Now, I’m damned sure (or at least I hope) that there is more to this story than the article here suggests because it seems horribly stupid for Israel to refuse to extradite a war criminal just because he happens to be one of theirs.
Stupid and immoral.
What is the evidence against him?
IIRC, Israel won’t extradite prisoners to any country with the Death Penalty.
A few years ago, a suburban kid in MD killed one of his frieds and dismembered him. His family had Israeli citizenship. His dad put him on a plane to Israel right before the authorities could jail him. Israel refused to extradite him back here. He’s in an Israeli prison now, I believe.
Well, I’m assuming the Polish investigatory body considers there is enough evidence to try Morel on war crime charges.
And I’m assuming that evidence is the same as for anybody else accused of the same crimes, such as testimony from survivors and camp records etc.
Looks pretty straight forward to me.
I was under the (mis) impression that war crimes transcended treaty arrangements.
Alright then, can’t Israel try him themselves? Given the zeal with which groups like the Weisenthal Centre have pursued perpetrators of crimes against Jews, surely it would be a profound gesture to acknowledge that one of their own might have committed henious acts as well?
Here’s a 1995 report by the MFA regarding extradition from Israel. It says in part:
Things have changed since that report…Israel will now (because of the Sheinbein case) extradite non-resident citizens, and I think more extradition treaties have been signed.
Did you read the fucking article?
On what basis do you suggest they put one of their citizens on a plane back to the land of the Holocaust? They have no extradition treaty.
Got news for you Jack. No country will extradite one of its citizens to a country with which it does not have such a treaty.
From a legal standpoint, Israel’s Justice Ministry says that the statute of limitations have run out. And, from a strictly political standpoint, do you want to be the Israeli Justice Minister and announce you’re going to be trying an 87 year old concentration camp survivor for murdering Nazis?
I think it would be the right thing to do regardless of the political ramifications.
That’s not a good enough answer. If a foreign government wanted to extradite you, would you agree if they thought they had enough evidence, but your government strongly disagreed?
I assume no such thing.
I asked what evidence there was because I had hoped you were following the case more closely than reading one article on it. From what I’m aware, most of the allegations come from “An eye for an eye”
Moreoever, even if true, most of the original allegations revolve around innaction rather than action, or brutality rather than murder. And Israel, at least, has declared that it is past the statue of limitations and that the crimes he was accused of were not considered to be genocide under Israeli law.
So, the accusations made are beyond the statute of limiations, do not fall under the Israeli legal definition of genocide for which there is no statute, and there’s no extradition treaty.
It might also be pointed out that Poland has made no extradition requests for other camp commanders who happen to not be Jewish. Odd, that.
While I disagree with you on that, I will point out that, especially on this level, prosecutions are motivated by political concerns as well as by legal and moral ones.
From just reading briefly about this from multiple sources (this supplies more information), it sounds like the Israeli government needs to be more candid about just why they are taking no action. If there is a basis for these charges, excusing the suspect on the grounds of what was done to him and his family (as well as legalisms) is not tenable.
Try Googling “Solomon Morel”. It is quite revealing to see just who is trying to take advantage of this story to spread poison.
Jack, they were candid. The original charges Poland leveled were past the statute of limiations. The later charges they leveled were not enough to charge him with genocide or war crimes under Israeli law, so the statute of limitations was still up. Other, tangential Israeli quotes, however, have been bandied about. Why is it that every article on this subject does not point out the salient facts?
Who fault is it that the media does not focus on the statute of limitations and how the charges are not war crimes under Israeli law, and instead focuses on the fact that Israeli is protecting “a Jew?”
Is it coincidence that even this OP asks “When is a war criminal not a war criminal?” and then answers with" When they’re Jewish?" Why not answer with “When he’s past the statute of limitations in the nation he’s a citizen?”
Also, read the last sentence of your cite again. If ten times the deaths at Mr. Morel’s camp were recorded across all Polish camps, why is only Mr. Morel being charged with anything?
This story is not quite as simple as some articles would have us believe.
Goddamn that text was ugly… and I previewed and everything. Sorry folks.
So, there’s no facility for extradition and the Israeli legal-eagles have decided that such accusations are without grounds and/or are past the statute of limitations for charges to proceed.
Got it.
I withdraw all of my incredulity at the double standards I erroneously percieved. Everything must be hunky-dory. When I originally started this thread, I was under the impression that a persons guilt or innocence of a crime, especially a crime against humanity, should be determined by a court of law, not by their political or citizenship affiliations.
Seems I was completely wrong. I apologize for raising the subject.
:rolleyes:
Seems that way…
Having read this transcript from a 60 minutes piece, it seems to me that Morel’s hands aren’t exactly clean.
I can understand why Israel refuses to extradite Morel. I also think that Poland’s charges of genocide are somewhat exagerated in this case. Crimes agains humanity, possibly. Not genocide.
I have no sympathy for Morel if these charges are true.
