Newly released today, Defence for Children International-Palestine Section (DCI) has produced this short film about Israel’s ill-treatment of Palestinian children during their arrest, transfer and detention. Alone: Palestinian Children in the Israeli Military Detention System contains images of children who found the courage to talk about the appalling treatment.

For example, 14-year-old Ala tells how he was handcuffed and blindfolded during his arrest. “They [Israeli soldiers] put me in the jeep and transferred me to Etzion interrogation center. The interrogator told me to say goodbye to my friend Muhannad, because he was going to throw me from the third floor. No one was there to protect me. No one was with me. I was alone.”
Since 2000, around 7,500 Palestinian children from the occupied Palestinian territories have been detained, interrogated and imprisoned within the Israeli military law system. The film also presents basic information and the impact of their arrest and detention on families.

When 13-year-old Muhannad talks about his arrest, the look in his eyes is heart breaking. His father saw how Israeli soldiers treated his son, “It was as if they were coming to arrest a combatant or an armed fugitive.”

Interrogations are set up to terrorize
In 75 precent of the cases documented by DCI, child detainees suffered some form of physical violence during arrest, transfer and interrogation.

The suffering starts the moment a child is arrested and continues throughout interrogation and court sessions, explains DCI lawyer Iyad Misk. Children are often physically, verbally abused, insulted by soldiers during transport in the jeep. The abuse continues during the interrogation.

Children are also often enticed with offers of immediate release in exchange for confessions. However, what normally happens is just the opposite. Once a child confesses, he is sent to prison and his file is sent to the court. Interrogations are set up to terrorize, says Misk.

Nader Abu Amsha of the East Jerusalem YMCA Rehabilitation Programme says that the purpose of the raids, arrests and interrogations is more than getting information. It is to break the will and spirit of a generation. The purpose is to break the children and make them live in fear and confusion so they become an inactive, unproductive generation.

DCI’s latest film is an excellent tool to inform a wide audience about the ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system. The film can watched on YouTube, or copies of the DVD can be ordered from DCI-Palestine.

First published in the Electronic Intifada.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

Al Haq’s memorandum provides a solid legal framework for advocating Palestinian rights, based on the recommendations of the 2004 International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the wall Israel built on Palestinian land, and the internationally accepted 2001 general rules on legal obligations of states when international law is violated. International legal scholars have endorsed the memorandum including Professor John Dugard.

The report also gives legal backing to governments wishing to sanction Israel, stating that ‘it is lawful for any injured party, including any affected State, to take “countermeasures”’.

The document is in particular relevant for the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement because it explicitly strengthens the legal basis for activism against Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise. The document presents useful examples of public and corporate complicity. The following summary of the legal paper focuses on information which is particularly relevant for the BDS movement.

Israeli settlement development is a state enterprise

Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory violate Article 49 (6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which states that “the occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”

Israeli governments, the Israeli military, the Jewish Agency and the World Zionist Organization (WZO) played a crucial role in the strategic and operational planning at the early stages. More recently, settlement expansion has been driven by the Ministry of Construction and Housing, the Ministry of Defense – including the Minister’s Assistant on Settlement Affairs – the Israeli military and its “Civil Administration” in the occupied territories, regional and local authorities, and the Settlement Division of the WZO, writes a 2005 official government report. These bodies have mapped Palestinian land allocated for confiscation, identified suitable locations for settlements, supported their construction, and facilitated populating them with Jewish Israeli settlers. Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are therefore the outcome of a state enterprise and not merely the work of the settlers.

Moreover, the Israeli parliament (Knesset) and the courts, in particular the Israeli High Court, have passed over the years legislation and jurisprudence to “justify” the settlement enterprise.

Complicity of institutions and companies

Several public and private actors receive contracts or subsidies for their services to Israel’s settlement enterprise such as postal authorities, academic institutions, the Israeli labor union (Histadrut) and Israel’s national water company Mekorot, which plays a key role in the discriminatory water supply to Israeli settlements and Palestinian communities in the occupied territories.

Other players in the settlement enterprise are Israeli security, trade and export companies, such as Elbit, Agrexco and Mehadrin. Businesses and associations provide essential services for the maintenance and development of the settlements in the area of construction, transport, supply, and services in health, education, culture and sports.

Moreover, private Israeli security companies such as G4S Israel perform tasks in the occupied territories that were traditionally executed by the Israeli security forces. G4S provides equipment and services for the incarceration of Palestinians or the operation of checkpoints and the police headquarters in occupied Jerusalem.

IT companies like Hewlett-Packard subsidiary EDS Israel provide and maintain surveillance and other security-related technology for the Israeli army and settlements.

Israeli banks provide the financial infrastructure and services for all settlement activity including foreign companies.

States must ensure Israel’s respect for international law

During the 45-years settlement enterprise, Israel has realized dramatic changes of the status and demographic composition of the occupied territories. It violated the Fourth Geneva Convention and human rights treaties, as well as customary international law prohibitions on colonialism, racial discrimination and apartheid.

All 194 states who ratified the Fourth Geneva Convention are responsible to ensure Israel’s respect of the provisions of the Convention.

Under the International Convention against Torture, the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, states have the obligation to ensure that persons responsible for serious breaches amounting to international crimes are brought to justice.

In addition, all states have the legal obligation to cooperate to bring Israel’s international crimes to an end. They should also not recognize the illegal situation created by Israel in its settlement enterprise, nor render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation. Therefore, all states have to ensure that its organs, public and private entities, and persons whose activities are attributable to the state under international law, do not violate these obligations. This includes state-funded or otherwise-supported aid agencies and businesses performing certain official functions in the settlement enterprise.

Complicity of states in Israel’s international crimes in relation to settlements

Many states are complicit in Israel’s settlement enterprise by rendering unlawful aid or assistance via state organs, entities and individuals whose activities are attributable to the state. Grave examples are military aid or cooperation with Israel’s oppression of Palestinians in the occupied territories. Official aid or support for the construction and development of Israel’s wall, checkpoints, terminals, prisons and detention centers are other examples.

The same counts for aid or support the so-called joint Israeli-Palestinian industrial zones in the occupied territories, which benefit Israeli business, undermine Palestinian development and exploit Palestinian labor. States are also complicit by allowing direct, often tax-exempt, support of the illegal settlements by Jewish and Christian Zionist organizations registered in their country.

A grave act of complicity is the international protection the United States provide to Israel. Through diplomatic pressure on other states, in the full knowledge of the circumstances, it obstructs efforts of states – within and outside the United Nations – to counteract Israel’s serious breaches.

