THE HAGUE (Reuters) – Canadian lawyer William Schabas, an
international scholar on genocide, has been criticised by friend and foe
for first researching crimes against the Muslim Rohingya of Myanmar,
and now defending the state accused of perpetrating them.
Schabas helped research a report in 2010
on systematic attacks against the Rohingya, which concluded that they
met the international threshold of crimes against humanity.
Three years later, in an Al Jazeera
documentary, he was filmed saying: “Denying their history, denying the
legitimacy of their right to live where they live, these are all warning
signs that mean that it’s not frivolous to envisage the use of the word
genocide.”
This week Schabas stood alongside Myanmar
leader Aung San Suu Kyi at the International Court of Justice in The
Hague and denied genocide here took place during a military campaign in 2017 in which thousands were killed and raped and hundreds of thousands displaced.
“William Schabas is basically selling out
the Rohingya for some Myanmar gov’t $$$. Really the worst sort of
behaviour, how totally immoral and two-faced,” Phil Robertson, Deputy
Asia Director at Human Rights Watch said on Twitter on Thursday.
In an interview with Reuters, Schabas rejected the criticism.
“I am an international lawyer. I do
international law cases,” he said at a book launch after three gruelling
days in court where he argued the crimes did not constitute genocide.
“Both sides have a right to have competent representation. If people don’t understand that, that’s not my problem,” he said.
Stephen Rapp, a former United States war
crimes ambassador who works at the Holocaust museum, was among
colleagues who criticised Schabas.
“We have heard this morning from my
friend Bill Schabas, I was just with him 10 days ago. I prosecuted
genocide, we obtained convictions for this crime. He is wrong about the
law: this was a genocide,” Rapp told journalists and NGOs in The Hague
on Wednesday evening.
In court the following day, Schabas tried to clarify his 2013 remarks in the Al Jazeera documentary “The Hidden Genocide”.
Schabas said he was responding to a hypothetical, not the real situation in Myanmar.
“The journalist persistently tried to get
me to apply the word genocide … And I just as persistently refused,
cause I’ve never said that genocide was taking place in Myanmar.”
NO GENOCIDE DENIALIST
In the Reuters interview Schabas also
countered criticism of his views about the events in Srebrenica, Bosnia,
when around 8,000 Muslim men and boys were massacred by Bosnian Serb
forces in July 1995.
“He, frankly, doesn’t think Srebrenica
was (genocide) and that was found by the courts (to be genocide),” said
Rapp. “The position he takes on genocide is in my view entirely too
restrictive”.
Schabas said he has accepted that Srebrenica was genocide.
“I am not arguing with anybody about
whether genocide took place in Srebrenica. That has been decided. That
train has left the station and the fact that I had an opinion about it
before the decisions were reached seems to me to be quite normal and
understandable,” he said.
His distinct interpretation of the crime
of genocide has led some people to call him a genocide denialist, a
criticism he rebuffed.
“If you discuss genocide and you suggest
that this probably doesn’t fit the definition of international law, very
quickly some people say you are denying, they say you’re denying
genocide, as if you’re, you know, a Nazi sympathizer whose claiming that
Auschwitz didn’t exist, which most of the time is not the case.
“Your old debate about Srebrenica was not
whether it happened or not, it’s not about that. It’s about whether the
legal qualification should be crimes against humanity rather than
genocide,” Schabas said.
Defending a party accused of genocide is
never going to be a popular job, said Sareta Ashraph, an international
lawyer who believes genocide in Myanmar is ongoing.
“For him a genocide has to involve a
substantial number of dead, he relies on body count,” she said. “I think
he’s actually the perfect person for that case, although I disagree
with his arguments. It’s not an absurd argument, it’s just very, very
conservative on genocidal intent”.
“What he is saying is that what is being described (in Myanmar) is crimes against humanity, not genocide,” Ashraph said.
In 2015, Schabas was forced to resign as
the head of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry on the Gaza
Conflict after a complaint from Israel about his prior work for the
Palestine Liberation Organisation.
UN Watch director Hillel Neuer said he
told Schabas at the time that he “had breached his duty of impartiality
as head of the UN Human Rights Council inquiry” because he had made
prejudicial statements “including his call to indict Israel’s prime
minister as his ‘favourite’ defendant …”
Genocide, Schabas said, is a subject of
great sensitivity to people “and the debates can be not only quite
robust, but people get angry very quickly.”
He said his decision to stand in
Myanmar’s corner was not emotional, but professional. “I am hired as a
lawyer, they’re my client.”
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-myanmar-rohingya-profile-schabas/myanmars-lawyer-to-critics-on-genocide-case-everyone-has-right-to-defence-idUKKBN1YH02Y?fbclid=IwAR1wRsyZBQO8CBYo3FdFEfU3aBXaiba2pbXfR0F4wm_DR7fceTftk9x-LKw
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.