Connect with us

News

France may not enforce ICC arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu

Published

on

France may not enforce ICC arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

France has suggested it would not necessarily detain Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu if he entered the country despite an outstanding arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

The French foreign ministry on Wednesday said Netanyahu could have immunity from arrest because Israel has not signed the Rome Statute, which established the ICC.

“A state cannot be compelled to act in a manner that is incompatible with its obligations under international law regarding the immunities of states not party to the ICC,” it said. “Such immunities apply to Prime Minister Netanyahu and other concerned ministers and must be taken into account if the ICC were to request their arrest and surrender.”

Advertisement

The French statement, which came a day after Paris helped the US broker a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, risks undermining the ICC by raising questions about its jurisdiction.

Rights groups including Amnesty International criticised the French position as “deeply problematic” because it ran counter to its obligations as an ICC member.

The Hague-based court last week issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant “for crimes against humanity and war crimes” allegedly committed in Israel’s offensive in Gaza.

The ICC’s 124 member states — which include most European and Latin American countries and many in Africa and Asia — are obliged to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant if they enter their territory. But the court has no means of enforcing the warrants if they do not.

While Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, a 2021 ICC ruling said the court has jurisdiction over offences committed in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip because the Palestinian territories are signatories.

Advertisement

The relationship between the Israeli prime minister and Emmanuel Macron, president of France, has become increasingly strained, with French officials sharply criticising Israel’s military operations in Gaza and Lebanon.

But France has also played a key role in trying to prevent the conflicts in the region from spreading.

The ICC warrants were a flashpoint in the muti-party talks over the Lebanon ceasefire because French foreign minister Jean-Noël Barrot angered Netanyahu after he suggested France would comply with the warrant. Barrot said “France will always apply international law” without clarifying exactly what he meant.

The warrants have sparked outrage in Israel, with Netanyahu’s office branding them “antisemitic” and calling the ICC “a biased and discriminatory political body”.

Israel on Wednesday filed appeals to the ICC over the war crimes charges and requested the court suspend the warrants pending the outcome.

Advertisement

According to the Rome Statute, the ICC has jurisdiction over all heads of state or government, even if “immunities or special procedural rules” exist under domestic or international law.

But article 98 of the statute says the court cannot request an arrest that would require a state to “act inconsistently with its obligations under international law” regarding an individual’s diplomatic immunity.

French officials did not give further details of the basis for their stance, but it raised questions over whether the same reasoning could apply to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is subject to an ICC arrest warrant for war crimes in Ukraine. Like Israel, Moscow is not a signatory to the Rome Statute.

Macron’s opponents in France attacked the government’s statement and accused it of adopting the position to gain Israel’s support for the ceasefire.

“France is once again bowing to Benjamin Netanyahu’s demands by choosing him over international justice,” said Green leader Marine Tondelier on social network X, adding that it set a dangerous precedent.

Advertisement

“If we follow the logic . . . to its conclusion, what should we understand? That Putin will not be arrested if he comes to Unesco? This is a serious historical error,” she wrote.

Additional reporting by Suzi Ring in London

News

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Published

on

Top Drug Regulator Is Fired From the F.D.A.

Dr. Tracy Beth Hoeg, the Food and Drug Administration’s top drug regulator, said she was fired from the agency Friday after she declined to resign.

She said she did not know who had ordered her firing or why, nor whether Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. knew of her fate. The Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The departure reflected the upheaval at the F.D.A., days after the resignation of Dr. Marty Makary, the agency commissioner. Dr. Makary had become a lightning rod for critics of the agency’s decisions to reject applications for rare disease drugs and to delay a report meant to supply damaging evidence about the abortion drug mifepristone. He also spent months before his departure pushing back on the White House’s requests for him to approve more flavored vapes, the reason he ultimately cited for leaving.

Dr. Hoeg’s hiring had startled public health leaders who were familiar with her track record as a vaccine skeptic, and she played a leading role in some of the agency’s most divisive efforts during her tenure. She worked on a report that purportedly linked the deaths of children and young adults to Covid vaccines, a dossier the agency has not released publicly. She was also the co-author of a document describing Mr. Kennedy’s decision to pare the recommendations for 17 childhood vaccines down to 11.

