Web Site: http://www.aredam.net

See the news at: http://www.aredam.net/divers.html

Title of this page :


Complaint against unknown persons according to the terms of Article 211-1 of the French penal code, for the crime of genocide over the people of Palestine.

1 - Introduction

2 - Text of the charge

3 - Plan of the complaint:

3 - 1- Regarding the qualification of the crime of genocide.
3 - 2- Regarding the quality to act and validity of the CODEIG society
3 - 3- Regarding the obligation to pay a deposit when instituting a civil action, in anticipation of an eventual civil law fine for instituting an improper action.



1 - Introduction

Why it is fundamental for the common development of mankind to have a world-wide debate over the problem of genocide in general.

This article has been written by Michel DAKAR, a man who is committed to judicial denunciation of the genocide of the Palestinian people by the Zionists. This text introduces a civil action that will be shortly instituted.

Genocide was not invented by mankind; nor has it been limited to one era in history or one region of the world.

It is an act which concerns other animal species, including the apes. The cases of chimpanzees and gorillas have been particularly studied, where one group of apes will totally destroy another in order to seize their territory. Similar behaviors have been observed among wolves and lions.

Genocide by man has occurred in all populations, all periods and all places.
Thus, the native people of the Americas, who were totally annihilated by European settlers in North America, or had their societies totally destroyed by the Spaniards in Central and South America, are themselves descended from a people that invested the Northern part of the American continent through the Behring straight, about eleven thousand years ago, and then slowly spread as far as Patagonia, at the extreme point of South America, radically annihilating on their way hundreds of big game species (elephants, tigers, lions, armadillos and others) which are now extinct. Some people think that that extermination was of a comparable scale to that of the extinction of dinosaurs.

The populations of the Pacific Islands behaved in the same way towards their fauna and flora. On Easter Island, for example, they eradicated all the big animals and destroyed all the forests, with the final consequence that they annihilated themselves, the end of their history being marked by acts of mass cannibalism between enemy clans.

Man is but a wrinkle in the history of life on Earth. He is neither central nor unique, nor original in his behavior. He is an animal, whose notable trait is a well-developed brain; but although he has a giant brain, he is still led by the same animal instincts as our so-called inferior brethren, the apes and lions, and such.

Destroying other species, or other groups in the same species, or other forms of life, such as plants, is extremely common to all forms of life.
When we look at Man, that recurring of destruction and genocides looks like a stuttering in history, a wanton repetition, for Man has intellectual means that should enable him to overcome simple animal determinism.

To conquer a territory and eradicate its occupants - peoples or individuals - or subdue one’s neighbors in order to exploit them and benefit from them, and deprive them of the possibility of using their lives freely: what is genocide, if not a rapport of domination between individuals, wielded on a large scale by one group over another group or over other species, animal or vegetal?
Such is the animal-like typing that we must escape. And we have ample capacity for that.

Human history is but the general history of life; and we are at a turn in human history, at a threshold on which we are dancing, without deciding to cross.
Such is the general problem. And it is possible to deal with it concretely through the case of the genocide of the Palestinian people by the Zionists, which is happening under our very eyes, just beyond our doors, and is engineered by people with whom we live side by side, here in France, in our very towns and districts, in our own buildings, on our own doorsteps.

An action at law is to be instituted with the senior examining magistrate of the Paris Court against the individuals responsible for the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people. The text of the charge is given below.

This action will be supported by pickets of fighters distributing tracts, with due respect of the Law, and provided with explaining posters, who will be posted in front of the Palais de justice and the Préfecture de police in Paris, in an effort to have that action at law considered and not rejected straight off or taxed with an exorbitant sum of money.

It is indeed a matter of common knowledge that the Zionists who perpetrate the genocide of Palestinian people have supreme control over the Palais de justice and the Préfecture de police.

2 - Text of the charge :

Complaint against unknown persons according to the terms of Article 211-1 of the French penal code, for the crime of genocide over the people of Palestine
I the undersigned, Michel Dakar, President of the CODEIG society (COmpréhension et DEpassement de l’Idée de Génocide = Comprehension and Extension of the Idea of Genocide), whose office is at 36 rue Stephenson Paris 18ème, an address at which address CODEIG is also domiciled, file a complaint against unknown persons for the crime of genocide over the people of Palestine by the persons responsible for the Jewish settlements in Palestine, which started under the English colonial mandate delivered by the Society of Nations that declared, among other things, the creation of a ‘‘national home land for the Jewish people’’ on 24 July 1922, which was ultimately put in concrete form on 29 November 1947 by a United Nations vote deciding the partition of Palestine between the people of Palestine and the Jewish settlers; this crime is presently being made permanent and is proceeding towards its completion.

3 - Plan of the complaint:

3 - 1- Regarding the qualification of the crime of genocide.
3 - 2- Regarding the quality to act and validity of the CODEIG society
3 - 3- Regarding the obligation to pay a deposit when instituting a civil action, in anticipation of an eventual civil law fine for instituting an improper action.



3 - 1- Regarding the qualification of the crime of genocide.

Excerpt from Article 211-1 of the French penal code:

‘‘The fact of committing against members of any group, and in execution of a concerted plan aiming to the total or partial destruction of any national, ethnic, racial or religious group or of any group determined by any other arbitrary criteria, anyone of the following acts constitutes a genocide:

A willful attack against their lives;
A serious attack against their physical or psychic integrity;
Subduing them to conditions of existence of such a nature as to entail the total or partial destruction of the said group;
Any measure aiming to prevent births;
Any forced transfer of children.’’


Any colonization by settlement in an area that is already peopled constitutes in itself an act of genocide. Such was and is the case as regards North America, Australia, New Caledonia, Algeria and Tibet.

