ER Editor: We’ve published a fair bit on the downing of the MH17 civilian flight back in 2014 in the Donbass region of Ukraine. See HERE.
A reminder that Donbass is the Russian (eastern) area of Ukraine, a region which has seen years of Ukraine military action against the residents, producing thousands of deaths.
A Dutch investigation leading to a trial in the Hague District Court in November 2022 pointed fingers at 4 individuals in absentia, 3 of whom are Russian and one Ukrainian, all residents of the Donbass (referred to as ‘separatists’). See these two reports, the first revealing that the level of evidence against the four individuals was pretty poor; the whole trial seemed more a political hatchet job against Russia —
MH17 Criminal Case: Show Trial or Justice? [VIDEO]
Note in the report below how the Dutch government has been playing its cards close to its chest, refusing to reveal key information in the MH17 case.
Three of the four accused were sentenced to life imprisonment; one was acquitted.
Dutch Court Passes Sentence in MH17 Trial
In a case brought by Ukraine to the International Court of Justice back in 2017, involving additional issues than just that of the MH17, the ICJ just yesterday refused to rule on the MH17 matter. See Joe Lauria’s report below.
***
A reminder that Donbass, along with 3 other regions in east / south-east Ukraine, voted to join Russia toward the end of 2022 even though they appear on the map as being within Ukraine. The US overthrow of the Yanukovych government by the Neocons in 2014 used to be called the ‘Maidan coup’ before the name got a makeover.
********
ICJ Rules Against Ukraine on Terrorism, MH17
In a blow to Ukraine, the World Court ruled Russia didn’t finance terrorism in Donbass and the court refused to blame Moscow for the downing of Flight MH17.
JOE LAURIA for CONSORTIUM NEWS
The World Court ruled on Wednesday that Russia did not finance terrorism in its defense of separatists in Ukraine and the court refused to find Russia guilty of downing Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 as Ukraine had asked.
The case was brought to the ICJ by Ukraine in 2017, three years after the U.S.-backed coup in Kiev overthrew the democratically-elected President Viktor Yanukovych.
ICJ delivers ruling in Ukraine v. Russia Wednesday at The Hague. (U.N. TV Screenshot)
.
When Russian speakers in Donbass rebelled against the unconstitutional change in government that they had voted for, the coup leaders in 2014 launched what it called an “anti-terrorist” military operation to put down the rebellion.
Russia responded by helping ethnic Russians with arms and other military equipment. Ukraine claimed to the court that that was in breach of a treaty barring terrorism financing.
But the ICJ ruled on Wednesday that the treaty only covered cash transfers made to alleged terrorist groups. This “does not include the means used to commit acts of terrorism, including weapons or training camps,” the Court said in its judgement.
“Consequently, the alleged supply of weapons to various armed groups operating in Ukraine… fall outside the material scope” of the anti-terrorism financing convention, the Court ruled. The Court also said it had no evidence to show that any of the armed militias in Donbass fighting against the government could be characterized as terrorist groups.
The ICJ found only that Russia was “failing to take measures to investigate facts… regarding persons who have allegedly committed an offense.” It added that the court “rejects all other submissions made by the Ukraine.”
The ruling is highly significant in undermining Kiev’s claim to be fighting a war against terrorists in Donbass, an essential part of the Ukraine’s and the West’s narrative in justifying its brutal operation that left more than 10,000 civilians dead.
Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 amid indications that Kiev was beginning a new offensive against Donbass. Ukraine and the West had failed to implement two peace agreements negotiated in Minsk and endorsed by the U.N. Security Council. Western and Ukrainian officials later admitted they never had any intention of implementing the deal and pretended to to buy time to build up its forces against Russia. (ER: This stunning admission was made by both Merkel and Hollande.)
Rejected MH17 Claim
In its complaint to the Court, Ukraine had also claimed that Russia was responsible for the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 in 2014, killing all 298 civilian passengers and crew on board. Kiev wanted Russia to pay compensation to the victims.
But the court refused to rule whether Russia was responsible and to order compensation. This ruling appears to contradict the results of the official investigation into the incident.
The Dutch Safety Board (DSB) and a Dutch-led joint investigation team (JIT) concluded in 2016 that the plane was shot down by ethnic Russian separatists using a missile supplied by Russia. Moscow has denied involvement in the incident.
Russian legal team listening to ICJ’s ruling on Wednesday. (U.N. TV Screenshot)
The ruling on MH17 came two weeks after the European Court of Justice decided that the Dutch government was not required to release information it has about the incident. The Dutch news outlet RTL Nieuws had brought the case before the ICJ.
It wanted to know what reports the Dutch government had gotten regarding Ukrainian airspace before the plane was shot down. The government refused to release that information and the European court ruled it did not have to divulge information regarding aviation safety.
No Discrimination
Ukraine was also denied compensation for what it said was discrimination against ethnic Tatars and Ukrainians in Crimea after Russia annexed the peninsula in 2014.
The court only agreed that Russia failed to protect Ukrainian language education in Crimea. This complaint came as Ukraine passed laws discriminating against the Russian language in the country.
CN‘s Joe Lauria was outside the World Court on Wednesday before the ruling came down:
Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He is the author of two books, A Political Odyssey, with Sen. Mike Gravel, foreword by Daniel Ellsberg; and How I Lost By Hillary Clinton, foreword by Julian Assange. He can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter @unjoe
Source
************
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply