing of Khashoggi was a premeditated murder, ordered by top echelons of the Saudi Monarchy, namely the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. Today, Turkish President Erdoğan corroborated before the Turkish Parliament that it was pre-planned.  Furthermore, it is unimaginable that the crime was carried out without the prior knowledge of the Saudi Consul. However, the latter could have prevented it, but he never did – regardless of the reasons. In addition to committing murder, violating Khashoggi’s right t...

Source: ICRC " Rule 129. A. Parties to an international armed conflict may not deport or forcibly transfer the civilian population of an occupied territory, in whole or in part, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand. B. Parties to a non-international armed conflict may not order the displacement of the civilian population, in whole or in part, for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand. Summary State practice establishes these rules as norms of customary international law applicable in international (A) and non-international (B) armed conflicts respectively. International armed conflicts The prohibition of the deportation or transfer of civilians goes back to the Lieber Code, which provides that “private citizens are no longer … carried off to distant parts”. [1]  Under the Charter of the International Military Tribunal (Nu...

Source:   ICRC   “Rule 51. Public and Private Property in Occupied Territory Rule 51. In occupied territory: (a) movable public property that can be used for military operations may be confiscated; (b) immovable public property must be administered according to the rule of usufruct; and (c) private property must be respected and may not be confiscated; except where destruction or seizure of such property is required by imperative military necessity. Summary State practice establishes this rule as a norm of customary international law applicable in international armed conflicts. Movable public property The rule that all movable public property that may be used for military operations may be confiscated is a long-standing rule of customary international law already recognized in the Lieber Code, the Brussels Declaration and the Oxford Manual. [1]  It is codified in the Hague Regulations, which provides that the following may be confiscated: “...

Source: ICRC “ 1. What is occupation?  Article 42 of the 1907 Hague Regulations (HR) states that a "territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territory where such authority has been established and can be exercised." According to their common Article 2, the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 apply to any territory occupied during international hostilities. They also apply in situations where the occupation of state territory meets with no armed resistance. The legality of any particular occupation is regulated by the UN Charter and the law known as  jus ad bellum.  Once a situation exists which factually amounts to an occupation the law of occupation applies – whether or not the occupation is considered lawful. Therefore, for the applicability of the law of occupation, it makes no difference whether an occupation has received Security Council approval, what its aim is, ...

Today, the Israeli High Court of Justice dismissed the petitions of the residents of Khan Al-Ahmar Bedouin community, east of Jerusalem, and ruled to demolish the community.  The Court also ruled that the demolition can be carried out within a week. ------------------------------ The demolition of Khan Al-Ahmar would constitute war crimes: - forcible transfer - wanton and extensive destruction of private property, not justified by military necessity

UN General Assembly Resolution 302 (IV) of 8 December 1949, which established the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

My photos of Jerusalem For more photos, click here