But in an interview on Friday, Dr. Hoeg said she “stuck with the science.”

Advertisement

“I am incredibly proud of the work we were doing,” Dr. Hoeg said, adding, “I’m glad that we didn’t give in to any pressures to approve drugs when it wasn’t appropriate.”

As the director of the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, she was a political appointee in a role that had been previously occupied by career officials. An epidemiologist who was trained in the United States and Denmark, she worked on efforts to analyze drug safety and on a panel to discuss the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the most widely prescribed class of antidepressants, during pregnancy. She also worked on efforts to reduce animal testing and was the agency’s liaison to an influential vaccine committee.

She made sure that her teams approved drugs only when the risk-benefit balance was favorable, she said.

The firing worsens the leadership vacuum at the F.D.A. and other agencies, with temporary leaders filling the role of commissioner, food chief and the head of the biologics center, which oversees vaccines and gene therapies. The roles of surgeon general and director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are also unfilled.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

Published

on

Supreme Court is death knell for Virginia’s Democratic-friendly congressional maps

The U.S. Supreme Court

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The U.S. Supreme Court refused Friday to allow Virginia to use a new congressional map that favored Democrats in all but one of the state’s U.S. House seats. The map was a key part of Democrats’ effort to counter the Republican redistricting wave set off by President Trump.

The new map was drawn by Democrats and approved by Virginia voters in an April referendum. But on May 8, the Supreme Court of Virginia in a 4-to-3 vote declared the referendum, and by extension the new map, null and void because lawmakers failed to follow the proper procedures to get the issue on the ballot, violating the state constitution.

Virginia Democrats and the state’s attorney general then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking to put into effect the map approved by the voters, which yields four more likely Democratic congressional seats. In their emergency application, they argued the Virginia Supreme Court was “deeply mistaken” in its decision on “critical issues of federal law with profound practical importance to the Nation.” Further, they asserted the decision “overrode the will of the people” by ordering Virginia to “conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected.”

Advertisement

Republican legislators countered that it would be improper for the U.S. Supreme Court to wade into a purely state law controversy — especially since the Democrats had not raised any federal claims in the lower court.

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with Republicans without explanation leaving in place the state court ruling that voided the Democratic-friendly maps.

The court’s decision not to intervene was its latest in emergency requests for intervention on redistricting issues. In December, the high court OK’d Texas using a gerrymandered map that could help the GOP win five more seats in the U.S. House. In February, the court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map, adopted to offset Texas’s map. Then in March, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked the redrawing of a New York map expected to flip a Republican congressional district Democratic.

And perhaps most importantly, in April, the high court ruled that a Louisiana congressional map was a racial gerrymander and must be redrawn. That decision immediately set off a flurry of redistricting efforts, particularly in the South, where Republican legislators immediately began redrawing congressional maps to eliminate long established majority Black and Hispanic districts.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

Published

on

Explosion at Lumber Mill in Searsmont, Maine, Draws Large Emergency Response

An explosion and fire drew a large emergency response on Friday to a lumber mill in the Midcoast region of Maine, officials said.

The State Police and fire marshal’s investigators responded to Robbins Lumber in Searsmont, about 72 miles northeast of Portland, said Shannon Moss, a spokeswoman for the Maine Department of Public Safety.

Mike Larrivee, the director of the Waldo County Regional Communications Center, said the number of victims was unknown, cautioning that “the information we’re getting from the scene is very vague.”

“We’ve sent every resource in the county to that area, plus surrounding counties,” he said.

Footage from the scene shared by WABI-TV showed flames burning through the roof of a large structure as heavy, dark smoke billowed skyward.

Advertisement

The Associated Press reported that at least five people were injured, and that county officials were considering the incident a “mass casualty event.”

Catherine Robbins-Halsted, an owner and vice president at Robbins Lumber, told reporters at the scene that all of the company’s employees had been accounted for.

Gov. Janet T. Mills of Maine said on social media that she had been briefed on the situation and urged people to avoid the area.

“I ask Maine people to join me in keeping all those affected in their thoughts,” she said.

Representative Jared Golden, Democrat of Maine, said on social media that he was aware of the fire and explosion.

Advertisement

“As my team and I seek out more information, I am praying for the safety and well-being of first responders and everyone else on-site,” he said.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending