Perhaps, but there’s the challenge of who gets to declare genocide formally. A city mayor no matter how large probably shouldn’t be able to unilaterally do so when no authority recognized by his nation does so.
I agree Netanyahu should be arrested, but I just don’t think a city mayor can reasonably unilaterally do so. Certainly from a practical standpoint it’s a nightmare if your own federal government will be at odds over the arrest of a foreign leader.
The genocide convention require the countries to do all within their power to stop the genocide. What’s more impactful than arresting thr current genocide enabler
You clearly don’t know what you are talking about. The genocide convention (not the geneva convention) that the US signed legally obliges them to act regardless of where the genocide is happening. Your logic is ridiculous because it would mean that any country only has an obligation to stop genocide if it occurs within their own borders.
Interesting, but given that America isn’t party to the ICC I wonder what legal reason he could provide for this.
The genocide convention
Perhaps, but there’s the challenge of who gets to declare genocide formally. A city mayor no matter how large probably shouldn’t be able to unilaterally do so when no authority recognized by his nation does so.
I agree Netanyahu should be arrested, but I just don’t think a city mayor can reasonably unilaterally do so. Certainly from a practical standpoint it’s a nightmare if your own federal government will be at odds over the arrest of a foreign leader.
Yeah. I didn’t mean that Mamdani will be able to do it just saying that the genocide convention is a valid legal reason for Netenyahu to be arrested
The Geneva convention does not authorize arrests of individuals. That’s what the ICC is for, but the US does not recognize the ICC.
The genocide convention require the countries to do all within their power to stop the genocide. What’s more impactful than arresting thr current genocide enabler
No, it doesn’t. Countries have no legal obligation to stop something happening outside their borders.
Imagine being so confident, yet incorrect.
You could have taken 2 minutes to look up “genocide convention” to find out that it’s not the Geneva Convention.
They do. But they ignore the genocide convention.
You clearly don’t know what you are talking about. The genocide convention (not the geneva convention) that the US signed legally obliges them to act regardless of where the genocide is happening. Your logic is ridiculous because it would mean that any country only has an obligation to stop genocide if it occurs within their own borders.