According
to ChristianPost;
Dola
Indidis, a lawyer, Roman Catholic, and former spokesperson for the
Kenyan Judiciary, filed the lawsuit regarding Jesus’ death with the
International Court of Justice, the primary judicial branch of the
United Nations based at The Hague in the Netherlands.
Indidis
filed the lawsuit against Pontius Pilate, several Jewish elders, King
Herod, Tiberius (Emperor of Rome 42 BC-37AD), the Republic of Italy
and the State of Israel.
“I
filed the case because it’s my duty to uphold the dignity of Jesus
and I have gone to the ICJ to seek justice for the man from
Nazareth,” Indidis told the Nairobian in a recent interview. “His
selective and malicious prosecution violated his human rights through
judicial misconduct, abuse of office bias and prejudice.”
Indidis
claims the goal of his lawsuit is to have “a declaratory judgment
declaration that the trial judgment and sentence entered were badly
done and therefore null and void,” according to The Blaze.
Additionally, the lawyer argues that Jesus’ sentence was
incompatible with Galilean law at the time, as the sentence for
blasphemy was being stoned to death, not crucifixion.
According
to the Jerusalem Post, Indidis named the Republic of Italy and
the State of Israel in the lawsuitbecause when these two states
gained independence, they incorporated the laws of the
Roman Empire into their new government systems. These are the
same laws that were in effect when Jesus was crucified.
Indidis
initially submitted his case to the Kenyan High Court in Nairobi in
2007, but it was rejected for not having enough legal standing,
especially since parties Indidis wishes to prosecute have been dead
for 2,000 years.
Although
Standard Media reports that the International Court of Justice
has created a preliminary panel to consider Indidis’ case, an ICJ
spokesperson told Legal Cheek that it would not be considering the
case, as it is out of its jurisdiction. The ICJ usually focuses on
territory disputes between countries belonging to the United Nations.
“The
ICJ has no jurisdiction for such a case. The ICJ settles disputes
between states. It is not even theoretically possible for us to
consider this case,” the ICJ spokesperson told Legal Cheek.
I just don't know what to say about this. But is this lawyer serious?
No comments:
Post a Comment