21 june 2018
Human Rights Watch has condemned the United States government’s decision to withdraw from the United Nations Human Rights Council, saying this is a sign of the country’s unwillingness to protect human rights.
“The US has been threatening to walk away from the Human Rights Council ever since President Trump came into office, so this decision comes as no surprise,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “Trump has decided that ‘America First’ means ignoring the suffering of civilians in Syria and ethnic minorities in Myanmar at the United Nations.”
“The Trump administration’s withdrawal from the Human Rights Council is a sad reflection of its one-dimensional human rights policy in which the US defends Israeli abuses from criticism above all else,” Roth said. “By walking away, the US is turning its back not just on the UN, but on victims of human rights abuses around the world, including in Syria, Yemen, North Korea and Myanmar. Now other governments will have to redouble their efforts to ensure that the council addresses the world’s most serious human rights problems.”
The US is withdrawing from the United Nations human rights council, the Trump administration announced on Tuesday, calling it a “cesspool of political bias” that targets Israel in particular while ignoring atrocities in other countries.
The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, claimed that she had traveled to the council’s headquarters in Geneva a year ago to call for reforms, to no avail.
“When a so-called human rights council cannot bring itself to address the massive abuses in Venezuela and Iran, and it welcomes the Democratic Republic of Congo as a new member, the council ceases to be worthy of its name,” the ambassador said.
Haley also pointed to the continued existence of “agenda item 7”, a permanent fixture on the schedule, exclusively devoted to the discussion of rights violations in the occupied West Bank and the blockaded Gaza Strip.
The US has long criticized the Human Rights Council for its standing agenda item 7 on rights violations by all parties in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This item was included when the council’s agenda was drawn up at the conclusion of its initial year, in 2007, at a time when the US had decided not to participate in the council.
“The US has actively campaigned for removing agenda item 7, and has opposed resolutions dealing with the Occupied Palestinian Territories, even when not presented under this agenda item, such as a recent Special Session resolution creating an inquiry into violence in Gaza,” said Human Rights Watch.
The Human Rights Council was created by the UN General Assembly in 2006 as the UN’s top human rights body. While it has its shortcomings – including the participation of persistent rights violators such as Israel – the council plays a vital role in addressing serious rights abuses around the world. It has initiated investigations into rights violations in Syria, Yemen, Burundi, Myanmar, and the occupied Palestinian territories, and addresses key topics such as migration, counterterrorism and protecting people with disabilities, and others from violence and discrimination.
“The US has been threatening to walk away from the Human Rights Council ever since President Trump came into office, so this decision comes as no surprise,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “Trump has decided that ‘America First’ means ignoring the suffering of civilians in Syria and ethnic minorities in Myanmar at the United Nations.”
“The Trump administration’s withdrawal from the Human Rights Council is a sad reflection of its one-dimensional human rights policy in which the US defends Israeli abuses from criticism above all else,” Roth said. “By walking away, the US is turning its back not just on the UN, but on victims of human rights abuses around the world, including in Syria, Yemen, North Korea and Myanmar. Now other governments will have to redouble their efforts to ensure that the council addresses the world’s most serious human rights problems.”
The US is withdrawing from the United Nations human rights council, the Trump administration announced on Tuesday, calling it a “cesspool of political bias” that targets Israel in particular while ignoring atrocities in other countries.
The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, claimed that she had traveled to the council’s headquarters in Geneva a year ago to call for reforms, to no avail.
“When a so-called human rights council cannot bring itself to address the massive abuses in Venezuela and Iran, and it welcomes the Democratic Republic of Congo as a new member, the council ceases to be worthy of its name,” the ambassador said.
Haley also pointed to the continued existence of “agenda item 7”, a permanent fixture on the schedule, exclusively devoted to the discussion of rights violations in the occupied West Bank and the blockaded Gaza Strip.
The US has long criticized the Human Rights Council for its standing agenda item 7 on rights violations by all parties in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This item was included when the council’s agenda was drawn up at the conclusion of its initial year, in 2007, at a time when the US had decided not to participate in the council.
“The US has actively campaigned for removing agenda item 7, and has opposed resolutions dealing with the Occupied Palestinian Territories, even when not presented under this agenda item, such as a recent Special Session resolution creating an inquiry into violence in Gaza,” said Human Rights Watch.