Furthermore, states who cooperate with or support settlement activities of Israeli state-organs or public and private entities violate the legal obligation not to provide aid or assistance in maintaining the unlawful situation. This happens in numerous cases of official cooperation in the area of trade and research, including the EU. State support to activities or projects of (transnational) business companies who contribute to Israel’s unlawful settlement enterprise in the occupied territories. Such aid or assistance amounts to recognition of the illegal situation created by Israel in the occupied territories.

The 2010 OECD decision to accept Israel as a member, with its settlements in the occupied territories but without the occupied Palestinian population, is mentioned as another grave example of complicity.

Complicity of donor governments and state funded aid agencies

Donor governments and state-funded aid agencies render aid or assistance to Israel’s settlement enterprise when they construct Palestinian infrastructure, in particular roads, which indirectly contributes to the maintenance of Israel’s regime of segregation and apartheid in the occupied territories and the expansion and entrenchment of Israel’s settlements in the occupied territories. The same counts for the procurement of materials or goods for humanitarian and development aid from Israeli suppliers implicated in violations linked to the settlement enterprise.

In addition, states or state-funded aid agencies provide recognition of the settlement enterprise when they abide by Israel’s illegal permit regime in the occupied territories, or when state representatives conduct relations with Israeli organs or entities endorsing the illegal settlement enterprise.

Moreover, donor governments and state-funded agencies provide recognition when they fail to hold Israel accountable for its serious breaches in public statements or UN resolutions, or tolerate destruction or damage of aid-infrastructure or aid-equipment by the Israeli army without military necessity, or by private settlers.

States can lawfully impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel

The serious breaches linked to Israel’s settlement enterprise in the occupied territories legally affect all states. Therefore, states are entitled to act individually or collectively on behalf of the Palestinian victims. They can lawfully take countermeasures such as reprisals or sanctions, because Israel has failed to comply with its obligation of cessation of the illegal settlement enterprise and reparation for Palestinian victims.

To bring down Israel’s settlement enterprise states can, for example, lawfully adopt measures to prohibit import of Israeli goods or export to Israel, suspend cooperation agreements with Israel, impose other forms of embargoes on trade and cooperation; freeze funds and assets of the Israeli state, entities and persons responsible for the serious breaches; bar Israeli banks from international financial transfers (SWIFT); and suspend agreements on landing rights of airplanes or impose flight bans.

However, states have failed to adopt appropriate countermeasures to end Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise. That is why the BDS movement campaigns against governments, local authorities, companies or other actors who are involved in Israel’s breaches of international law against the Palestinians in the occupied territories. The BDS movement can build on the legal arguments presented in Al Haq’s paper to strengthen its strategy and actions.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

This video, shot by the Research Journalism Initiative, shows Israeli soldiers using Palestinian children as human shields in Balata refugee camp near Nablus in the occupied West Bank in 2007. 

Two more such incidents – in Tulkarm and Hebron – are reported in a new publication from the Israeli veterans’ organization Breaking The Silence with disturbing testimonies from Israeli soldiers about the maltreatment of Palestinian children under Israeli occupation.

Children are exposed to a harsh daily reality of constant friction with occupation forces, arrests, violence, intimidation and harassment. They are wounded or killed because soldiers ignore them at the scene of events, or by targeting them directly, sometimes at random. The disturbing actions the soldiers describe — some undoubtedly amounting to war crimes —  took place in the occupied Palestinian territories between 2005-2011. This post is the first of two which summarize shocking examples of the abuse of children by Israeli forces.

Using children as human shields

Two soldiers testified how children were used as human shields. In Tulkarm in 2005, the “neighbor procedure” was used in an arrest mission.

Usually a resident of the neighboring house is summoned and required to enter the wanted person’s home and call all its inhabitants to come outside. “We got all the people out. No one was the wanted person. We feared he was still there, inside. So at first neighbors were used, then some kid. Bilal, I even recall his name. I remember because I got very angry over this. And they kept sending him into that house to check that no one was inside, open all the doors, turn on all the lights, open all the windows.”

“So there’s a school there. We’d often provoke riots there. We’d be on patrol, walking in the village, bored, so we’d trash shops, find a detonator, beat someone to a pulp, you know how it is,” said a soldier relating incidents in Hebron in 2006-2007. “Search, mess it all up. Say we’d want a riot? We’d go up to the windows of a mosque, smash the panes, throw in a stun grenade, make a big boom, then we’d get a riot,” he continued.

Once, “We fired a lot of rubber ammo. A lot. Every time we’d catch Arab kids, hold them like this, with stones, like retards. You know, so that the others would throw stones at them, not at us.” When asked if the children were turned in human shields, the soldier replied “Yes.” The kids cannot run away, he explains, because they will be badly beaten. “You catch him, push the gun against his body, he can’t make a move, he’s totally petrified.”

Use of handcuffs for torture

In 2009, the Israeli army’s Kfir Brigade was ordered to take over a school in the town of Salfit in the occupied West Bank and turn it in into a detention facility. Anyone between 17 and 50 years had to be arrested to collect information for the Shabak (Israel Security Agency), however, even 14-year-old children were brought in.

People arrived blindfolded and shackled. “There are soldiers who know what the point of the [plastic] handcuff is, and then there are others, who think that it is meant as a device to stop blood flow from the wrist to the fingertips. [T]hey think it should be on so tight that no blood can get through.”

Many people were very tightly shackled “and they were begging to be released just a bit. Eventually, after they cried and complained, the company commander ordered them released, and after a while [about seven hours] they even had their hands in front instead of behind their backs. It takes time for hands to turn blue. Not everyone had blue hands, but many people already turned numb.”

The operation lasted from morning until noon the next day. Detainees had to stay the whole time blindfolded and shackled in the sun. When they asked to go to the bathroom, they were beaten to pulp and cursed at for no reason by the soldiers who took them there. A 15-year-old child was taken the bathroom “to piss and a soldier slapped him, took him down to the ground while he was shackled and blindfolded. Just like that, because he is an Arab.”

“Choose someone, aim at his body.”

A soldier who served during 2006-2007 in Nablus explains that when children hit you with stones, you don’t get out of the jeep. “You shoot through the loophole.” Asked “Do you choose some kid at random?” a soldier replied “Yes. Choose someone, aim at his body.”

“I remember one time we put a kid down. We didn’t kill him but someone hit the kid in the chest and he fell and probably lost consciousness, or at least, it was pretty close. About 10 meters.”

The soldier stated that his brigade was not instructed in how to use rubber ammunition. “There are rules. They tell you to shoot four. There’s this cluster of rubber bullets, pieces with four parts, packed in a kind of nylon. You can break it in two, so it’s stronger and flies further. As soon as it’s four it’s less strong and flies less far. We’d usually break it in half. [W]e figured it out ourselves. It’s something that’s common knowledge in the army.”

