Fact-finding missions are obliged to avoid even the perception of bias. Regrettably, Pillay's prior public lobbying to “sanction apartheid Israel” is a basis for questioning

As Lord Hope added, “protestations” by an individual accused of bias that she has an open mind “are unlikely to be helpful.” Pillay cannot magically

Under the UN rights office's own rules, commissioners need “a proven record of independence and impartiality,” which are impacted by “prior public statements.” Pillay is

…that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased”. The appearance of bias is sufficient to disqualify a person. There is no need

The legal principle was stated by Lord Hope of Craighead for the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords in 2001. A person should not

Yet like Schabas in 2014, Pillay effectively argues that “What I am going to try to do is park my views at the door…they’re not

Two key facts: 1. In June 2020, Pillay publicly lobbied governments to “Sanction Apartheid Israel!”https://t.co/qsGeI7TfQ9 2. In June 2021, Pillay publicly lobbied President Biden to

Navi Pillay says her lobbying to “sanction Israeli apartheid” doesn't make her biased because “statements made as individuals in the past” are unrelated to “the

Lord Ahmad, she just went to China, kowtowed to Xi and sold out the Uyghurs. https://t.co/z9LU8RYyHB — Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) June 15, 2022

Boom: @ColRichardKemp blasts U.N.'s Pillay Commission in their faces. “Mr. President, Putin's disinformation justifies his illegal war on Ukraine; your own disinformation justifies Hamas’ illegal

.@cornjag1 @jinsadc on Hamas' use of Gaza's Al-Jalaa tower, which housed AP & Al Jazeera, in the 2021 Hamas-Israel War: “Why was Hamas using a

UN Watch