Pierre d'Argent

I teach & practise international law, and write about it.

Louvain University, Foley Hoag, Member of the Institut de droit international, Past President ESIL

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

We are the real protectors of Ukraine's future. Get rid of your government and come back to mother Russia...
Is there not a single mind in the #WhiteHouse to understand that the #mineralsdeal is exactly what Putin needs for his next cynical move?

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

Yesterday's press conference between #Putin and #Lukashenko gave us a taste of the spin Russia’s propaganda will give to unfolding event to reconquer hearts and souls after #UkraineWar and how the US #Mineralsdeal will be used by Moscow. Lukashenko was his Master's Voice.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

In substance : this war between Slavic nations was unnecessary. The territories will never be Ukrainian again and your sons and daughters have been killed in vain. But on top of that, generations of Ukrainians will now have to pay the US for this proxy war. Zelensky is a traitor.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

Long in the making but finally there! Thanks to all 55 generous authors of the 41 chapters of this Handbook, including my wonderful co-editors Anne van Aaken, @LauriMalksoo and Justus Vasel. With gratitude also to @OUPLaw.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

@ThTkWB @GLBouchez Étonnant que les offusqués par la métaphore ne se demandent, afin de connaître le sens de la déclaration, si l'inverse avait du sens: qu'aurait-on dit si @GLBouchez avait dit "gérer comme des poètes et non comme des ingénieurs"? Autre tollé dans un verre d'eau ou compris?

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

On the International Court of Justice ruling regarding Gaza | EEAS https://t.co/u5BWM588w4

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

My comment on @juliettemm now on @Verfassungsblog https://t.co/1NMeOA8lFL

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

@AdHaque110 @mabecker17 This does not mean however that the operation so halted by the Court is constitutive of genocide. That is why knowing what is precisely prohibited is difficult to know, except that the current operation cannot continue as such.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

@Verfassungsblog @just_security @juliettemm @mabecker17 @AdHaque110 Let us face it: there would be no #ICJ order on Rafah #GazaGenocide‌ to halt anything if it were not for the after comma part of the sentence of operative para. 57(2)(a)

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

@AdHaque110 @mabecker17 Thx Mike. We would certainly agree if you agree that the Order does not order Israel to stop any and all military operations in Rafah. Israel could turn to more commando-style/less massive operations and be compliant. Obvious Court does not order to halt any military action.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

@mabecker17 What is required is that the current operations or any other that create the risk of irreparable prejudice change/is not pursued, on that we agree of course.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

@mabecker17 Thx Mike. Para. 47 of the #ICJ Order that the "current" situation entails a "further" risk of irreparable prejudice: it confirms previous PM. This is just ticking the boxes for the indication of PM. Does not mean that genocide is ongoing, which is for the merits.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

@mabecker17 To halt that offensive, the current one ("its"), but not to halt any offensive. @AdHaque110

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

In other words, compliance with the Order may be brought by stopping all military action, but also by conducting a less massive operation. That is what the Order means when you take its words for what they say. But I don't think we disagree on that.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

The words after the comma require Israel to change course in its military operations, not to stop them all together in Rafah. Reading more would be entirely misguided IMHO. Again, does anyone seriously believe we would have an Order without these carefully crafted words?

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

I drafted PM orders back then but of course it is the judges who collectively tweak and finally approve. I remember in particular the deliberation in Costa Rica v. Nicaragua when the Court ordered the Parties to vacate the disputed territory.

[Pierre d'Argent @pierre_dargent]

On the making of PM Orders: when I served as First Secretary of the #ICJ, there was one deliberation after hearings, giving clear directions of result, then registry staff drafted in coordination with President and then again a full deliberation with amendements and votes.