Interviewer: “As soon as this pack of rubber bullets is broken in half, it becomes lethal.

Soldier: “Really? Well, that’s what we did.”

Interviewer: “We did, too. As soon as the ‘tampons’ are separated, they’re lethal. The nylon must not be removed.”

Soldier: “Not removed?!”

Interviewer: “No.”

Soldier: “We barely fired a whole cluster, I mean four. It’s like you want to save ammo, too.”

Violence against Palestinian children

The booklet presents numerous examples of shocking violence against children.

• “At first you point your gun at some five-year-old kid, and feel bad afterward, saying it’s not right. Then you get to a point where… you get so nervous and sick of going into a village and getting stones thrown at you. But it’s obvious, you’re inside the village, you’ve just passed the school house, naturally the kids will throw stones at you. Once my driver got out, and without blinking, just grabbed some kid and beat him to a pulp. And that kid was just sitting in the street and looked like some other kid, or wore another kid’s shirt, or perhaps he was that kid but that’s not the point” (Nablus in 2005).
• “We’d go on two night patrols in the designated area. I was driving and suddenly I see some Arab boy, about 18 years old, with his face mangled, really bad. He had a black eye, his lip was torn, in really bad shape. So I stop, offer him water, and he points at my jeep and say the license plate number was 06543, so he goes: “No, 0666 hit me.” I don’t understand what he wants from me and then the other jeep arrives. The sergeant in it says: “See how I handled him?” (Bethlehem 2006-2007).
• “Kids would throw stones at us, we’d catch some kid who happened to be there and beat him to a pulp. Even if he didn’t throw stones. He would know who did. ‘Who is it? Who is it?’ Finally he’d tell us who did it.” The soldiers gives an example of the heavy beating of 10-year-old child which is suspected of throwing stones. “That commander had no mercy. Really. Anyway the kid could no longer stand on his feet and was already crying. He couldn’t take it anymore. He cried. The commander shouted: ‘Stand up!’ Tried to make him stand but he couldn’t. He really couldn’t. From so much beating he just couldn’t stand up. The commander goes: ‘Don’t put on a show,’ and kicks him some more.” In response to the question “If I were a Palestinian, what would I get beaten up for?”, a soldier replies “It was enough for you to give us a look that we didn’t like, straight in the eye, and you’d be hit on the spot. We got to such a state and were so sick of being there, you know what I mean” (Hebron 2006-2007).
• “There was another instance of a 14-year old, an illegal alien. He was detained, kept on the side, so he stood there and hummed to himself. This annoyed one of the guys. He went up to him and said: ‘Something amusing you?’ The kid said: ‘Yes, gotta keep my spirits up.’ ‘Spirits up, eh?’ and the soldier slapped his face” (Tulkarm 2008).
• A commander who wanted to to detain a child, “tore him away from his dad’s leg and we put the kid in the jeep. I did nothing at that point. At the end of the day, something has to make these kids stop throwing stones on the road because they can kill. That specific kid who actually lay there on the ground, begging for his life, was actually nine years old. I think of our kids, nine years old, and a kid handling this kind of situation, I mean, a kid has to beg for his life? A loaded gun is pointed at him and he has to plead for mercy? This is something that scars him for life” (Qalqiliya 2007).
• Following a riot at Qalandiya, there was an ambush put up in an abandoned house in Ramallah. “Soldiers got out with army clubs and beat people to a pulp. Finally the children who remained on the ground were arrested. The order was to run, make people fall to the ground. There was a 10-12 man team, 4 soldiers lighting up the area. People were made to fall to the ground, and then the soldiers with the clubs [a 30 centimeters long wooden club] would go over to them and beat them. A slow runner was beaten, that was the rule. We were told not to use it on people’s heads. I don’t remember where we were told to hit, but as soon as a person on the ground is beaten with such a club, it’s difficult to be particular” (Ramallah 2006-2007).

My next post will contain examples related to arrests and detention of Palestinian children, the order to shoot in case of suspicion of Molotov cocktails, and the practice of documenting abuse.

First published at Electronic Intifada.
AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

Re: Israel:Military Justice System Fails Victims of Gaza Conflict

Dear Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu,

I am William Nicholas Gomes, Human Rights Ambassador for Salem-News.com.

I have been informed by Human Rights Watch regarding the military trial that ended August 12, 2012, failed to hold anyone accountable for the killings of a mother and daughter during Israel’s military operation in Gaza in December 2008 and January 2009.

According to HRW, The two women were killed when an Israeli soldier opened fire on a group of civilians holding white flags to demonstrate their civilian status. The case concluded after a soldier pled guilty to “unlawful use of arms” without any conclusion that the action was linked to the killings. In a civil case, Israeli authorities paid compensation to the women’s families.

“The Israeli military received strong evidence in dozens of cases that its soldiers killed Palestinians unlawfully during Israel’s ‘Operation Cast Lead,’ yet the military has indicted only four soldiers, and jailed none on such charges,” said Eric Goldstein, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “The scant accountability for the apparent crimes by Israeli soldiers casts grave doubt on Israel’s willingness to prosecute crimes by its forces.”

Rayya Abu Hajjaj, 56, and her daughter Majida Abu Hajjaj, 35 were killed at around 1 p.m. on January 4, 2009, while trying to leave Juhr al-Dik, a village near the Israeli border in central Gaza that had come under Israeli attack, witnesses told Human Rights Watch. After an Israeli military radio broadcast told civilians to leave, and to seek medical treatment for a child wounded by a shell that struck a house in which they had sought shelter that day, the women joined a group of around 28 Palestinians holding white flags, witnesses said. Two of the four witnesses said they saw an Israeli soldier open small arms fire on the group without warning, fatally wounding the two women. The other witnesses could not identify the source of the shooting.

The witnesses told Human Rights Watch that the Israeli military had refused permission to allow medical teams to reach the area after the shooting. Rayya’s son, Majid Abu Hajjaj, told Human Rights Watch that he returned to the family’s home on January 20 and found the bodies of his mother and sister in the street. “The bodies were still lying there – Majida had been run over by a tank,” he said. “The next day our neighbors came and brought us her [severed] foot. My mother’s body was in the yard, too, partially buried under some sand.”

Israeli and Palestinian rights groups, the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, and journalists independently documented the shooting incident. The military has not sought to justify the fact that its troops opened fire, either by claiming that Israeli forces were under attack or that the women who were shot posed any threat.

The Israeli military prosecutor charged a soldier with the manslaughter of an unidentified Palestinian in the area where the women were killed, but the prosecution said it could not identify the victim. The prosecution closed its case against the soldier on August 12, dropping the manslaughter charge when he pled guilty to a diminished charge of “unlawful use of arms” for shooting his assault rifle without authorization.