The Human Rights Council was created by the UN General Assembly in 2006 as the UN’s top human rights body. While it has its shortcomings – including the participation of persistent rights violators such as Israel – the council plays a vital role in addressing serious rights abuses around the world. It has initiated investigations into rights violations in Syria, Yemen, Burundi, Myanmar, and the occupied Palestinian territories, and addresses key topics such as migration, counterterrorism and protecting people with disabilities, and others from violence and discrimination.
The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics released a statement Wednesday to mark the occasion of World Refugee Day. The report stated that Palestinians make up the world’s largest refugee population, with around 5.9 million Palestinian refugees around the world.
According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), Palestinian refugees live in 58 camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and other countries, while many others have settled in refugee camps in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and the Israeli-blockaded Gaza Strip.
“Palestinian refugees in the West Bank who are registered with UNRWA in 2017 accounted for up to 17% of the total registered refugees against 24.4% in the Gaza Strip,” said the PCBS in the statement, which was released on the occasion of the World Refugee Day.
Jordan has the largest number of Palestinian refugees with 39% of the total refugee population, followed by Syria and Lebanon 10.5% and 9.1% respectively.
According to PCBS, 43% of Palestinians in the State of Palestine are displaced refugees.
The poverty rate among Palestinian refugees registered 39% in 2017, while it reached 22.3% among non-refugees, the statement said.
“Unemployment rate among refugees reached up to 34.7% compared to 22.8% among non-refugees in 2017,” it added.
Illiteracy among Palestinian refugees in 2017 for individuals aged 15 years and above reached 3.0%, while it reached 3.6% among non-refugees, the PCBS said.
According to a report by al-Anadolu news agency, World Refugee Day comes a month after the 70th anniversary of the Nakba (Catastrophe), the term used by the Palestinians to refer to the creation of Israel in 1948.
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict dates back to 1917 when the British government, in the now-famous “Balfour Declaration,” called for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.
For many Palestinians, the right of return to their homes in historical Palestine from which they were driven in 1948 to make way for the new state of Israel is an inalienable right.
ANERA, American Near East Refugee Aid, said in their World Refugee Day statement that the protests in Gaza that have been ongoing since March 30th are a direct result of this refugee crisis.
“In recent months, simmering anger over closed borders and broken dreams of home sent hundreds of Palestinians to protest along the separation wall with Israel. The violence that ensued underscored Gaza’s suffering. Restricted movement in and out of Gaza has translated into shortages of basic foodstuffs and medical supplies, the separation of families and overall conditions the United Nations has described as unlivable.
“Jabalya camp, for instance, is about 1.4 square kilometers and is home to more than 100,000. It is considered one of the most densely populated areas in the world. Jabalia’s open air market is one of the largest in the Gaza Strip but few can afford to buy what’s on display. Unemployment is nearly 50% and few are allowed to leave the area to find work or even medical aid for chronic or life-threatening ailments.
“Ironically, many of the camp elders are living only a few kilometers from homes they were forced to flee and have probably never seen again. Youngsters growing up in Gaza see despair and dream of making their own memories far from home.”
According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), Palestinian refugees live in 58 camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and other countries, while many others have settled in refugee camps in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and the Israeli-blockaded Gaza Strip.
“Palestinian refugees in the West Bank who are registered with UNRWA in 2017 accounted for up to 17% of the total registered refugees against 24.4% in the Gaza Strip,” said the PCBS in the statement, which was released on the occasion of the World Refugee Day.
Jordan has the largest number of Palestinian refugees with 39% of the total refugee population, followed by Syria and Lebanon 10.5% and 9.1% respectively.
According to PCBS, 43% of Palestinians in the State of Palestine are displaced refugees.
The poverty rate among Palestinian refugees registered 39% in 2017, while it reached 22.3% among non-refugees, the statement said.
“Unemployment rate among refugees reached up to 34.7% compared to 22.8% among non-refugees in 2017,” it added.
Illiteracy among Palestinian refugees in 2017 for individuals aged 15 years and above reached 3.0%, while it reached 3.6% among non-refugees, the PCBS said.
According to a report by al-Anadolu news agency, World Refugee Day comes a month after the 70th anniversary of the Nakba (Catastrophe), the term used by the Palestinians to refer to the creation of Israel in 1948.
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict dates back to 1917 when the British government, in the now-famous “Balfour Declaration,” called for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”.
