Lammy says he will continue to talk to ‘senior Israeli officials’ despite arrest warrants – and claims ICC Act 2001 requires him to wait for ‘note verbale’ before acting. There is no such provision in the Act
A stammering David Lammy has tried to con the parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee about the procedure that would have to be undertaken if wanted war criminals Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant entered British jurisdiction. This is not the first time the Starmer government has used this lie.
Squirming after a question from Sheffield Central MP and committee member Abtisam Mohamed, Lammy made four false statements, including claiming that Section 2 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 (ICCA) requires him to wait ‘days or weeks’ for a ‘note verbale’ from the International Criminal Court (ICC) informing him of the warrant and only then to pass the warrant to a court to make a ruling on whether to action it – clearly implying that there is some kind of process to buy time for the fugitives from justice to make legal representations, or for Lammy and his fellow Starmeroids to look for a way out of having to action the ICC’s order.
But in fact, there is no mention in the ICCA of a ‘note verbale’ and any relevant court only has to appoint a ‘judicial officer’ – whose only job is to check the warrant is really from the ICC and then to order it to be carried out immediately:
And since Lammy, his boss Keir Starmer and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper already know the ICC has issued the warrant requiring any of the 124 signatory states to immediately arrest and extradite the two war criminals, the process can be pre-approved by the court in residence, meaning Netanyahu and Gallant should be in handcuffs the moment their feet touch British-controlled soil and in the air to The Hague on the first available flight.
If, that is – and of course it’s a huge ‘if’ that Lammy and co are desperately trying to avoid admitting – the UK government intends to follow international and UK domestic law regarding the genocidal Israeli politicians.
…even without the administration of the oath, giving false evidence or misleading a committee would be a contempt of the House.
UK Parliament
Lammy and Starmer are both lawyers and must know this full well and misleading a parliamentary committee is ‘contempt of the house’ according to parliamentary documents. No wonder he stumbled over his own words so much.
And while he and his colleagues weasel, Israel continues to slaughter and starve hundreds of thousands of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount as it has to be entered by us). Alternatively, if you prefer to make a one-off or recurring donation by simple card payment, please use the form below:
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your support is hugely appreciated.
Your support is hugely appreciated.
Your support is hugely appreciated.
DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearlyThanks for your solidarity so Skwawkbox can keep doing its job of inconveniencing the right and helping to build the left!
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Wasn’t it Starmer who said ‘ Lawbreakers can’t be Lawmakers’ when denouncing Partygate’? Shouldn’t he resign as seemingly unable to accept the ICC ruling?
This man does not represent me. He struggles because ‘international laws’ were never intended to be used upon the great and good of Western Nations, merely upon others who matter far less.
The degree of irony intended is difficult to convey.
This is covered in the Special Article Provisions of the Un-written Rules of the Internation al Rules Based Order:
“Special Article. The State of Israel, although located in geographically eastern territories, is an integral and inalienable part of the Collective West and Our Civilization; It is up to him, notably, to defend Western interests in the region by all the means and methods at his disposal, receiving for this purpose from Western countries, communities, unions, regions and alliances, at each moment, the financial, economic, political, and propaganda and, above all, military and weapons to achieve this essential task and the Rules-Based International Order is strictly applied.
The territory of Israel does not need defined borders, it can be expanded through the occupation, by any means, of the territories between the Nile and Euphrates rivers that it considers indispensable for its security and that of the entire West, because it lives surrounded by barbaric enemies fiercely attached to wild and savage methods. The Zionist doctrine, humanist and divinely mandated, notably regarding the millennial legitimacy of sovereignty over its territory, is an inseparable and irreplaceable component of Western Civilization, especially in geostrategic, geopolitical, military and religious terms through exclusively Western expressions of Faith, Hope, Charity and Piety.
Israel must diplomatically have the entire West on its side in the face of barbaric attempts to achieve its isolation and subsequent disappearance. The so-called “two-state solution”, occasionally and conjunctural defended by authoritative Western voices, emanates only from so-called international law, so it is absolutely incompatible with the Rules-Based International Order.”
https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/11/28/for-future-memory-of-western-decadence/
The only way this murderous thug is ever going to be arrested in the West is if someone attempts to carry out a citizen’s arrest.