The military court sentenced the soldier, identified as Staff Sgt. “S.” from the Givati Brigade of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), to 45 days in jail. He will be the second Israeli soldier to serve jail time for his actions during the 2008-09 Gaza conflict, in which Israeli forces committed numerous apparent violations of the laws of war. Israel jailed one other soldier for seven-and-a-half months, for stealing a Palestinian’s credit card.

Israeli media reported that the prosecutor and the soldier’s lawyer agreedthere was no conclusive proof that the shooting had caused the women’s deaths because Palestinian witnesses and Israeli soldiers gave different versions of the incident to military investigators, including the date the women were shot. The prosecutor’s office apparently took no steps to re-interview Palestinian witnesses to help resolve the discrepancies, even though an Israeli rights group that helped facilitate the Palestinians’ testimony urged military investigators to do so in July 2010, when the military first published a brief description of the case.

The case points to serious flaws in the Israeli military justice system, Human Rights Watch said. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported in July 2010 that, “as in several other cases,” the January 2009 killing “was not reported up the chain of command beyond the battalion and brigade levels,” and that the military advocate general’s office, which is responsible for prosecuting soldiers for crimes, “only learned of the killing because Palestinians filed a complaint via human rights groups.” The Israeli rights group B’Tselem wrote to the military advocate general with extensive details about the case in May 2009. The military prosecutors filed charges against “S” in July 2010.

Human Rights Watch found that Israeli criminal investigations of apparent laws-of-war violations in the Gaza conflict were not prompt, thorough, or impartial. Investigations also failed to credibly examine policies authorized by senior levels of the country’s political and military leadership that may have led to violations of the laws of war, including rules of engagement that allegedly led to shootings of civilians, firing high-explosive artillery shells into populated areas, and the widespread destruction of civilian property.

In the Israeli military system, in many cases, alleged crimes are prosecuted only if soldiers from the unit that was involved first report the incident to officers in the chain of command. Since both the soldiers and the officers to whom they are reporting may be implicated in the violation, the system is not conducive to reporting events that should be criminally investigated, Human Rights Watch said. It also delays criminal investigations, which may not be initiated until after the reporting procedure, known as an “operational debriefing,” is completed. An additional problem is that the “debriefings” are intended primarily as a lessons-learned exercise and are not conducted by criminal investigators.

In July 2010, the military said it had opened an investigation after being informed of the killings. The military prosecutor indicted “S” for opening fire without authorization and for the manslaughter of an unidentified Palestinian in Juhr al-Dik on January 4, 2009, an Israeli governmental report stated, but the identity of the person “S” killed could not be confirmed. The report noted unspecified “inconsistencies” between the military’s initial investigations and other reports.

The military spokesman’s office said on July 6, 2010, that soldiers who were questioned said the shooting incident killed a Palestinian man and occurred on January 5, 2009, whereas Palestinian witnesses said it was January 4. This discrepancy contributed to the court’s conclusion that there was no proof that the women were killed when “S” opened fire.

B’Tselem, which helped arrange for the Palestinian witnesses to give testimony to the military, wrote to the military prosecutor when the military first reported the discrepancy, asking investigators to take steps to clarify the date. But the military prosecutor did not call the Palestinian witnesses for new interviews to clarify the discrepancies, B’Tselem stated.

Haaretz reported that “S”’s lawyers contended that no body had been recovered, although B’Tselem said it provided the military with the women’s death certificates.

On August 1, 2011, Israel agreed to pay 500,000 shekels (US$123,000) in compensation to the Abu Hajjaj family in a civil case filed over the women’s deaths. The family, represented by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights in Gaza, closed its civil claim as a result. Civil compensation for victims of international crimes does not relieve a state of its obligation to prosecute a deliberate killing of a civilian by its military forces, Human Rights Watch said.

With the conviction of “S,” the Israeli military courts have convicted a total of four soldiers for violations of Israeli military law during the 2008-09 Gaza conflict. A military court in November 2010 demoted and gave three-month suspended sentences to two soldiers for forcing a civilian boy to open a bag they suspected was booby-trapped (it was not).

In another case, an Israeli military court in February 2010 reprimanded a commander in the Givati Brigade for “exceeding his authority” by authorizing an artillery attack that hit the UN Relief and Works Agency field headquarters in Gaza City on January 15, 2009. No members of Palestinian armed groups were present in the UN compound. However, the court-martial case involved only the use of high-explosive artillery shells and did not try the commander for authorizing the use of white-phosphorus munitions in the incident, which caused extensive damage to the UN compound. Hundreds of civilians were sheltering there at the time.

In May, Israeli military courts exonerated the same commander of “criminal intent” or “negligence” for ordering an attack on January 5, 2009, on a civilian home where no members of armed groups were sheltering. The attack killed 21 members of the Samouni family. However, the military did not investigate reports that its forces repeatedly denied medical crews access to the Palestinian wounded in the area for three days after that attack. The International Committee of the Red Cross, which attempted to obtain permission from Israeli forces for medical access, later reported finding young children lying without food or water beside their parents’ dead bodies.

Investigations by Israeli, Palestinian, and international rights groups documented numerous cases of apparent serious violations by Israeli forces during the conflict, during which they killed hundreds of Palestinian civilians.

I want to remind you the state of Israel is standing on the base of injustice and out of the system nothing but injustice you can deliver. The democracy, rule of law and justice is fully absent within the state of Israel, the state need a full reformation.

AUTHOR: William Nicholas Gomes
URL: www.williamgomes.org
E-MAIL: williamgomes.org [at] gmail.com

Caterpillar machine involved in construction of Israeli A1 railway tunnel 3A in the occupied West Bank. (Photo retrieved from Israel Railways’ Facebook page on 29 July 2012)

Who Profits?, a project of the Tel Aviv-based Coalition of Women for Peace, found photo’s of the A1 high-speed train project that will connect Tel Aviv and Jerusalem on the Israel Railways’ Facebook page. The photo’s – published on 4 June 2012 – document the use of Caterpillar equipment in the construction of tunnel 3A which lies within the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

Israel’s A1 high-speed train crosses the Green Line – the 1949 Armistice Line (also known as the “1967 line” or “Green Line”) that is internationally recognized as the boundary between Israel and the occupied West Bank. When completed, the A1 high-speed train will exclusively serve Israeli commuters between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Who Profits published a report on the A1 fast train in October 2010.

