1 june 2018
by Valentina Azarova
As Israel ramps up construction of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) with added cover from the Trump administration, we should recall that not only does the establishment and maintenance of the settlements constitute violations of international law, but so do all private transactions and business dealings in or related to the settlements, which Israel has effectively integrated into its national economy. UN Security Council Resolution 2334 of December 2016 affirmed that Israel’s settlement activity in the OPT has “no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law,” but did not clarify the nature of the legal consequences and risks that states and private actors may incur from activities in or related to the settlements.
Hundreds of businesses continue to operate freely and without consequence in some 250 settlements Israel has erected. In March 2016, member states of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) decided to act on this issue: Through HRC resolution 31/36 they tasked the UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) with setting up a database of such businesses and reviewing it annually. The OHCHR announced [PDF] in a January 2018 report that it had created a list of 206 businesses, the names of which it intends to disclose “in a future update.”
The database is a unique transparency tool and soft power enforcement mechanism that could provide a service to states and their corporate nationals who may become involved in illegal business activities. Many states realize that the initiative is an opportunity to develop a blueprint for a tool that would monitor activities in high-risk business environments not only in Israel’s settlements, but in other ongoing cases of occupation and annexation. The mechanism would help states protect their legal orders and business communities from the consequences of breaches of international law entailed by business activities in settlements.
The OHCHR’s January 2018 report begins the process of elaborating the methodology and working procedures for this mechanism. During its latest session in March 2018, the HRC acknowledged the importance of this task and the need to continue to support the OHCHR in its endeavor. Member states stressed the need to ensure the integrity of the work and to provide political “safe space” for the elaboration of the mechanism’s proper normative framework and working procedures.
This initiative to address rights abuses in the context of Israel’s occupation has unsurprisingly drawn attacks. Israel, the US, and others claim the database is a “blacklist” that singles out Israel for criticism and encourages the adoption of sanctions and boycott measures against all Israeli entities. They also criticize the UN for spending scarce resources and acting outside its authority as an adjudicative body.
Some UN officials and states have argued for the need for another HRC resolution to allocate the financial and human resources required to establish and sustain the database. The importance of providing businesses with legal guidance and information about other businesses’ activities should drive states to ensure that the OHCHR is able to operate impartially and with the necessary means.
It is crucial that the database be represented in the public debate and in diplomatic circles as the only kind of mechanism that the UN and its member states could have contemplated in line with international law: a tool for compliance control and transparency. Instead, thus far it has widely been misrepresented as a “blacklist.” Only an approach that understands the contribution of this interpretative exercise to the international rule of law can provide the OHCHR with bases to refute the criticisms against the initiative and enable it to engage states to support the project in the face of attempts to obstruct it.
When Harms Cannot Be Mitigated
The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights [PDF] require businesses to assess whether their operations have a harmful effect on human rights and to mitigate such harms by, for instance, engaging with local communities and altering particular production or supply lines. Businesses are required to abstain from activity in business environments where harms cannot be mitigated. HRC resolution 31/36 affirms that a business undertaking operations in Israel’s settlements is unable to mitigate the adverse impact of its activities on the severity and frequency of violations of human rights.
The reason for this is that all transactional activities with entities based or operating in Israeli settlements contribute to the systemic violations of individual and collective human rights that result from the wrongful appropriation, allocation, and enjoyment of property rights vis-à-vis land and other natural resources. Thus any business that is based or operates in the settlements is contributing to illicit financial flows generated from illicitly constituted and wrongfully enjoyed property rights. To guarantee their compliance with international standards, businesses must therefore terminate all their business activities that extend to the settlements. If the business fails to do so, the home state authority must shoulder the burden of regulating the business’ activities and protecting domestic subjects from exposure to the risks created by such transnational activities.
In establishing the database, the OHCHR is tasked with providing interpretative guidance on the ways in which companies and individuals acting as procurers, investors, and consumers may contribute to and benefit from violations of international law in occupation. While many such cases may not meet the high threshold of civil and criminal liability for complicity, they may still be liable to legal risks under provisions of domestic law of the business’ domicile country. They may also detrimentally affect the legal order of the company’s home state if it fails to regulate the proceeds and rights acquired by its business in the context of such transnational activities. Put differently, a company whose activities fall outside the international framework may nevertheless incur consequences under its home state’s domestic law.
