Then why hasn't he disclosed the questions that were so innocent if he has nothing to hide. If he dealt with the PLO in a professional manner then he is not fit to sit on any committee that could be seen as a conflict of interest. Would you like to be faced by a Judge who had once defended the other party in a court of law, or would you rightly claim conflict of interest.
His answer to the above:
"I did not apply for the job. I was approached by the UN to do it. There was no question of disclosure of previous activities, because my record was well-known within the UN as well as by the states that were consulted on my appointment, including Israel. Earlier in the year, when I was being considered as a candidate for special rapporteur on the occupied territories, Israel was quite active in its opposition to me. Israel knew all about my past and my activities. The record is public." Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News
And as a professional he should have refused point blank because of a conflict of interest. What would you say if the next person approached had done work for Israel in the same manner. Would you accept him as chair of such an important committee, or would you be demanding his removal because of his conflict of interest. When he was originally appointed to the post those who were unbiased asked why he was appointed with his track record of ANTI SEMITISM and BIAS towards Israel.
I'll let the man answer that for himself:
"The word “biased” gets thrown around a great deal in this discussion. Some people seem to think that it is the same thing as having an opinion that is contrary to their own. But bias refers to someone who is asked to provide an impartial judgment and who is incapable of doing this because of personal views. Someone without bias is someone who is capable of putting their personal views aside in order to reach an objective, neutral and impartial position. There is lots of evidence that, in the past, I have expressed views that do not correspond to those of the government of Israel. But I can only be accused of bias if it can be shown that I cannot detach myself from those views. Is there any evidence that I cannot? I don’t think so. I think most of those who have criticized me for “bias” really only want to have a commission composed of people with views that lean in their direction. Q A William Schabas No evidence I m biased against Israel The Canadian Jewish News
And yet he has spoken out in the past in anything less like neutral words about Israel. He has accepted evidence that painted Israel blacker than black, but never withdrawn his words when the evidence was later proven to be false and Islamic propaganda. That in itself shows an unhealthy bias towards not only Israel but the Jews.
His response: "But I can only be accused of bias if it can be shown that I cannot detach myself from those views. Is there any evidence that I cannot? I don’t think so."
And yet he is viewed as a rabid ANTI SEMITE with comments such as these.
In 2010, writing in an article for a law journal, in response to the Israeli Prime Minister's statement that Israel faced "three major strategic challenges, namely the Iranian nuclear program, rockets aimed at our civilians and Goldstone,"Schabas stated his view that Binjamin Netanyahu might be regarded as “the single individual most likely to threaten the survival of Israel
Also in 2011, Schabas said in a speech that he believes that Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu should be "in the dock of an international court
In 2012, in regard to Iranian nuclear program, Shabas wrote that Iran “very arguably has a claim to require nuclear weapons for defensive purposes
Regarding Hamas, Shabas said: “If we look at the poor people of Gaza ... all they want is a state – and they get punished for insisting upon this, and for supporting a political party in their own determination and their own assessment that seems to be representing that aspiration
Schabas has accused Israel of war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression committed “on the territory of Palestine since 2002,” and has acknowledged that “much of [his] effort” is focused on bringing about the prosecution of Israelis at the International Criminal Court
And then his BLOOD LIBEL
During a speech at the Russell Tribunal in 2013, Schabas said that it is his "profound belief [that] the international law can be used to demonstrate and underscore the violations committed by the State of Israel, and moreover can be used to hold accountable individuals who have perpetrated international crimes against the people of Palestine." Asked about various possible tools for prosecuting Israel, Schabas said: "I would have been inclined to talk about crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression, all of which I think can be shown have been perpetrated at various times during the history of the State of Israel. These are all crimes that have become increasingly robust in their definition in recent decades and for which we now have international institutions capable of prosecuting the crimes. With a bit of luck, and by twisting things and maneuvering, we can get them before the courts