lost his wife and nine of his children altogether he lost thirty one family members his son lost his wife and his three children including his infants on who he saw  decapitated there's been a global movement to hold human rights abusers from all over the world accountable wherever they are especially when their own countries won't hold them accountable since the eighty's when the c c r sort of rediscovered the the statute which allows non citizens to bring claims in the united states courts against defendants from anywhere for violations of customary international law for human rights violations so basically when human rights violators have come to the u s non citizens have been able to sue them and hold them accountable in u s courts this has been supplemented by another statute the torture victims protection act which congress passed in one thousand nine hundred two which allows non citizens and citizens to sue for torture and what's called extrajudicial killings it's clear in the united states that international law is a part of u s law and that when the courts have jurisdictions over over people in the united states so when a human rights violator comes to the united states that person can be held accountable in u s courts for their acts wherever they occurred there is this is that you know this is primarily known as the concept of universal jurisdiction and a lot of countries allow for this concept although in most countries the claims are criminal in nature the defendant can actually be placed in jail you know can be arrested sentenced here in the united states although there could be the opportunity to have to have criminal suits against against defendants what private citizens can do or non citizens can do is hold them liable for damages in u s courts in other words they won't be able to be sentenced for their crimes but they can at least be held accountable for their crimes and assess damages to to the people that they farm to the victims of their crimes the palestinian victims of human rights violations are not different from any other victims they have the same rights and they have to be treated equally and fairly by those national systems including the us just justice system there is no reason at all that human rights violators from  are should be held liable for their human rights violations and human rights violators from israel should not in august of two thousand and five the israeli parliament part of the agreement was is that the israelis would not allow the flanges forces of the lebanese forces into west beirut because here was a civilian population that was totally unprotected and the israelis reneged on that promise what they did was they surrounded subbranches and allowed the lebanese forces to go in  lit up the sky with flares prevented any body from fleeing from suburbs and this orgy of killing took place over several nights in the camps we learned about the appointment a former israeli general whose name was amos your own become the military attache of israel at the israeli embassy in washington when we learned that the individual who had been appointed had been a person who had been found responsible by an israeli commission investigating the summer and shatila massacre we were astounded we were astounded because number one that they would appoint a person with such a background for such a and important position and number two that the united states with except such a person as the military attache to washington rewarded with this position as really military attache in washington we requested from the united states government that they not received his accreditation as the military attache in washington we got no satisfaction in that request so we began an effort to have him removed we contacted canada because whoever is the israeli military attache to the united states is also military attache to canada and we were successful and and getting the canadians to not accept your own as a military attache to canada we also wrote to all the members of the united nations pointing out the fact that the united states was accepting a person who was essentially a war criminal we filed a lawsuit  on behalf of some of the survivors of in the united states district court we were represented in this by professor francis boyle of the university of illinois law school motions to dismiss by your rooms attorney's worse successful before the federal judge who held that your own had immunity because he was a diplomat we also led a public information campaign with op ed pieces that were published in the here israel itself had had a commission that found your own to bear responsibility in the subbranch attilla massacre and he was being accepted with open arms by the united states to be a diplomat in washington we also had as part of our public information campaign put had placards put in the  washington d c subway system with your own picture a picture of the victims of  mostly alone is a fellow at the washington institute in washington d c so he's been in the u s for months and he was actually in one thousand nine hundred most recently of the chief of staff of the i d f the israeli defen forces until june of two thousand and five but in one thousand nine hundred eighty six he headed the intelligence branch of the i d f so that he was responsible for the intelligence and some of the cross border operations at the  time israel is occupying southern lebanon and in april of one thousand nine hundred six they conducted what was called operation grapes of wrath where they were shelling the civilian population in southern lebanon trying to get force them out of southern lebanon hundreds and hundreds at least eight hundred refugees fled to the un facility at the u n compound that had been set up in southern lebanon to basically monitor the occupation the u n compound was north of the occupied territory  so refugees had fled from their villages in southern lebanon and those who didn't have the money or the means to go all the way to beirut or other places had to go to the un compound in qana so about eight hundred refugees were there  very clear that was there the i d f knew it was there about eight hundred refugees fled to the compound and on april eighteenth the i d f actually attacked the compound  wife and nine of his children altogether he lost thirty one family members his son lost his wife and his three children including his infant son who we saw decapitated another plane a few lost his wife and three children and four others who suffered disabling injuries there was about a minute or two into the shelling the u n compound personnel actually contacted the i d f and said you're shelling a un compound the shelling continued for seventeen or eighteen more minutes before they stopped and asked international human rights watch the when all investigated the incident and found that it was unlikely that it was air this was their finding after significant public or significant pressure by the u s and  under his authority who made the decision or who implemented that decision and also for his responsibility and not punishing anyone for this incident the complaint alleges he is culpable for war crimes crimes against compensating these victims despite the fact that it's been almost ten years since the incident the victims have had have had no compensation there has been no accountability against any israeli officials for this incident there is really no place else for for the victims to go so finally they've been able to you know at least have been an attempt to achieve justice and a because moshe ya'alon is was is or was in the u s in washington d c so there's jurisdiction over him mostly alone is represented by a law firm who has appeared in litigation and will be moving to dismiss the case that doesn't it doesn't matter whether or not he is here or whether or not he is back in israel the case still moves forward against him you know in this case it was it was clear that this incident  you know is clear internationally that this incident violated international human rights and that it was that it was unlawful the other case that was also brought in the past and again it was an attempt to initiate a criminal prosecution of process was in belgium where victims of landmark case in the sense that it had brought to the legal system the the the importance of addressing those human rights violations especially where the victims were never been compensated were never been heard for the suffering for the damages that the have that they had during foreign jurisdiction to hear cases related to foreign nationals when there was no immediately in between of the victim or the perpetrators to the country where their victims were pursuing the actions and that is why there is so need now to continue with the process of seeking justice in every single legal system most recent case was the case of trying to to prosecute any israeli official who was formerly the head of the southern command in the israeli army drawn on  when he was the commander of over in the time that the massive home demolitions occurred and but to see a sense of for human rights associated or assisted by abuses maybe except for limited numbers of cases particularly with regard to genocide that were committed in rwanda in bosnia and other places laws that allowed victims of human rights early violations from all over the world to use the legal system in order to pursue justice there were several attempts and cases that were brought in different countries a particular in european ds for example during the civil war and they were successful using the one nine hundred fifty five in geneva conventions act in brussels and in other countries there were some attempts to bring such cases