Madaxweynaha Jamhuuriyadda Federaalka Soomaaliya, Mudane Xasan Sheekh Maxamuud, ayaa magaalada Addis Ababa ee dalka Itoobiya kulan miro-dhal ah kula yeeshay Madaxweynaha dalka Koonfur Afrika, Mudane Cyril Ramaphosa. Kulankan oo ka dhacay intii uu socday Shir-madaxeedka Midowga Afrika, ayaa ahaa fursad muhiim u ah labada hoggaamiye si ay uga wada hadlaan danaha guud ee ka dhexeeya labada dal iyo mustaqbalka qaaradda Afrika. Xoojinta Xiriirka Dublamaasiyadeed iyo midka Ganacsi Wadahadallada dhexmaray labada madaxweyne ayaa udub-dhexaad u ahaa sidii loo xoojin lahaa xiriirka dublamaasiyadeed iyo kan ganacsi ee labada qaran. Madaxweyne Xasan Sheekh ayaa tilmaamay muhiimadda ay leedahay in Soomaaliya iyo Koonfur Afrika ay yeeshaan iskaashi dhinac kasta ah, gaar ahaan xilligan ay Soomaaliya ku jirto soo kabasho xooggan oo dhinacyada amniga iyo dhaqaalaha ah. Labada hoggaamiye ayaa isla meel dhigay in la ballaariyo fursadaha maalgashi iyo in la fududeeyo isu-socodka dadka iyo badeecadaha, taa...
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