The intensive settlement of Jewish people in Palestine, as early as 1922, when Palestine was under British mandate, in a densely populated (600 000 people over an area roughly equivalent to that of Normandy) region in which all the land was already occupied and tilled, constitutes an act of genocide, for the consequence of that settlement was to deprive the original population of its land, when it is a well known fact that possession of the land is a condition that is inherent in the existence of a people.

Such a settlement was a willful attack against the life of the people of Palestine; it was also a serious attack against their physical and psychic integrity; moreover, it subdued them to conditions of existence of such a nature as to entail their total or partial destruction.

The so-called ‘‘Zionist’’ program, the name of which must be retraced to an ideology which conditions Jews to emigrate in Palestine, idealizes genocide.

This is substantiated by the famous quotation of a Zionist ideologue, which sums up the Zionist program: « a people-less land for a land-less people ».

The creation of the national Zionist community called Israel is based on a ‘right’ of genocide.

The worldwide recognition of the State of Israel constitutes a world-wide recognition of this ‘right’ of genocide.

Similarly, this recognition starts a new world order that would be based on the negation of culpableness for any crime, through an inversion of roles between criminals and victims.

This complaint is filed against all of the above.

The 24 July 1922 decision of the Society of Nations to authorize spoliation of the inhabitants of Palestine for the benefit of Jewish settlers by creating a ‘‘national home for the Jewish people’’ is therefore null and void, for it is in patent and absolute contradiction with the mandate given in that decision, which stipulated in Article 4: ‘‘… nothing will be done that may prejudice the civil and religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine.’’

Besides, the 29 November 1947 UN decision of partitioning Palestine, on top of the notorious fact that it had been obtained through shameless corruption, was also in opposition to the UN charter of 26 June 1945, which is based on the notion of the right of peoples to self-determination (Article 1, 2nd comma), as the 1947 decision is in direct and final conflict with this latter principle since the people of Palestine had no voice in the matter.

Since 1947, the UN charter has been based actually on the ‘right' to commit genocide over a people, on the ‘right’ to eradicate other people, and this means that, since 29 November 1947, human rights have actually been based on assassination.

The 1947 UN decision makes the UN charter null and void; thus the United Nations Organization has been a mere façade of right camouflaging non-right ever since.



3 - 2- Regarding the quality to act and validity of the CODEIG society

The CODEIG society was registered with the Paris Préfecture de police on 31 May 2005, and an acknowledgment was issued by the Préfecture on 2 June 2005.

It is inscribed in the CODEIG society’s bylaws that pursuant to Article 2-4 of the French code of penal procedure it has the power to institute any action as regards crimes against humanity. This power takes effect five years after the society’s registration with the Préfecture (31 May 2005 – 31 May 2010).

This society was declared lawful by a judgment of the district Court (1st civil division, on 14 September 2005), then by a decree of the Paris Court of Appeal (1st civil division, on 21 November 2006). This latter decision is final, since the Public Prosecutor did not lodge an appeal with the French supreme court of appeal.

The civil action against CODEIG had been urged by the Paris District Prosecutor upon recommendation of the Préfet de police, in order to obtain that the judges declare that Society unlawful ‘a priori’ (even before it acted) and decree its dissolution. Such a request was tantamount to instituting, through case law, a crime of intention.

In spite of this decision of justice, and although the Administration has had the bank check for the publication costs paid to its order, the Administration is still stopping the publication of the existence of CODEIG in the official gazette.

It is indeed true that the constitution of a society registered with the Préfecture is only effective when that fact has been legally published.

However, the nature of such a publication is not fixed by any statutory text.

Court decisions are decreed in public and are therefore public documents.

Their existence is as uncontestable as a publication in the official gazette, and so is their legal value.

Therefore the constitution of the CODEIG society has been legally published.


3 - 3- Regarding the obligation to pay a deposit when instituting a civil action, in anticipation of an eventual civil law fine for instituting an improper action.

The practice of requiring the remittance of a sum of money called ‘consignation’ (deposit) with each filing of a complaint instituting a civil action is governed by two articles of the French code of penal procedure.


Article 88

The examining magistrate notes, by order, the filing of the complaint. According to the resources of the party instituting the civil action, the judge sets the amount of deposit that that party must – unless it has obtained jurisdictional assistance – deposit with the clerk of the Court and the period of time within which the deposit must be effected under penalty of the complaint being declared un-receivable. Any party instituting a civil action may be exempted by the judge from such a deposit.


Article 88-1

The deposit set pursuant to Article 88 guarantees the payment of any fine that may be ordered pursuant to Article 177-2.

The sum deposited is restituted when no fine has been decreed by the examining magistrate or, in case of appeal by the Public Prosecutor or by the party instituting the civil action, by the examining division of the Court.


This judicial practice is doubly in contradiction with one of the bases of French Law, that of presumption of innocence, which is recognized in Article 9-1 of the French civil code:

- On the one hand by systematically assuming that any party instituting a civil action is guilty, and must pay a fine before any judgment;

- On the other hand by systematically assuming that, if the complaint is recognized as being abusive, the party instituting the civil action will then refuse to pay its fine.

More prosaically, by setting a deposit in an amount that may be prohibitive such a practice is a hidden means to keep away from justice any politically undesirable party instituting a civil action.

This second practice, the exclusion from justice through lack of money, is in contradiction with the French Constitution which affirms the equality of all citizens before the Law (Preamble of the Constitution of 4 October 1958, Article 1).

This complaint aims to re-establish Right at a planet level. Within this context, the inner consistency of this complaint implies that such a spirit of compliance with what is right must also be applied to the problem posed by the practice of remitting a sum of money when filing a complaint, a practice which is basically in opposition to the principle of right.

Therefore I ask to be exempted from any and all deposits.