For many Palestinians, the right of return to their homes in historical Palestine from which they were driven in 1948 to make way for the new state of Israel is an inalienable right.
ANERA, American Near East Refugee Aid, said in their World Refugee Day statement that the protests in Gaza that have been ongoing since March 30th are a direct result of this refugee crisis.
“In recent months, simmering anger over closed borders and broken dreams of home sent hundreds of Palestinians to protest along the separation wall with Israel. The violence that ensued underscored Gaza’s suffering. Restricted movement in and out of Gaza has translated into shortages of basic foodstuffs and medical supplies, the separation of families and overall conditions the United Nations has described as unlivable.
“Jabalya camp, for instance, is about 1.4 square kilometers and is home to more than 100,000. It is considered one of the most densely populated areas in the world. Jabalia’s open air market is one of the largest in the Gaza Strip but few can afford to buy what’s on display. Unemployment is nearly 50% and few are allowed to leave the area to find work or even medical aid for chronic or life-threatening ailments.
“Ironically, many of the camp elders are living only a few kilometers from homes they were forced to flee and have probably never seen again. Youngsters growing up in Gaza see despair and dream of making their own memories far from home.”
19 june 2018
UN Secretary-General António Guterres on Monday warned of an imminent war between Israel and the Palestinians in case the current humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip, which has been under Israeli blockade for 12 years now, remains as it is.
This came in Guterres' first report to the Security Council on Resolution 2334 which was issued on 23rd December 2016.
Resolution 2334 calls for an immediate halt to the settlement construction in the occupied Palestinian territories, including Jerusalem, and confirms that Israel's settlement activities are illegal and blatantly violate international law.
The UN chief said in the report that he is shocked by the Israeli occupation forces' use of lethal force since border protests began in Gaza on 30th March.
He stressed that Israel has a responsibility to exercise maximum restraint and not to use live fire except as a last resort in the event of a real threat.
At least 136 Palestinians have been killed and over 13,000 injured by Israeli gunfire during peaceful protests along Gaza's eastern border in demand of the Palestinian refugees' right of return to their lands from which they were expelled in the 1948 war.
He renewed his call for a transparent and independent investigation into the killing of unarmed civilians in Gaza's border protests.
Guterres in his report warned that Israel's settlement activities continue unabated and undermine the hopes and the practical prospects for establishing a viable Palestinian state.
This came in Guterres' first report to the Security Council on Resolution 2334 which was issued on 23rd December 2016.
Resolution 2334 calls for an immediate halt to the settlement construction in the occupied Palestinian territories, including Jerusalem, and confirms that Israel's settlement activities are illegal and blatantly violate international law.
The UN chief said in the report that he is shocked by the Israeli occupation forces' use of lethal force since border protests began in Gaza on 30th March.
He stressed that Israel has a responsibility to exercise maximum restraint and not to use live fire except as a last resort in the event of a real threat.
At least 136 Palestinians have been killed and over 13,000 injured by Israeli gunfire during peaceful protests along Gaza's eastern border in demand of the Palestinian refugees' right of return to their lands from which they were expelled in the 1948 war.
He renewed his call for a transparent and independent investigation into the killing of unarmed civilians in Gaza's border protests.
Guterres in his report warned that Israel's settlement activities continue unabated and undermine the hopes and the practical prospects for establishing a viable Palestinian state.
18 june 2018
Drawing on 30 interviews with asylum seekers who 'voluntarily' left Israel, rights group claims Eritrean and Sudanese refugees were given false information, abandoned once in Uganda by Israeli authorities and were often forced into giving their consent to leaving the country.
Amnesty International accused Israel of "cruel and illegal" transfers of Eritrean and Sudanese asylum seekers in a report [PDF] released Monday.
In the absence of a clear plan for the deportation, the government uses "voluntary" departures to a "third country" to reduce the number of African refugees in Israel.
Amnesty International's report is based on interviews with 30 asylum seekers from Eritrea and Sudan who "voluntarily" left Israel for Uganda over the past year, which indicate the agreement they signed with the Israeli government was misleading and the promises and guarantees they received were empty.
According to the report, instead of receiving a residence permit upon their arrival in Uganda, the asylum seekers received an irregular migration status with no possibility of work and the risk of detention or forcible return to their country of origin.
