Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    USAHITMAN Conspiracy News
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    USAHITMAN Conspiracy News
    Home»War News»U.N: U.S. Broke International Law by Eliminating Soleimani
    War News

    U.N: U.S. Broke International Law by Eliminating Soleimani

    By mediahitmanJanuary 3, 2020Updated:January 5, 2020No Comments2 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

    Agnes Callamard, the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial killing, said on Thursday night that the U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian terrorist mastermind Gen. Qasem Soleimani was a violation of international law.

    The U.N. has been oddly quiet about Soleimani’s violations of international law, including activities that indisputably violated U.N. sanctions.

    “The targeted killings of Qasem Soleiman and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis are most likely unlawful and violate international human rights law: Outside the context of active hostilities, the use of drones or other means for targeted killing is almost never likely to be legal,” Callamard wrote on Twitter.

    She proceeded to lay out an impossibly stringent standard for preventive action that becomes grotesquely amusing when measured against Soleimani’s malign activities, not least his involvement in an undisputed act of war against the United States, the attack on the U.S. embassy in Baghdad last week:

    To be justified under international human rights law, intentionally lethal or potentially lethal force can only be used where strictly necessary to protect against an imminent threat to life.

    In other words, whoever targeted these two men would need to demonstrate that the persons targeted constitute(d) an imminent threat to others. An individual’s past involvement in “terrorist” attacks is not sufficient to make his targeting for killing lawful.

    Furthermore, drone killing of anyone other than the target (family members or others in the vicinity, for example) would be an arbitrary deprivation of life under human rights law and could result in State responsibility and individual criminal liability.

    The use of drones on the territory of other States has also been justified on the basis of self-defense. Under customary international law States can take military action if the threatened attack is imminent, no other means would deflect it, and the action is proportionate.

    The test for so-called anticipatory self-defense is very narrow: it must be a necessity that is “instant, overwhelming, and leaving no choice of means, and no moment of deliberation”. This test is unlikely to be met in these particular cases.

    Soleimani was not much concerned about killing people other than his targets – his operations routinely included the indiscriminate murder of civilians, from Syria to the streets of Baghdad.

    Read More Here

    UN United Nations
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    mediahitman

    Related Posts

    ‘No indication of enemy fire’: US forces in Afghanistan confirm loss of recon plane

    January 28, 2020

    Jeff Bezos hack: UN experts demand probe of Saudi crown prince

    January 24, 2020

    Lie-detector tests for terrorists? New UK govt plan sparks backlash online

    January 22, 2020

    Comments are closed.

    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest
    © 2026 ThemeSphere. Designed by ThemeSphere.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.