Overview of the construction site of A1 high speed railway tunnel 3A near Palestinian villages of Beit Iksa and Beit Surik. (Photo retrieved from Israel Railway Facebook page on 29 July 2012)

Israel builds railway tunnel 3A on occupied land

The railway will run for six kilometers on occupied Palestinian land, violating international law in several ways. For example, Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention forbids Israel as occupying power from destroying Palestinian property. The construction of the A1 railway also constitutes a significant alteration of the infrastructure of the West Bank contrary to the Hague Regulations of 1907, Section 3. Israel’s entire settlement enterprise in the West Bank has been declared illegal and illegitimate countless times by governments all over the world and by the United Nations Security Council and the International Court of Justice  although no action has ever been taken to enforce those decisions.

Tunnel 3A is part of the section of the railway which cuts into the West Bank near the Palestinian villages of Bet Surik and Bet Iksa, close to Jerusalem. The section consists of a tunnel, a bridge over Cedar Valley and a second tunnel. The map on page 11 in Who Profits’ report on the A1, clarifies the situation. Tunnel 3A is situated on occupied land.

In the original plan the route would pass the Israeli town of Mevaseret Zion. However, the Israeli residents objected to the plan, demanding that the route be moved at least 500 meters further north. Following protests by Israeli citizens, the railway route was moved to 250–300 metres north of the 1949 Armistice Line, cutting into the lands of the vilages Beit Surik and Beit Iksa.

Caterpillar machine assisting in construction of Israeli A1 railway tunnel 3A near Palestinian villages of Beit Iksa and Beit Surik. (Photo retrieved from Israel Railways’ Facebook page on 29 July 2012)

Caterpillar machinery used for illegal construction of railway tunnel on occupied Palestinian land

Recently, Maureen Clare Murphy reported in her blog Milestone victory: pension fund giant TIAA-CREF divests $72 million from Caterpillar that US pension fund giant TIAA-CREF had removed Caterpillar, Inc. from its Social Choice Funds portfolio. The Quaker Friends Fiduciary Corporation decided to divest $900,000 worth of shares in Caterpillar one month earlier.

The role of Caterpillar machines in the illegal construction of A1 railway tunnel 3A in the occupied West Bank is yet another reason for socially responsible investors to divest from the company.

First published at The Elctronic Intifada.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

G4S, the firm at the center of the debacle over security for the London 2012 Olympics, is helping Israel secure facilities where Palestinian children are imprisoned and severly abused.

Defence for Children-Palestine (DCI-Palestine) has released an urgent appeal to end the practice of holding Palestinian children from the West Bank in solitary confinement in facilities in Israel. The organization has documented 53 such cases since 2008.

The children have been held in solitary confinement mainly in Al Jalame and Petah Tikva interrogation centers. The security systems for Al Jalame detention facilities were provided by G4S Israel, according to a March 2011 report on the firm by Who Profits.

G4S Israel is a subsidiary of British-Danish security firm G4S and it is deeply involved in Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories, as well as in Israeli prisons and detention centers.

Meanwhile, G4S has lost its credibility because its incapacity to deliver on the contract to secure the London Olympics. The UK government stepped in and mobilized 3,500 military personnel to fill in the gap. Nick Bukcles, G4S’s CEO, was interrogated by members of parliament about the failure of his company. Buckles admitted that G4S’s reputation is in tatters.

DCI-Palestine documents the cases of 19 boys held solitary confinement
In its urgent appeal, DCI-Palestine has documented the cases of 19 boys who were held in solitary confinement by Israel. The boys were aged between 15 and 17 years. DCI-Palestine writes:

In most cases the children are arrested from their homes in the occupied West Bank by Israeli soldiers in the middle of the night. After being tied and blindfolded, the children are transferred to an interrogation centre inside Israel, most commonly to the Al Jalame facility, near Haifa. The children report being held in solitary confinement at these facilities for an average of 10 days. Whilst detained in these facilities, the children are questioned by ISA interrogators and are generally denied access to their parents and a lawyer. No education is provided to children at these facilities. 

The children taken to Al Jalame describe being held in solitary confinement in a small cell (commonly referred to as “Cell 36”) measuring approximately 2×3 metres. The children report either sleeping on a concrete bed, on the floor, or on a thin mattress which is often described as “dirty” and “foul smelling.” Meals are passed to the children through a flap in the door, thus depriving them of human contact. The walls of these cells are reported to be grey in colour with sharp protrusions which are painful to lean against. There are no windows and the only source of illumination comes from a dim yellow light that is reported to be kept on 24 hours-a-day. Some children complain of suffering pain behind their eyes and adverse psychological effects after being detained in these cells.

It appears from the testimonies provided by the children that the dominant purpose for detaining them in these conditions is to break their spirit in order to extract a confession. Many children report being kept in solitary confinement between lengthy interrogation sessions in which prohibited techniques are frequently used, such as excessive shackling of the legs and hands, as well as position abuse, physical violence and threatening behaviour. Most children detained and questioned in these facilities end up providing a confession, which in some cases, is written in Hebrew. Once the children confess, they are prosecuted in a military court and transferred to a regular prison.

DCI-Palestine recommends to send urgent appeals to members of parliament and Israeli embassies in your country. DCI suggest to call in your appeal for an immediate end to the practice of solitary confinement of children, and that Israel should amend its laws to prohibit the practice. In addition, every detention facility, including Al Jalame, must be opened up to unbiased external inspection.

First published at The Electronic Intifada.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

An Israeli soldier fired at a bag to terrorize a nine-year-old Palestinian after the boy was unable to open it, according to a new report.

Defence for Children International (DCI) in Palestine has published the report on Israel’s treatment of Palestinian children. The report – which covers the period of October 2002 to May 2012 – was submitted to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child on 4 June. The report presents facts about children who were killed or used as human shields as a result of the occupation. It highlights the situation of the children prosecuted in Israeli military courts or held in military detention. In addition, DCI reveals details about ill-treatment by Israeli forces and the increasing use of violence by settlers against Palestinian children.

The video above illustrates the behavior of Israeli soldiers and settlers towards Palestinian children. It was made in 2009 and tells the story of 16-year-old Jameel from occupied Hebron. Jameel testifies about his arrest by Israeli soldiers while he accompanied two electricians to his home. Jameel was beaten by the soldiers and taken blindfolded and handcuffed to a checkpoint nearby. He was forced to stand near the checkpoint while a group of 40 to 50 settlers threw stones and brutally beat him. When the soldier in command appeared, he released Jameel. However, he threatened Jameel not to talk about what had happened; otherwise he would personally kill Jameel.

In February, I reported in my blog  post “Shabak tortures and ill-treats Palestinian detainees with impunity” about efforts to hold the Israeli secret service (Shabak) to account for its torture and ill-treatment of Palestinian detainees. In Accountability Still Denied, the Public Committee against Torture in Israel (PCATI) revealed how Israel has evaded criminal investigations into all 701 complaints of torture and ill-treatment.