While they were promised by Israel to receive 30-day visas to enter Uganda, some of the asylum seekers interviewed by Amnesty International received no such document. Instead, their papers were taken from them and they were left with no visa or other document to show legal entry to the country.
In addition, a letter issued by the Israeli government promises that "a local team will be waiting for you at the airport to accompany you in the first few days. The team will take you to a hotel arranged for you in advance, where you will have an orientation and introduction meeting with the local representatives, during which they will inform you of your options and help you in your first steps in the country."
Instead, according to the report, the asylum seekers received an "intimidation talk," as Ibrahim, a Sudanese asylum-seeker deported to Uganda in 2017, told Amnesty International.
"They told us that Uganda is dangerous because people know that we arrive here with money and they will try and steal from us. They told us that they wanted to help us because we didn’t have documents, and without an ID card we wouldn’t even be able to get a SIM card for our phone," Ibrahim recalled.
"They also told us that we would not be able to get (asylum) papers here because we came from Israel. They acted like they wanted to help us and told us not to worry."
Some asylum seekers reported that the "representatives" they met with offered to arrange to smuggle them out of Uganda upon payment, or otherwise promised documents that would allow them to stay in Uganda, but took the money and disappeared.
According to the report, representatives of the Israeli Administration Population, Immigration and Border Authority were in constant contact and were cooperating with the local "representatives" in Uganda who took money from the asylum seekers promising to smuggle them out of the country or provide them with visas, but disappeared without fulfilling any of the promises they made.
The Israeli government told the Supreme Court in April 2018 that it had a post-transfer monitoring mechanism in place to ensure the implementation of the agreement with Uganda, including follow-up conversations with the deportees via phone calls and emails during the first 30 days after their arrival, to verify that they had received papers, had a place to stay and all other matters were in order.
The government also reported that the Population, Immigration and Border Authority had contacted 95 percent of the deportees who left Israel in 2017, none of whom had reported "unusual events."
Despite that, only two of the asylum seekers interviewed for the report had been in contact with Israeli officials after arriving in Uganda and appeared to have received no help at all.
"A few hours after we arrived at the hotel, 'Michael,' an Eritrean man, came to the room. He said he worked with Israeli immigration and took our pictures with his phone to send them to Israel as proof that we had arrived. Then he called 'Shishai,' an immigration officer in Israel, from his phone and let me speak to him. ‘Shishai’ just wanted to make sure that we had reached Kampala. I never spoke to him again," said one refugee.
Another received a call from an Israeli immigration official. "I told him it’s very bad: I have no job and no papers," he said. He too received no help.
Moreover, the report claims that asylum seekers’ departure from Israel to Uganda were not voluntary, even in the instances in which they formally agreed to leave the country.
According to the report, an agreement by a migrant to leave the country was often forthcoming due to a combination of coercive or manipulative factors, among them a dysfunctional absorption apparatus, indefinite arrests or the threat thereof, violent declarations, discrimination by government officials, vague information, and the provision of false and misleading promises about the fate that awaits them after their departure.
Among other things, the report provides two pieces of testimony from inside Saharonim Prison where asylum seekers were held, which point to the prevalence of mental abuse which was deliberately employed to break the asylum seekers’ will until they “leave at will.”
Chen Baril Agari from Amnesty International Israel said that “the report highlights that under the dysfunctional asylum seeker apparatus, together with legislation that was intended to make the asylum seekers’ lives more difficult and false promises that were given to them—this is expulsion and not a willful departure.”
A spokesman for the organization, Gil Noah, also lamented Israel’s secret deals with other countries to absorb the refugees, even though those countries were significantly worse off economically.
“The report sheds light on the way in which secret agreements between states made it possible for Israel to turn its back on responsibility for the joint global refugee crisis,” Noah said.
“It is inconceivable that Israel should refuse to provide refuge to a tiny number of refugees in its territory and instead to pass the responsibility to a country that is dozens of times poorer than it is and which has already taken into its territory millions of refugees.
Amnesty International accused Israel of "cruel and illegal" transfers of Eritrean and Sudanese asylum seekers in a report [PDF] released Monday.
In the absence of a clear plan for the deportation, the government uses "voluntary" departures to a "third country" to reduce the number of African refugees in Israel.
Amnesty International's report is based on interviews with 30 asylum seekers from Eritrea and Sudan who "voluntarily" left Israel for Uganda over the past year, which indicate the agreement they signed with the Israeli government was misleading and the promises and guarantees they received were empty.
According to the report, instead of receiving a residence permit upon their arrival in Uganda, the asylum seekers received an irregular migration status with no possibility of work and the risk of detention or forcible return to their country of origin.
While they were promised by Israel to receive 30-day visas to enter Uganda, some of the asylum seekers interviewed by Amnesty International received no such document. Instead, their papers were taken from them and they were left with no visa or other document to show legal entry to the country.
In addition, a letter issued by the Israeli government promises that "a local team will be waiting for you at the airport to accompany you in the first few days. The team will take you to a hotel arranged for you in advance, where you will have an orientation and introduction meeting with the local representatives, during which they will inform you of your options and help you in your first steps in the country."
Instead, according to the report, the asylum seekers received an "intimidation talk," as Ibrahim, a Sudanese asylum-seeker deported to Uganda in 2017, told Amnesty International.
"They told us that Uganda is dangerous because people know that we arrive here with money and they will try and steal from us. They told us that they wanted to help us because we didn’t have documents, and without an ID card we wouldn’t even be able to get a SIM card for our phone," Ibrahim recalled.
"They also told us that we would not be able to get (asylum) papers here because we came from Israel. They acted like they wanted to help us and told us not to worry."
Some asylum seekers reported that the "representatives" they met with offered to arrange to smuggle them out of Uganda upon payment, or otherwise promised documents that would allow them to stay in Uganda, but took the money and disappeared.
According to the report, representatives of the Israeli Administration Population, Immigration and Border Authority were in constant contact and were cooperating with the local "representatives" in Uganda who took money from the asylum seekers promising to smuggle them out of the country or provide them with visas, but disappeared without fulfilling any of the promises they made.
The Israeli government told the Supreme Court in April 2018 that it had a post-transfer monitoring mechanism in place to ensure the implementation of the agreement with Uganda, including follow-up conversations with the deportees via phone calls and emails during the first 30 days after their arrival, to verify that they had received papers, had a place to stay and all other matters were in order.
The government also reported that the Population, Immigration and Border Authority had contacted 95 percent of the deportees who left Israel in 2017, none of whom had reported "unusual events."
Despite that, only two of the asylum seekers interviewed for the report had been in contact with Israeli officials after arriving in Uganda and appeared to have received no help at all.
"A few hours after we arrived at the hotel, 'Michael,' an Eritrean man, came to the room. He said he worked with Israeli immigration and took our pictures with his phone to send them to Israel as proof that we had arrived. Then he called 'Shishai,' an immigration officer in Israel, from his phone and let me speak to him. ‘Shishai’ just wanted to make sure that we had reached Kampala. I never spoke to him again," said one refugee.
Another received a call from an Israeli immigration official. "I told him it’s very bad: I have no job and no papers," he said. He too received no help.
Moreover, the report claims that asylum seekers’ departure from Israel to Uganda were not voluntary, even in the instances in which they formally agreed to leave the country.
According to the report, an agreement by a migrant to leave the country was often forthcoming due to a combination of coercive or manipulative factors, among them a dysfunctional absorption apparatus, indefinite arrests or the threat thereof, violent declarations, discrimination by government officials, vague information, and the provision of false and misleading promises about the fate that awaits them after their departure.
Among other things, the report provides two pieces of testimony from inside Saharonim Prison where asylum seekers were held, which point to the prevalence of mental abuse which was deliberately employed to break the asylum seekers’ will until they “leave at will.”
Chen Baril Agari from Amnesty International Israel said that “the report highlights that under the dysfunctional asylum seeker apparatus, together with legislation that was intended to make the asylum seekers’ lives more difficult and false promises that were given to them—this is expulsion and not a willful departure.”
A spokesman for the organization, Gil Noah, also lamented Israel’s secret deals with other countries to absorb the refugees, even though those countries were significantly worse off economically.
“The report sheds light on the way in which secret agreements between states made it possible for Israel to turn its back on responsibility for the joint global refugee crisis,” Noah said.
“It is inconceivable that Israel should refuse to provide refuge to a tiny number of refugees in its territory and instead to pass the responsibility to a country that is dozens of times poorer than it is and which has already taken into its territory millions of refugees.
