'2 probable war crimes’ committed in Lebanon pager attack: Legal expert

By Rabia Ali

ISTANBUL (AA) - Tuesday’s deadly pager explosions in Lebanon have sparked significant concern among legal experts and academics, who stress that the attacks may amount to war crimes.

The pagers, wireless telecommunications devices, exploded Tuesday in several areas of Lebanon, killing at least 12 people, including two children, and injuring thousands.

Lebanese media suggested the incident showed an Israeli breach of the system, while local security sources said that Israel’s spy agency Mossad planted explosives inside pagers used by Hezbollah members months before they exploded.

Luigi Daniele, an expert in international humanitarian law, said he believes that there are “two probable war crimes” relevant to the incident.

“The first is intentionally directing attacks against individual civilians not taking a direct part in the hostilities, for all the unlawful targets, so basically, diplomats or merely political affiliates of Hezbollah with no combat function,” Daniele, a senior lecturer at the Nottingham Trent University, told Anadolu.

This, he explains comes under Article 8 (2) (b) (i) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) for directing attacks against civilians not taking direct part in hostilities.

The second potentially relevant war crime, he said, is intentionally directing attacks in the knowledge that they will cause "clearly excessive incidental civilian harm."

Calling this an “important war crime,” Daniele said the ICC recently charged Russian military commanders over their attacks on power grids for precisely this reason.

“I think it is even more the case when detonations have been planned to take place in densely populated areas full of civilians. So, this harm to civilians was entirely foreseeable," he argued.

This falls under Article 8(2)(b)(iv) of the Rome Statute of "intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated."

Daniele said it is important to understand that in this test about the excessiveness of civilian harm, “not only killing civilians but also injuring them” are included in the test.

He also stressed the issue of attribution with no claim of responsibility for the attack, adding that this is also an “important indicator.”

“Probably those responsible for the attack are aware of the many layers of its illegality and for this reason don't claim responsibility.”

- Targeting populated areas, civilians areas is unlawful

Daniele said that the most concerning aspects were the legal status of those targeted as they were not in an area of active hostilities, and were reportedly in densely populated areas of cities such as street markets or barber shops.

“Even assuming that some of the targets were lawful, still the modalities of the attack indicate by all standards a criminal attack," he said.

He explained that in areas out of active hostilities, only members of armed groups serving continuous combat functions can be targeted, and that it will need to be demonstrated that the targets were combatants.

According to Daniele, this “doesn't appear to be the case” in the Lebanon pager blasts.

“The main problem is that Israel's military security apparatus designates as targets civilians, political affiliates of groups it considers enemies or terrorists. And this is not lawful under international law."

“International law tells us that even lawful targets must be attacked (while) taking all the feasible precautions to spare civilians and in any way that the attacks should be canceled when it's foreseeable that they will cause excessive incidental civilian harm.”

Explaining further, he said: "It seems rather the contrary that the pagers have been detonated in the most densely populated areas while people were driving. So, of course, foreseeing with certainty the carnage that indeed happened."

The legal expert also highlighted another “important” prohibition under the laws of war and the prohibition against causing superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering including to enemy combatants.

“So (this applies) even (to) persons that might qualify for the combatant status. And here you know for sure it doesn't appear that it was the case for all targets. For example, foreign diplomats in missions abroad are by no means local targets. They are civilians. The same applies to merely political affiliates of non-state actors performing no combat functions or having no military status in the organization,” he said.