By Rachel Neuwirth, Mich News (with the assistance of Salomon Benzimra)
This article was written one year ago. And now Hezbollah announced they will sue Israel in damages.
[..] Everyone recognized that Israel was the attacked party: the G8, the UN, the EU and even Saudi Arabia in their official statement just after July 12 were all unequivocal in identifying Hezbollah as the aggressor. And yet, at the Stockholm Conference, the only thing we heard from the “international community†was pledges to assist Lebanon in its reconstruction effort as if the country had suffered a natural disaster.
This is an obscenity.
There was nothing natural in this destruction: it was the result of a war which was launched from Lebanese territory against a sovereign neighboring country. Certainly, Lebanon, as a country, did not attack Israel. Hezb’allah did. But Hezb’allah is an armed militia which is affiliated to a political party with significant representation in the Lebanese Parliament and at the ministerial level, even though it is trained, armed and spiritually supported by a foreign power, Iran. Moreover, except for his declaration on the first day of hostilities, Fouad Siniora maintained his unveiled support for Hezb’allah during the five weeks of hostilities, conveniently forgetting his obligation to disarm Hezb’allah, as required by UN Resolution 1559 which was passed two years earlier.It has also been established that the regular Lebanese army cooperated with Hezb’allah in more than one occasion. Therefore, holding Lebanon as a squeaky clean victim of aggression is also obscene. Whatever the legal responsibility of Hezb’allah-Lebanon may be in triggering the war, and conducting it, there is no doubt that Israel was the victim of aggression. But none of the participants in the Stockholm Conference ever raised this issue. Worse, some organizations even compounded the obscenity by accusing Israel.
In an appalling statement, analysts of the European-based Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt (French acronym CADTM) declared,
“Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon must demand accountability from their aggressors.â€
They went on to say that
“for Lebanon, a possible solution resides in the immediate cancellation of its debt and the establishment of funds for its reconstruction, which would be fed by reparations deposited by Israelâ€
Not content to single out Israel, CADTM suggested that the United States, which backed Israel and helps equip and finance the Israeli army, should also be liable for “reparations.†And they concluded with this pearl of Orwellian doublespeak:
“It is only then that it will be possible to say that the Lebanese people will have received justice.â€
These comments from CADTM should have provoked an uproar of indignation, but nothing was heard in the august halls of the Stockholm Conference. This silence was also obscene.
According to the report I read, Hezbollah plans to use dual-citizenship Lebanese to launch a court action in their “other country”, Canada being one of them.
Could this be dismissed as frivolous or could it create some legal harassment in Canada and elsewhere?
There is nothing for Israel to do until Hezbollah files suit. So far it is just talk.
Whether Hezbollah in its own right or in the name of nominal plaintiffs brings suit against Israel, they have to do so in some jurisdiction that permits a non-resident party to sue another non resident party. They might be able to do so in Lebanon, but Israel has no assets in Lebanon and there would be issues relating to trying to register any judgment obtained in a foreign jurisdiction where Israel has assets and one that has reciprocal enforcement of judgments laws or treaties with the jurisdiction in which the law suit was first brought.
There are quite a number of legal issues and hurdles to be faced by Hezbollah for them to even begin to carry out their threat.