17 june 2018
Under the proposed bill, photos like this would be illegal (Photo: B'Tselem)
Proposed legislation criminalizes taking photos or filming IDF soldiers on duty, setting the punishment at 5-10 years in prison; more moderate version also under consideration; deputy AG says bill won't pass legal scrutiny.
The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved on Sunday a bill proposal seeking to bar the filming and photography of IDF soldiers, which could completely change the nature of military coverage.
Deputy Attorney General Raz Nizri said during the Ministerial Committee discussion that barring the filming and photography of IDF soldiers would not pass legal scrutiny.
"We could go for a more moderate proposal, while drawing the comparison to police officers, but the problem is that it would set a minimum for punishment," Nizri said. "This means there will be no choice but to have criminal record."
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, meanwhile, welcomed the advancement of the legislation, writing on Twitter, "IDF soldiers are under attack from within by Israel haters and terror supporters who seek to humiliate, disgrace and harm them. We'll put an end to that."
Meretz leader Tamar Zandberg slammed the decision, saying "If the government wants to take care of IDF soldiers so much, perhaps it should start by handling the settlers who dismantle military vehicles, wound police officers and throw stones at soldiers."
The legislation will be brought to the Knesset for a preliminary reading on Wednesday.
The bill, sponsored by Yisrael Beytenu MK Robert Ilatov and backed by Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, targets anyone who documents IDF soldiers on duty and distributes the materials.
Under the original version of the bill, offenders could face anywhere between five and ten years in prison if the documentation is found to be "undermining the spirit of IDF soldiers and Israeli citizens" or harming state security.
"This decision aims to cover up crimes committed by Israeli soldiers against our people, and to free their hands to commit more crimes," Deputy Palestinian Information Minister Fayez Abu Aitta said.
The phrasing of the bill stops short of a blanket ban, aiming instead at "anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian organizations" which spend "entire days near Israeli soldiers waiting breathlessly for actions that can be documented in a slanted and one-sided way so that soldiers can be smeared".
Naming B'Tselem and several other left-wing groups, the bill says many of them are supported by organizations and governments with "a clear anti-Israel agenda" and that the videos are used to harm Israel and national security.
The ban would cover social networks as well as traditional media.
B'Tselem shrugged off the bill.
Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit was able to soften the legislation, setting the punishment from anywhere between two weeks and three years.
But even if a more moderate version of the bill is eventually passed into law, it would still limit media coverage in the West Bank and on Israel's borders, as the Israeli media gets photos and videos of many incidents from the Palestinians or from left-wing organizations.
Diplomatic officials expressed concern that the attempt to prevent the filming and photography of soldiers in the public sphere in the West Bank could damage to Israel's image.
"We're fighting about Israel's image as a democratic country that acts with transparency, and the initiative to prevent documentation (of soldiers) could present us in the opposite light—as a country that has something to hide," one official said.
Despite Mandleblit’s softening of the punishment stipulated in the bill will be compared to a large extent to the prohibition against disturbing police officers while performing their duties, meaning that the decision to prohibit the use of cameras would be left to the discretion of the soldier, who would be authorized to limit photographers and to remove protesters causing disruptions.
The implementation of the bill would depend to large extent on instructions received by soldiers in the field.
The vague wording in the current bill will likely have to be brought before the High Court of Justice. However, the bill may not only be applicable to left-wing organizations, which for years have sought to capture violent incidents involving the IDF in the West Bank on camera and disseminated the recordings in a negative light, which supporters of the army say stains its image.
While the bill received Lieberman’s blessing, officials in the army have yet to state their position.
MK Ilatov’s office has not rejected the possibility of widening the bill to also include Israeli journalists who regularly cover what is taking place in the various sectors, and it has not yet been made clear whether it will apply to Area A, which is controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
At the same time, right-wing activists also often use their cameras to document violent skirmishes with Israeli security forces during court-ordered evacuations of illegal outposts. It remains unclear whether they, too, would be forbidden from using recording the incidents.
The majority of photographers at B’Tselem are Palestinian volunteers who permanently carry a camera. Violent outbreaks, pursuits against terrorists, raids in villages and other IDF operation on the Gaza or Lebanese border are almost invariably filmed live by the Palestinians and foreign photographers. The footage and photographs are then transferred to Arab and international television networks.
The videos are then distributed on Facebook and other social media outlets.
Proposed legislation criminalizes taking photos or filming IDF soldiers on duty, setting the punishment at 5-10 years in prison; more moderate version also under consideration; deputy AG says bill won't pass legal scrutiny.
The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved on Sunday a bill proposal seeking to bar the filming and photography of IDF soldiers, which could completely change the nature of military coverage.
Deputy Attorney General Raz Nizri said during the Ministerial Committee discussion that barring the filming and photography of IDF soldiers would not pass legal scrutiny.
"We could go for a more moderate proposal, while drawing the comparison to police officers, but the problem is that it would set a minimum for punishment," Nizri said. "This means there will be no choice but to have criminal record."
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, meanwhile, welcomed the advancement of the legislation, writing on Twitter, "IDF soldiers are under attack from within by Israel haters and terror supporters who seek to humiliate, disgrace and harm them. We'll put an end to that."
Meretz leader Tamar Zandberg slammed the decision, saying "If the government wants to take care of IDF soldiers so much, perhaps it should start by handling the settlers who dismantle military vehicles, wound police officers and throw stones at soldiers."
The legislation will be brought to the Knesset for a preliminary reading on Wednesday.
The bill, sponsored by Yisrael Beytenu MK Robert Ilatov and backed by Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, targets anyone who documents IDF soldiers on duty and distributes the materials.
Under the original version of the bill, offenders could face anywhere between five and ten years in prison if the documentation is found to be "undermining the spirit of IDF soldiers and Israeli citizens" or harming state security.
"This decision aims to cover up crimes committed by Israeli soldiers against our people, and to free their hands to commit more crimes," Deputy Palestinian Information Minister Fayez Abu Aitta said.
The phrasing of the bill stops short of a blanket ban, aiming instead at "anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian organizations" which spend "entire days near Israeli soldiers waiting breathlessly for actions that can be documented in a slanted and one-sided way so that soldiers can be smeared".
Naming B'Tselem and several other left-wing groups, the bill says many of them are supported by organizations and governments with "a clear anti-Israel agenda" and that the videos are used to harm Israel and national security.
The ban would cover social networks as well as traditional media.
B'Tselem shrugged off the bill.
Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit was able to soften the legislation, setting the punishment from anywhere between two weeks and three years.
But even if a more moderate version of the bill is eventually passed into law, it would still limit media coverage in the West Bank and on Israel's borders, as the Israeli media gets photos and videos of many incidents from the Palestinians or from left-wing organizations.
Diplomatic officials expressed concern that the attempt to prevent the filming and photography of soldiers in the public sphere in the West Bank could damage to Israel's image.
"We're fighting about Israel's image as a democratic country that acts with transparency, and the initiative to prevent documentation (of soldiers) could present us in the opposite light—as a country that has something to hide," one official said.
Despite Mandleblit’s softening of the punishment stipulated in the bill will be compared to a large extent to the prohibition against disturbing police officers while performing their duties, meaning that the decision to prohibit the use of cameras would be left to the discretion of the soldier, who would be authorized to limit photographers and to remove protesters causing disruptions.
The implementation of the bill would depend to large extent on instructions received by soldiers in the field.
The vague wording in the current bill will likely have to be brought before the High Court of Justice. However, the bill may not only be applicable to left-wing organizations, which for years have sought to capture violent incidents involving the IDF in the West Bank on camera and disseminated the recordings in a negative light, which supporters of the army say stains its image.
While the bill received Lieberman’s blessing, officials in the army have yet to state their position.
MK Ilatov’s office has not rejected the possibility of widening the bill to also include Israeli journalists who regularly cover what is taking place in the various sectors, and it has not yet been made clear whether it will apply to Area A, which is controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
At the same time, right-wing activists also often use their cameras to document violent skirmishes with Israeli security forces during court-ordered evacuations of illegal outposts. It remains unclear whether they, too, would be forbidden from using recording the incidents.
The majority of photographers at B’Tselem are Palestinian volunteers who permanently carry a camera. Violent outbreaks, pursuits against terrorists, raids in villages and other IDF operation on the Gaza or Lebanese border are almost invariably filmed live by the Palestinians and foreign photographers. The footage and photographs are then transferred to Arab and international television networks.
The videos are then distributed on Facebook and other social media outlets.
Page: 27 - 26 - 25 - 24 - 23 - 22 - 21 - 20 - 19 - 18 - 17 - 16 - 15 - 14 - 13 - 12 - 11 - 10 - 9 - 8 - 7
