04.06.19, contribution 22, return of the jihadists (13), iraq, justice, clarification

blog: madic50.blogspot.com / Book: The Two forms, ed. Amazon

Paris, Tuesday, June 4, 2019

CONTRIBUTION (22) TO THE NATIONAL DEBATE WISHED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC IN 2019.

THE RETURN OF THE JIHADISTS (13), THE CLARIFICATION ENGAGED BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE JIHADISTS IN IRAK AND THE AFFIRMATION OF THE PRIORITY OF IRAQI JUSTICE (Continuation of the reflection n ° 12 of March 11th, 2019, cf: madic50)

1) - The clarification

The Iraqi judiciary has tried and convicted nine French jihadists, all of whom have been sentenced to death.

For several years, the fate of jihadist Daesh prisoners has been controversial.

This succession of judgments is a clarification.

If the sentence had been imprisonment, there would have been the equivocal, maintained by the northern cadres towards those of the South, a prison sentence extremist and vain to be corrected by the justices of the North. They alone would be able to make a credible judgment.

A sentence that could be decided and carried out only after a transfer of detainees and trials on the European territory concerned. These countries are the only place for a truly legal and humane execution of sentences.

The death penalty obliges each of the States concerned to recognize that the only punishment is that fixed by the Iraqi judiciary.

Either they manage to give the Iraqi authorities the assurance of the recognition of their judicial and therefore national sovereignty, or the convicts will be executed.

By these repeated convictions to a penalty which execution renders without recourse; the Iraqi justice states bluntly:

1- That it alone is competent to judge crimes committed on its soil or in the Syrian military zone of which it ensured the Liberation.

2- That it has priority over the justice of the European Union (EU) for the judgment of the training course and exercise of these criminals who aim at the overthrow of all the political states in favor of the Muslim kalifa.

The legal clarification of Iraq accompanies the strategic evolution that is the destruction of Daesh and the lucid refusal of the French to see return these criminals.

2) - Consular protection

Admittedly, the French State and the EU, which constitutionally reject the death penalty, are justified in intervening on behalf of their fellow citizens in order to have their sentences commuted.

However, this assertion of the sole or priority jurisdiction of the Iraqi justice forces them to respect several conditions in the presentation of their concerns.

1- The foundation

a- The basis of an appeal is now the recognition of the priority of the Iraqi justice as a place of trial of the facts committed on the place of formation and first exercise of the criminal grouping aim at enslaving all the governments and their populations to its principles religious. They refuse the very existence of a political government.

b- The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) puts it this way: "And it is not absurd to judge in Iraq what happened in Mosul. Iraqi intelligence services are best able to document the acts committed by our nationals. "

2- Diplomacy

Europeans can only act according to the rules of diplomacy or by following the judicial agreements previously established between the states.

3- The only judicial way

a- This appeal can not have the purpose of claiming to disqualify the Iraqi justice.

b- In the words of Jean-Yves Le Drian, Minister of Foreign Affairs, in the National Assembly: "Contrary to what I hear here and there, the trial is fair," said the minister, citing the presence of judges, prosecutor, clerk and lawyer at public hearings

4- The rejects

The so-called "exfiltration" or legal exclusivity doctrines of Western Europe are rendered obsolete.

In this case, it must be possible to present to the Iraqi state an agreement allowing the convicts to have their sentence commuted and to serve the sentence in Iraq before coming to Europe to be tried.

This judgment is essential because the European jihadists have carried the war to Syria and Iraq to be able to lead it also in the EU.

3) - Cultural colonialism

European democrats can thank the Iraqi authorities for this clarification of the debates.

This establishment of the fate of the jihadists prisoners on the only sector of the sovereignty of the countries on whose territory they worked puts an end to the equivocal colonialists that carried until recently the public debate.

