• Jaytreeman@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    The order was to stop genocide. The other option was to throw the case out.

    The language is purposely broad for legal reasons, but apparently, people are taking it’s broadness as a win for Israel.

    This was definitely not a win for Israel.

    • MxM111@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      No, the court did not recognize that there is genocide, thus it cannot give the order to stop. The court recognized that there might be a genocide, thus the case will proceed. The other two options were - there is no genocide (through the case away) and there is genocide. But none of these options were realized.

      The court also reminded that there shouldn’t be genocide (but without stating that there is)