MODENA The question comes from Modena Palestinian and a sentence published yesterday by the Court of Rome, Personal Rights and Immigration Section, intended to “set a precedent” in the use of terms. Specifically stating that it cannot be said in the public service that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. In fact, the Modenese lawyer promoted the cause, together with his colleague Dario Rossi from Genoa Fausto Gianellicriminal lawyer but also expert in international law.
The TV episode
It all starts from the May 21, 2020 episode of “The Legacy”, in which the host asked the competitor what the capital of Israel was. She replied Tel Aviv, but he corrected her to Jerusalem, and she was then forced to correct. The embassy of the State of Palestine in Italy sent a letter of protestfollowing which in the episode of 5 June 2020 the host made a clarification in which he said that «there are different positions on the issue. We believe that we, who have no right to do so, should not enter into such a delicate dispute, and we apologize for having involuntarily evoked it.” The Palestinians became even more angry, claiming that there is no discussion on the point, because the UN and the international legal system, but also the Italian one, have never recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
The sentence
This gave rise to a civil lawsuit for defamation against Rai, promoted by the Charity Association of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, based in Genoa, and the Palestinian Association in Italy, based in Milan, defended by Gianelli. The sentence was clear: according to judge Silvia Albano “it is clear that the information disseminated on the first occasion of 21 May 2020according to which Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, is objectively false.” The judge therefore condemned Rai to broadcast “L’Eredità” during the course (which, however, is no longer broadcast, ndr) or in another program with a similar type of user and time slot, the correction: “Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel and is not recognized as such by international law”. The request for compensation for damages was not accepted because it was formulated in too general terms, but Rai was still sentenced to pay the appellants a residual amount of 5 thousand euros in legal costs.
The lawyer
«We are extremely satisfied» underlines the lawyer Gianelli, who is a member of the ELDH Executive Committee – European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and Human Rights. «The judge established two basic elements: that RAI must provide correct information, and that international law is very clear in recognizing that Jerusalem was illegally occupied by Israel, together with the other territories. We also had support from a report by Francesca Albanese, UN special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories. The ruling establishes that in Italy recognizing Israel’s occupation is illegal. Saying on TV that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel means recognizing the abuse of force against law. It would be like saying that occupied Donbass is Russia.”
**How does the Rome court’s ruling on RAI’s portrayal of Jerusalem’s status potentially challenge established norms surrounding neutrality in international reporting?**
## Interview: Jerusalem: Capital or Contested Territory?
**Guests:**
* **Fausto Gianelli:** Modenese lawyer and expert in international law, representing the plaintiffs in the case.
* **[Name of Guest 2]:** Legal expert specializing in international law and media regulations, providing an independent perspective.
**Introduction**
Welcome to World-Today-News.com. Today, we’re diving deep into a recent court ruling in Rome that has ignited a debate about the status of Jerusalem. We’re joined by Fausto Gianelli, the lawyer who spearheaded a successful lawsuit against the Italian national broadcaster RAI, and [Name of Guest 2] for a balanced perspective on this complex issue.
**Section 1: The Ruling and its Implications**
* **Mr. Gianelli, you successfully argued that stating “Jerusalem is the capital of Israel” on public television is “objectively false.” Can you elaborate on the legal basis for this claim?** *This question probes the legal reasoning behind the ruling.*
* **How significant is this ruling in the broader context of international law and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Does it set a precedent for future cases?** *This encourages an analysis of the ruling’s wider implications.*
* **[Guest 2], what are your thoughts on the court’s interpretation of international law in this case? Do you see this as a landmark decision, or is it more nuanced than that?** *This invites a counterpoint and diverse perspective.*
**Section 2: Freedom of Speech and Media Responsibility**
* **Mr. Gianelli, critics argue that the ruling could stifle freedom of speech and prevent open discussion on controversial topics. How would you respond to these concerns?** *This addresses potential counterarguments and ethical dilemmas.*
* **What are the responsibilities of public broadcasters like RAI when it comes to presenting information on sensitive geopolitical issues? Should there be stricter guidelines?** *This encourages reflection on media ethics and their role in shaping public opinion.*
* **[Guest 2], do you believe the court’s decision strikes a balance between freedom of speech and the responsibility to provide accurate information?** *This invites further nuance and debate on the balance between rights and responsibilities.*
**Section 3: The Future of Jerusalem**
* **Mr. Gianelli, the ruling doesn’t explicitly address the future status of Jerusalem. What are your hopes for a resolution to this enduring conflict?** *This looks beyond the legal case towards a potential solution.*
* **[Guest 2], what are the potential consequences of legal rulings like this for future peace negotiations regarding Jerusalem?** *This explores the broader implications for the political landscape.*
* **Do you believe international law can play a more effective role in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict moving forward? If so, how?** *This encourages a forward-looking discussion on the role of law in conflict resolution.*
**Conclusion:**
Thank you both for your insightful contributions to this complex and important discussion. We hope this interview has provided our audience with a deeper understanding of the intricate legal and political issues surrounding the status of Jerusalem.
—
**Note:** This structure allows for a dynamic and engaging interview, encouraging discussion and exploring multiple perspectives on this sensitive issue.