One month later, I wrote about complaints about misbehavior towards Palestinian women detainees and prisoners. In my blog post  ”Palestinian women testify about ill-treatment and torture during their arrest and interrogation,” I reported about two group complaints — filed by PCATI — addressing gender-specific types of ill treatment and torture.

This month, DCI has published a report to the UN, containing disturbing information about the ill-treatment and torture of Palestinian children by Israeli forces and  Shabak interrogators.

No trust in Israel

DCI has submitted 11 complaints on behalf of Palestinian children since 2009. PCATI experienced that the majority of detainees who reported torture or ill-treatment to PCATI’s lawyers refused to submit complaints to the Israeli authorities. According to PCATI, the victims have no trust in Israel’s mechanism of investigation or fear reprisals. The number of complaints is therefore no indication of the frequency of the misbehavior by Israeli forces. Instead, they give insight into the type of violence used against the children.

The complaints filed by DCI on behalf of the Palestinian children concern ill-treatment and torture by Israeli forces. Here are some details of the complaints as presented in DCI’s report.

Dua, aged 16, was forced at gunpoint by Israeli soldiers to search for a weapon during a raid on her house on 18 February 2010.

Ibrahim, aged 15, was arrested at 1:30 am on 25 May 2010. He reported that an interrogator in Gush Etzion attached a pair of car battery jump leads to his genitals and threatened to electrify the cable.

Ahmad R., aged 17, was arrested at 1:30 am on 20 May 2011. He was ordered out of the house with the rest of his family and made to strip naked in front of everybody and was then tied and blindfolded. Ahmad reported being beaten by soldiers inside a military vehicle.

Ahmad F., aged 15, was arrested from his family home at around 2:00 am on 6 July 2011. Amongst other things, he reported that soldiers placed food on his body and then brought a dog over to eat the food.

Rasheed, aged 16, was arrested by Israeli soldiers on 4 November 2011 and transferred to the Jalame facility, inside Israel. He reported being held in solitary confinement in a windowless cell for 13 days and being repeatedly interrogated whilst tied to a chair.

Mahmoud, aged 17, was arrested by Israeli soldiers on 10 March 2012, when he was walking beside a road near the village of Azzun, where he lives. He reported being ill-treated during the process of arrest, transfer and interrogation.

Mohammad H., aged 14, was arrested from his family home in East Jerusalem at 4:00 am on 15 March 2012. He reported being ill-treated during the process of arrest, transfer and interrogation by the Israeli authorities.

Sadem, aged 16, was arrested while he was grazing sheep with two other boys on 16 March 2012. He reported being beaten and remaining tied for 19 hours.

‘Ala, aged 15, and two of his friends were arrested by Israeli soldiers on 10 May 2012. They were accused of throwing stones at settler cars and reported being repeatedly beaten by the soldiers. DCI has published more information about ‘Ala on its website.

Mohammad J., aged 16, and two of his friends were arrested by Israeli soldiers on 10 May 2012. They were accused of throwing stones at settler cars and reported being repeatedly beaten by the soldiers.

Israeli soldiers abuse nine-year-old Majed as a human shield

Nine-year-old Majed was forced at gunpoint by Israeli soldiers to search bags suspected of containing explosives on 15 January 2009. On its website DCI tells the boy’s story:

Majed recalls that there were about 40 men, women and children in the basement seeking shelter. At around 5:00am, units from the Givati Brigade entered the basement “firing.” Majed recalls seeing the red laser sights from their guns everywhere. The soldiers separated the men from the women and children and forced them to strip down to their underwear. Whilst this was going on a soldier approached the group of women and children and pointed to Majed and said “come here.”

“The soldier approached me and grabbed my shirt from my neck and dragged me away. ‘He’s a child,’ my mother began shouting. I thought they would kill me,” recalls Majed, “I became very scared and wet my pants. I could not shout or say anything because I was too afraid. The soldier dragged me 20 meters away. He pointed his weapon at me. He was shouting at me and I did not understand him, so he grabbed me and pushed me against the wall. He then started motioning with his hand and I figured out he wanted me to open the bags; small bags that the residents brought down with them containing their personal effects and money. The bags were similar to the bags used by football players. I understood from his hand gestures that he wanted me to open the bags. There were two bags in front of me. I grabbed the first one as he stood one-and-a-half meters away. I opened the bag as he pointed his weapon directly at me. I emptied the bag on the floor. It contained money and papers. I looked at him and he was laughing. I grabbed the second bag to open it but I could not. I tried many times but it was useless, so he shouted at me. He grabbed my hair and slapped me very hard across the face. I did not shout or cry but I was very scared. He dragged me away from the bags and forced me to stand against the wall, as he stood about one-and-a-half meters behind me. He then shot at the bag that I could not open. I thought he shot at me, so I shouted and put my hands on my head. He then pulled me through the corridor and another soldier said ‘Go to your mother.’ I ran to my mother and hid in her arms. ‘I wet my pants,’ I said to her. ‘It’s fine,’ she said.”

DCI filed a complaint on behalf of Majed which led to the “conviction” of the two soldiers who used him as a human shield. They received three month suspended sentences and were demoted in rank.

The complaint filed by Ibrahim was closed, while the cases of Ahmad F. and Rasheed have been opened for investigation. It is not known what will happen with the complaints of the other children.

First published at The Electronic Intifada.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

Vast areas near the occupied Dead Sea are closed off by Israel as “military area” (Who Profits, October 2010)

WhoProfits, a research project of the Coalition of Women for Peace, has documented corporate plunder of natural resources in the occupied West Bank. For example, Israeli cosmetics firm Ahava’s extraction of mud from the occupied Palestinian Dead Sea and HeidelbergCement and Cemex’s role in operating quarries in the West Bank. HeidelbergCement and Cemex headquarters are based in Germany and Mexico, respectively.

Last September, the Open Society Institute published the updated “Corporate War Crimes, Prosecuting the Pillage of Natural Resources,” a manual written by law professor James G. Stewart. The manual is useful for lawyers, rights organizations and Palestine solidarity activists to explore options to hold business representatives to account for their role in the plunder of Palestinian natural resources.

Natural resources in the West Bank are owned by the Palestinian people

Sovereignty over natural resources and the right to self-determination are closely tied. The Palestinian people unquestionably have the right to self-determination. The League of Nations already affirmed this right in 1917 and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) did so in its 2004 authoritative legal opinion on Israel’s wall built on occupied Palestinian land. The ICJ also found that “Israel is bound to comply with its obligation to respect the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and its obligations under international humanitarian law and international human rights law.”

