3 ms·

As I understand it, a non-profit submitted a specific complaint, and the prosecutor started an investigation: > The Hind Rajab Foundation’s strategy focuses on

by e12e 1y ago

As I understand it, a non-profit submitted a specific complaint, and the prosecutor started an investigation: > The Hind Rajab Foundation’s strategy focuses on targeting individual soldiers, especially dual nationals or those traveling to countries with universal jurisdiction provisions. Since its establishment in September 2024, the foundation has worked with legal partners to gather documentation — including videos and images taken during the soldiers’ service in Gaza — and file cases in multiple countries, including France, the Netherlands, Brazil, and the UK. I don't think it would be surprising for such evidence to be enough to warrant investigation and questioning - but perhaps not enough for holding in custody until a trial.

spwa4 1y ago
It would be surprising because the people of the foundation are terrorist supporters (for certain), or actual terrorists (not proven) The founders of the foundation, Dyab Abou Jahjah and Karim Hassoun, are known to campaign and provide material support to Hezbollah - a terrorist organization. Diab Abou Jahjah actually went to Lebanon and may have actually participated in Hezbollah operations - he declared his intent to do so in the newspaper before leaving, but was not so stupid as to confirm it afterwards. So there is no proof he actually fought for them. It IS proven that he transferred money to Hezbollah and collected money from others for Hezbollah (which is by the way a war crime, in case that convinces anyone. Knowingly supporting terrorist organizations, which he did, is a war crime) Socialists in Belgium protect especially Mr. Jahjah because he's been part of a Belgian communist party for a long time. Of course, that doesn't change what he did. But it would still be VERY surprising that any court would take any complaint about terrorism from a terrorist supporter, from a person who left for a war zone declaring his intent to become a terrorist in the newspaper, seriously. Especially given other problems with people who did that, and the fact that the Belgian police force is, and I'm putting it very mildly, not particularly well suited or interested in fighting a foreign war ... Of course, this would be pretty typical strategy for the PVDA. Making legal complaints that are so absurd there's zero chance any court will do anything, then "pointing out" how unfair the justice system is and how it will always protect the capitalists (previously usually represented by OpenVLD, but more recently by the NVA). It's probably a decade ago, but they sued a hotel chain for refusing to convert a central hotel in Antwerp into social housing for free, and then made a big fuss when the court said what amounted to "WTF?".
- trogdor 1y ago
  > But it would still be VERY surprising that any court would take any complaint about terrorism from a terrorist supporter, from a person who left for a war zone declaring his intent to become a terrorist in the newspaper, seriously. Why? Prosecutors should pursue cases based on evidence. As long as the evidence is valid, it shouldn’t matter who brought it to the prosecutor’s attention.
  - spwa4 1y ago
    Because then the government just votes laws "everyone who wears shoes or breathes goes to prison for 10 years" and as long as they control the prosecutor general, they just imprison anyone they want. In other words, if you don't have fair and honest application of law (ie. the prosecutor going after every case they know about), NOT having law at all is actually preferable.

by e12e 1y ago

spwa4 1y ago

It would be surprising because the people of the foundation are terrorist supporters (for certain), or actual terrorists (not proven) The founders of the foundation, Dyab Abou Jahjah and Karim Hassoun, are known to campaign and provide material support to Hezbollah - a terrorist organization. Diab Abou Jahjah actually went to Lebanon and may have actually participated in Hezbollah operations - he declared his intent to do so in the newspaper before leaving, but was not so stupid as to confirm it afterwards. So there is no proof he actually fought for them. It IS proven that he transferred money to Hezbollah and collected money from others for Hezbollah (which is by the way a war crime, in case that convinces anyone. Knowingly supporting terrorist organizations, which he did, is a war crime) Socialists in Belgium protect especially Mr. Jahjah because he's been part of a Belgian communist party for a long time. Of course, that doesn't change what he did. But it would still be VERY surprising that any court would take any complaint about terrorism from a terrorist supporter, from a person who left for a war zone declaring his intent to become a terrorist in the newspaper, seriously. Especially given other problems with people who did that, and the fact that the Belgian police force is, and I'm putting it very mildly, not particularly well suited or interested in fighting a foreign war ... Of course, this would be pretty typical strategy for the PVDA. Making legal complaints that are so absurd there's zero chance any court will do anything, then "pointing out" how unfair the justice system is and how it will always protect the capitalists (previously usually represented by OpenVLD, but more recently by the NVA). It's probably a decade ago, but they sued a hotel chain for refusing to convert a central hotel in Antwerp into social housing for free, and then made a big fuss when the court said what amounted to "WTF?".

trogdor 1y ago
> But it would still be VERY surprising that any court would take any complaint about terrorism from a terrorist supporter, from a person who left for a war zone declaring his intent to become a terrorist in the newspaper, seriously. Why? Prosecutors should pursue cases based on evidence. As long as the evidence is valid, it shouldn’t matter who brought it to the prosecutor’s attention.
- spwa4 1y ago
  Because then the government just votes laws "everyone who wears shoes or breathes goes to prison for 10 years" and as long as they control the prosecutor general, they just imprison anyone they want. In other words, if you don't have fair and honest application of law (ie. the prosecutor going after every case they know about), NOT having law at all is actually preferable.