1- The reference statement

The simplest statement of this cultural colonialism was given by the NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW):

"If countries like France do not want their citizens to be sentenced to death ... they should take them home to be investigated and prosecuted," said on Friday. May 31, 2019, Lama Fakih, Deputy Director of the NGO Human Rights Watch (HRW) for the Middle East. (In fact, all French convicts in recent days are subject to a judicial investigation in the Hexagon, and therefore liable to the special Assize Court).

In this logic, the Western countries guarantee to their nationals a criminal walk in any country of the South. They only have the right to watch the slaughterers go by.

This trick is based on a reasoning that could be thought obsolete; that of colonialism; even in a purely cultural form.

France, the Western states, can rightly "bring home" their nationals. How? Otherwise, because they have special, tutelary rights over the southern states.

French engage in a fight to destroy a political state. The French state must repatriate them when they are defeated to avoid the inconvenience of the local penal code: necessarily barbaric and tainted with illegality.

4) - The triple maneuver

Casually, the NGO invites the EU states, including the French state, to get involved in a triple political maneuver:

1- Disqualification

The French state is summoned to disqualify the Iraqi state, to act on its territory as master, which is characteristic of the colonial culture.

According to this NGO, the French state is in fact a superior state. The Iraqi state is de facto an inferior state.

2- Complicity

It must be seen as the fallback zone of the defeated criminals.

This declaration claims for Western countries, France for example, the right to "bring home" "their nationals" "for the purpose of investigation and prosecution".

This excludes the field study, ie judicial, of crimes committed in Iraq and Syria.

The incompetence of the French state, police and justice, for a field study is a fact.

The "nationals" would be judged only for having left for a place of fighting and for the declarations of their participation in them.

The lawyers would only make a mouthful of this type of accusation.

How to prohibit freedom of movement and how to prove personal facts on a battlefield that has no access, even after the fact?

As the French state could not release these people, we would return to the same hysterical lamentations of state infamy as to the Iraqi state.

So the joke of "investigations" and "prosecutions" is a simple procedure of reintegration of public life, an airlock. Their only judicial purpose is to prohibit the states of the South and the North from trying crimes committed against Daesh.

The NGO camp therefore develops as an argument both colonial cultural arrogance and the moral and political recognition of jihadism on the grounds that it concerns only inferior states.

3- The ideological filiation

If colonialism is purely cultural, ideological filiation is active.

Under this reasoning, the French State can not surrender its nationals to the Iraqi State and accept that the justice of the latter is the only competent judge, because, ultimately, it recognizes a legitimacy in the fight against Kalifa against the principle of the political state considered as bankrupt.

The French state is called to consider that the destruction of the political states of the South and their replacement by archaic structures can be a legitimate political goal.

He can not therefore consider himself attacked when the Iraqi political state is attacked.

In fact, all political states are a criminal continuity.

a- The Iraqi state does not judge. He sits his all power by a parody of justice accompanied by torture and blindness.

b- The French State failed in its mission of defense of all its fellow citizens. He collaborates with the lower justices of the South. He subtracts the infamy to which he does not want to attach his name but which he supports shamefully.

On reading their argument, it appears that the NGO party settles in the same ideological lineage as the Islamic State.

This filiation is that of the disqualification of the political state in favor of kalifa.

This time, it is not a question of attacking the states but of making them powerless, of forbidding them to defend themselves or to exist morally, of delegitimizing them.

Colonialism and villainous complicity are added to the Munich ideology.

The goal is to win culturally the battle lost militarily.

5) - Conclusion

The defeat of Daesh highlighted the conflict of two political lines.

It would be futile to wait for the conflict between these two political lines to recede.

The victory of one is necessarily the defeat of the other.

75 years ago, on the beaches of Normandy, a battle was fought. The two armies were as violent, cruel, criminal, but also globalist and nationalistic, one as the other.

The stake was the Occupation or the Liberation.

Thanks to the lucidity and determination of yesterday's winners, Europeans still have the means to choose between today's two lines.

This is not obvious.

Marc SALOMONE