Re: Israel seizes solar panels donated to Palestinians by Dutch government
※→ Apocalypse, et al,
I do not believe your observation is accurate.
This is where you're wrong clearly.
See the example I've given in my previous comment about going above the speed limit and getting fined for it.
You'll always get fined, whether you have a good reason or no reason at all.
(COMMENT)
Federal, state, and local (FSL) Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) have a lot of discretion; that is especially true in traffic violations -- a criminal violation
(there are lots of warnings issued). The Referrals for prosecution, And State Trail Courts requests and Administrative Hearing by Magistrates
(across 50 states) are discretionary. Prosecutors, quite frequently, decline to prosecute in criminal cases
(which the Solar Panel Issues is not); and Magistrates discharge an administrative dispute --- under a non-criminal remedy --- arbitration or some mitigating consideration.
However, FSL LEO generally do not get involved in Residential and Commercial Building and Zoning Code violations
(Applications, Permits, and Payments) and are normally handled under the a Civil Overvies having jurisdiction and capable of adjudication actions that have been filed. However, the Israelis have
(with the Arab Palestinians) elected to use a summary judgment process.
AND FINALLY: The "Rule of Law" (RoL), which I cited in
Posting #20, essentially demonstrates that the Israeli Civil Administration violated the standing International Law on the subject matter. In cases where the Government violates the law
(as the Israelis have here), most often Rule in favor of the plaintiff (Arab Palestinians); monetary awards, restitution of that which was destroyed, and granting construction authority of non-threatening utilities that better the community. Remembering that the
UN Security Council [S/RES 446 (1979)] invoked the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) as outlined in the
Geneva Convention of 1949; to which Israel is a signatory.
• Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
Commentary of 1987
[p.839] Part IV, Section III, Chapter I -- Field of application and protection of persons and objects
2918 The Fourth Convention only rarely deals with the property or objects of protected persons. Thus Article 53 [ Link ] prohibits the Occupying Power in principle from destroying the personal property belonging to private persons. Article 33 [ Link ] prohibits pillage and reprisals against protected persons and their property. However, the object of that provision is not to guarantee the rights of ownership of protected persons.
2919 As far as the Hague Regulations (1907) are concerned, Articles 28 , 46, and 47 rule that private property cannot be confiscated and that pillage is formally forbidden.
Having said that, I still support the Israeli cause
(the protection of the Jewish People and the protection of Israeli Independence and Sovereignty from all aggressors) against the dangerous and destructive influence of Jihadist, Virulent Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgents, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters known to be located in the West Bank under the cover of the civilian population and sinister members of the Arab League.
Most Respectfully,
R