The UN General Assembly declared that sovereignty over natural wealth and resources is a “basic constituent of the right to self-determination” by adopting Resolution 1803 in 1962. The UN Security Council affirmed peoples’ rights to natural resources on several occasions.

By granting companies permits to extract natural resources in the occupied Palestinian territories for the benefit of Israel and the companies, Israel disregards its international obligations. Moreover, Ahava, HeidelbergCement and Cemex have conscientiously requested Israel army’s civic administration – the occupying power – for permission, instead of the owners – the Palestinians.

Ahava, HeidelbergCement and Cemex extract Palestinian natural resources

WhoProfits has documented the extraction of Palestinian natural resources by Israeli cosmetics firm Ahava and multinational building materials industries HeidelbergCement and Cemex.

Ahava operates an excavation site on the shores of the occupied Dead Sea to extract mud for its products. In a letter of 26 April 2011, the Israeli army’s civic administration informedWho Profits that it had granted Ahava a license for operating a site for collecting mud from the occupied area of the Dead Sea for commercial uses. Ahava received the license in 2004 and has been operating the excavation site ever since. The company is selling its products containing stolen Dead Sea minerals in Ahava flagship stores in Germany, Hungary, the Philippines, Korea and Singapore.

The multinational building materials industries HeidelbergCement and Cemex from Germany and Mexico, respectively, are involved in the operation of quarries in the occupied West Bank.

HeidelbergCement’s subsidiary Hanson Israel operates the Nahal Raba quarry in the West Bank near the green line — Israel’s internationally-recognized boundary with the occupied West Bank — and Kfar Qasim, a Palestinian village in Israel.

Cemex owns fifty percent of Yatir Quarry through its subsidiary ReadyMix Industries. The Yatir quarry lies next to the Israeli settlement of Teneh Omarim in the south Hebron hills of the West Bank.

In May 2011, The Electronic Intifada documented the transportation of construction material from Yatir and Nahal Raba quarries in the occupied West Bank into Israel.

International law prohibits plundering of natural resources

In his manual, Stewart writes that the laws of war protect property against pillage during armed conflict. In the Hague Regulations of 1907, two provisions stipulate that “the pillage of a town or place, even when taken by assault, is prohibited,” and that “pillage is formally forbidden.” According to an interpretation by Julius Stone, “wasteful or negligent destruction of the capital value, whether by excessive cutting or mining or other abusive exploitation” by the occupying state in the territory it occupies is “contrary to the rules of good husbandry,” Stone is recognized internationally for his expertise in international law. In addition, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 reaffirmed that “pillage is prohibited.” 

ICJ sets important precedent in case of illegal occupation of Namibia by apartheid South Africa

The South African apartheid regime illegally occupied Namibia for decades. The ICJ set an important precedent in its 1971 Advisory Opinion on South Africa’s presence in Namibia. Stewart refers to the Namibia Opinion in his manual by quoting the Court’s conclusion, “[O]fficial acts performed by the Government of South Africa on behalf of or concerning Namibia after the termination of the Mandate are illegal and invalid, this invalidity cannot be extended to those acts, such as, for instance, the registration of births, deaths and marriages, the effects of which can be ignored only to the detriment of the inhabitants of the Territory.” Therefore, attempts by the apartheid South African regime to grant title in Namibian natural resources were “illegal and invalid,” because the expropriation of natural resources is not analogous with registering births, deaths, and marriages.

Moreover, one of the judges on the case explicitly confirmed this interpretation in a separate opinion by adding that “other States should not regard as valid any acts and transactions of the authorities in Namibia relating to public property, concessions, etc.” The UN Security Council and United Nations Council for Namibia, later confirmed this view.

Palestinian natural resources exploited for the benefit of Israel and companies

Stewart presents in his manual also the argument that non-renewable resources can be exploited by an occupying army, provided that the money from these sales is spent exclusively on the humanitarian needs of the local population.

However, this is certainly not the case with Heidelberg Cement and Cemex. The Israeli daily Haaretz reported that Israel’s state comptroller revealed in its annual report for 2005, that although any royalties from the quarries should be used for the benefit of the Palestinian population, they were paid into the Israeli state treasury instead (“Digging up the dirt,” 3 September 2010).

In the case of Ahava, part of the profit will directly flow into the settlements of Mitzpeh Shalem and Kalia. The kibbutzes in these illegal settlements in the West Bank own 37% and 7,5% of Ahava, respectively.

Israel accelerates exploitation of Palestinian quarries after it occupied the West Bank

Stepping up the extraction of natural resources in war zones or conflict areas is a characteristic of the war crime of pillage. Until the early 1970s only two Palestinian quarries had existed in the area, according to Haaretz. The Israeli daily reports that Israel’s stone and gravel quarries in the West Bank came into operation in the early 1970s.

Israel’s plundering drew the attention of the UN General Assembly in 2010, expressing “its concern at the exploitation by Israel of the natural resources of the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” and called upon Israel “not to exploit, cause loss or depletion of or endanger the natural resources in the OPT.” It also recognized the right of the Palestinian people to claim restitution as a result of any exploitation, loss or depletion of, or danger to, their natural resources.

Business representatives can be held to account for plundering

Criminal courts are capable of prosecuting business representatives for pillage perpetrated during the course of commercial activities in a conflict zone, writes Stewart in his manual. After the Second World War, the Nuremberg Tribunal ruled that “[i]nternational law… binds every citizen just as does ordinary municipal law.” The Tribunal concluded that crimes against international law “are committed by men, not by abstract entities,” to ensure that the corporate structure did not shield business representatives from individual criminal liability. It contributed to broad consensus that the laws of war bind individuals.

Stewart argues that perpetrating, aiding, and abetting or instigating pillage of natural resources renders individual business representatives guilty of a war crime. He mentions that for example Germany, home country of HeidelbergCement, the 2002 Code of Crimes against International Law states that “Whoever in connection with an international armed conflict or with an armed conflict not of an international character pillages or, unless this is imperatively demanded by the necessities of the armed conflict, otherwise extensively destroys, appropriates or seizes property of the adverse party contrary to international law, such property being in the power of the perpetrator’s party, shall be punished with imprisonment from one to ten years.”

The boycott, divestment and sanctions movement has exposed the complicity of a number of multinational corporations in the Israeli occupation, alerting investors to the incompatibility with corporate social responsibility. In addition, Ahava has been targeted by the movement with protests and a boycott and protests.

The manual “Corporate War Crimes, Prosecuting the Pillage of Natural Resources” provides an additional tool. It can be used by lawyers, rights organizations and Palestine solidarity activists to explore options to hold business representatives to account for their role in the plunder of Palestinian natural resources.

First published at The Electronic Intifada.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

The 'Separation Wall' cutting through Abu Dis. The Wall is one of the factors that is in the way of a proper functioning Palestinian economy.

