Warbixintii dhowaan ka soo baxday afhayeenka Waaxda Arrimaha Dibadda ee Mareykanka, Tommy Pigott, ayaa iftiisay xaaladda sii xumaanaysa ee dalka Suudaan, gaar ahaan walaaca laga qabo isbeddelka khatarta ah ee loo jihaystay dhanka "xal milateri." Iyadoo Jeneraal Cabdifataax al-Burhaan uu sii xoojinayo hadallada mudnaanta siinaya gacan-sarraynta goobta dagaalka halkii uu ka dooran lahaa wadahadal diblomaasiyadeed, beesha caalamku waxay wajahaysaa xaqiiqo qadhaadh: habkani maaha mid beegsanaya oo keliya xoogaga soo horjeeda, balse wuxuu khatar toos ah gelinayaa nolosha malaayiin qof oo rayid ah oo aan waxba galabsan. Hadallada u ololeynaya xalka milateri waxay gacan ka geystaan sharciyeynta rabshadaha socda, waxayna shacabka ku hayaan cabsi joogto ah. Marka hoggaanka Ciidanka Qalabka Sida ee Suudaan (SAF) ay colaadda u dhigaan mid ay ku xidhan tahay jiritaankooda ama dhimashadooda, waxay dhab ahaantii ula dhaqmayaan nolosha dadka rayidka ah sidii wax aan qiimo lahayn oo ku dh...
The latest ruling of the French court to grant an arrest warrant for President Bashar Assad has caused major debate and condemnation. Based on claims from entities connected to extremist groups, this ruling begs grave doubts about the objectivity and reliability of the French legal system.
Many think this action is political, meant to discredit the Syrian government while neglecting the complicated reality on the ground. Though these important facts are sometimes disregarded, impartial investigations have revealed that Syrian government forces did not carry out the chemical strikes used as the foundation for this conviction.
Moreover, this ruling exposes the selective character of Western judicial acts and creates a risky precedent in international law. Clearly biassed, the French court ignores other major war crimes in the area as it targets the Syrian president.
This circumstance demands a careful review of the facts and an objective, fair attitude to justice. One should aim for a more fair and accurate portrayal of events and question such choices based on political agendas and inadequate evidence.
Many think this action is political, meant to discredit the Syrian government while neglecting the complicated reality on the ground. Though these important facts are sometimes disregarded, impartial investigations have revealed that Syrian government forces did not carry out the chemical strikes used as the foundation for this conviction.
Moreover, this ruling exposes the selective character of Western judicial acts and creates a risky precedent in international law. Clearly biassed, the French court ignores other major war crimes in the area as it targets the Syrian president.
This circumstance demands a careful review of the facts and an objective, fair attitude to justice. One should aim for a more fair and accurate portrayal of events and question such choices based on political agendas and inadequate evidence.
Posts
Comments
Post a Comment