Around 25.8% of Palestinians suffered from poverty in the Palestinian Territory in 2011, said a report by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) on Monday. It showed that slightly more than one out of four individuals was living below the poverty line in 2011, 17.8% in the West Bank and 38.8% in Gaza Strip. Similarly about 12.9% of individuals were living below the deep poverty line in 2011, 7.8% in the West Bank and 21.1% in Gaza Strip.

In 2011, the poverty line and deep poverty line for the reference household (two adults and three children) stood at 2,293 Israeli shekels ($637) per month and 1,832 shekels ($509) respectively. (The criteria were the amount that a family of five was able to spend on food, housing and clothing as is clarified in an earlier report of the PCBS from 1998.

A report released last May by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI ) put the number of Palestinians in East Jerusalem living below the poverty line even much higher: at no less than 78%. For children the number is even 84%. And it is on the increase: in 2006 the numbers for adults and children were 64% and 73% respectively.

Reasons are the neglect of the Arabic part of the city, with shortages of – for instance – 1000 classrooms, and of 50 kilometer of sewage pipes. Another is ‘the Wall’ which divides the main body of the city from many of its outskirts. ACRI mentions that since 1999 more than 5000 firms in Arabic East Jerusalem have closed their doors. As one of the consequences an estimated 40% of the male workforce does not participate in the job market and of the women some 85% is thought to be jobless. What may play a role as well, particularly in the case of the women, is the extreme shortage of kindergarten facilities. For some 15.000 children in the age of 3-4 years there are no more than 433 places available in a creche or pre-school.

As for the poverty in the West Bank and Gaza, also the occupation plays the biggest role, according to the World Bank.  In Gaza it is the the almost complete isolation from the rest of the world and the Israeli siege of the Strip. In the West Bank it is the Wall, the checkpoints and the many restrictions on the movement of people and goods.

AUTHOR: Martin Hijmans
URL: http://the-pessoptimist.blogspot.com/
E-MAIL: m.hijmans [at] planet.nl

Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of the State of Israel, pm_eng@pmo.gov.il

Re: Israel:Mahmoud Sarsak at risk of death’: Free him immediately

Dear Prime Minister of the State of Israel,

I am William Nicholas Gomes, Human Rights Ambassador for Salem-News.com.

I am writing to express my serious concern over Mahmoud Sarsak who at risk of death in Israeli prison.

Mahmoud, 25 years old and a member of the Palestinian national football team, has been detained for nearly three years under Israel’s “Unlawful Combatants Law,” which allows for Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to be detained for an unlimited amount of time without charge or trial. Those detained under the Statute have little or no legal protections, even less than those detained under administrative detention orders in the West Bank.

According to the information received Mahmoud Sarsak is currently on his 87th day of hunger strike, resulting in an imminent threat to his life. Despite the urgency of his condition, the Israeli Prison Service (IPS) has denied Mahmoud access to independent doctors from PHR-Israel until today.

According to PHR-Israel, The IPS also refuses to transfer him to a civilian hospital for proper treatment. Following today’s visit, the PHR-Israel doctor reported that Mahmoud has experienced extreme loss of muscle tissue and drastic weight loss. He has lost 33 percent of his body weight, from an original weight of 76 kilos down to his present weight of 51 kilos. He also suffers from frequent incidents of fainting and loss of consciousness, in addition to lapses in memory. The doctor further reported that Mahmoud is in danger of pulse disruptions (arrhythmias) that are endangering his life.

PHR-Israel’s independent doctor strongly recommended that Mahmoud should be immediately transferred to a hospital, as they are at immediate risk of death. These recommendations were given directly to the IPS doctor .It should be emphasized that contrary to medical ethic and professional standards, the IPS refused the request of the independent doctor to go over the full medical files of Mahmoud.

Israel’s practice of jailing West Bank Palestinians inside Israel violates the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit an occupying power from detaining members of the occupied population outside the occupied territory. I want remind you that administrative detention is allowed under international humanitarian law, it must be used only under exceptional circumstances as it infringes upon basic human rights, including the right to a fair trial. Indeed, the denial of a fair trial constitutes a ‘grave breach’ of the Fourth Geneva Convention, one of the most serious forms of war crimes. This form of arbitrary arrest also contravenes Articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

I also want to remind you the European Parliament called on Israel in a September 2008 resolution to “guarantee that minimum standards on detention be respected, to bring to trial all detainees, [and] to put an end to the use of ‘administrative detention orders’.”

Also the United Nations Human Rights Committee has stated several times that prolonged administrative detention is likely to result in the exposure of detainees to “torture, ill-treatment and other violations of human rights.”

I will also urge you Israel should immediately charge or release people jailed without charge or trial under so-called administrative detention. And Stop Jailing People Without Charge or Trial.

Israel’s international legal obligations require it to inform those arrested of the reasons for the arrest at the time, to promptly inform them of any charges against them, and to bring them before a judge, and in criminal cases, to provide a fair and public trial in which the defendant may challenge any witnesses against them. In its concluding observations on Israel in 2010, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which monitors states’ compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, criticized Israel’s “frequent and extensive use of administrative detention,” and called on Israel to “refrain from using [it]” and to “complete as soon as possible” a review of relevant legislation.

Given the critical health condition of the hunger strikers and the fact that Mahmoud Sarsak face imminent death:

• I demand that Mahmoud Sarsak should in advanced stage should move immediately to civilian hospitals where they can receive the standard of care necessary;
• I call for immediate intervention for the IPS to provide Mahmoud Sarsak with unrestricted access to independent doctors;
• I demand that Mahmoud Sarsak should allowed family visits;

Please note I have writtena separate letter to UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention asking urgent intervention on the case of Mahmoud Sarsak.

Please note that I have written a separate letter to the Member States of the United Nations to urgently put pressure on Israel to end its policy of arbitrary detention and to abide by the standard rules for the treatment of prisoners adopted in 1955, which set out what is generally accepted as being decent principle and practice in the treatment of prisoners.

I have also communicated with the European Parliament to activate the parliamentary fact-finding mission that includes members of its Subcommittee on Human Rights to investigate the conditions of detention of Palestinians held in Israeli prisons;specifically on the case of Mahmoud Sarsak. I have emphasized that the parliamentary fact-finding mission must include an investigation into Israel’s illegal practice of administrative detention and the use of the “Unlawful Combatant Law”;

I have draw urgent attention of the members of the European Parliament to bring the case of Mahmoud Sarsak attention of relevant Israeli authorities without delay.

I request your urgent intervention.

AUTHOR: William Nicholas Gomes
URL: www.williamgomes.org
E-MAIL: williamgomes.org [at] gmail.com