The database is a chance to calibrate the application of the UNGP to business environments in situations of occupation in a manner that would raise both businesses’ and home states’ awareness of their responsibilities and of the risks they incur when engaging in certain business activities in settlements in occupied territory. States that have committed to the implementation of the UNGP in their domestic law and policy would benefit from guidance ensuring that their domestic regulatory authorities are appropriately equipped to provide adequate regulation of activities in the settlements and certain types of transactions related to them.
The database should ultimately be looking to provide guidance that would generate a deterrence effect. It would help third party states protect their legal orders and subjects from inadvertent involvement in violations of international law. Therefore, home states are not only obligated in international law but also have a self-interest in providing the necessary guidance and regulatory incentives in domestic law that would enable such calls of judgment by their corporate nationals. Legal characterizations are also likely to encourage larger businesses to vet potential business partners for their involvement in abuses in occupied territory.
The Database: Not a “Blacklist”
The task of establishing the database is the very kind of initiative that the OHCHR is expected to undertake in order to guide and further states’ and corporate actors’ respect for international law in testing environments. With HRC resolution 31/36, states have entrusted the OHCHR to clarify the type of business activities that the UN fact-finding mission on settlements deemed to have “directly and indirectly enabled, facilitated, and profited from the construction and growth of the settlements.”
Despite this important task, both proponents and opponents have dubbed the database a “blacklist” – a semantic twist that is intended to undo the image of a soft mechanism with a mandate to document, report, and engage interested parties into a coercive tool that shames offenders into compliance. This unfounded image of the database’s function and purpose intends to mislead states and business of its proper purpose in line with the OHCHR’s mandate. The database is neither tasked with the adjudication [PDF] of the responsibility and liability of concerned parties, nor is it institutionally equipped to engage in law enforcement activities.
This punitive vision of the database has arguably already alienated key target audiences. To enable the database to offer a real service to states and businesses as duty-bearers, it should take a cooperative and non-adversarial approach to compliance control. This approach will ensure the mechanism’s legitimacy and the credibility of its decision-making process with regard to entities or individuals included in the database, along with ensuring the mechanism’s ability to formulate and follow a robust methodology and set out a normative framework that sensitizes foreign home states and their business communities to their responsibilities in international law.
A Robust Normative Framework
The OHCHR must show that it is committed to making the database a transparent and proactive monitoring mechanism intended to further compliance with international law. To this end, the OHCHR should aim to engage in a detailed presentation of the normative framework, criteria, and methodology it will use to decide on the kinds of business relations it will aim to include in the database. It must answer the following questions clearly and transparently: Why are the settlements a business environment in which all forms of business relations have an adverse impact on human rights? Which businesses and which specific types of transactions would be deemed to be wrongfully contributing to and benefiting from settlements?
It should also make public its rules of procedure, including the avenues for businesses to address the mechanism, challenge its decisions, and provide up-to-date information about their activities. These elements would serve the dual purpose of due process in specific instances, as well as facilitate the dissemination of knowledge and generate pre-emptive deterrence in different industry circles.
The OHCHR’s first progress report on the establishment of the database published in January 2018 does not provide clear guidance on these questions. It indicated that all business activities in settlements would contribute to the rampant human rights abuses caused by their existence and maintenance, but it does not explicate the basis for the strict liability standard that entails a prohibition on all such activities. Nor does it explain what modalities of business transactions are caught by this standard, which are not “remote and minimal.”
A robust approach to these normative questions is critical to the legitimacy of the UN’s decision to include a business on the database, as well as for convincing businesses and their home states of the value of this regulatory initiative.
Learning from Past Initiatives
Since 2013, 18 European government advisories have warned businesses of the economic, financial, and legal risks of conducting business in Israel’s settlements in occupied territory. This advice has coincided with a notable wave of decisions by companies in such countries as Norway, Denmark, and the Netherlands to terminate contracts and abstain from undertaking activities in or related to the settlements. The database would provide authoritative guidance on the basis of such decisions in international law and further the urgency of accelerating such practices.
The regulatory logic that underpins the database is not unknown to international organizations. While the database may be the first of its kind established by the OHCHR, it is not the first UN initiative to monitor and inform publics about companies committing human rights violations. Previous efforts include the UN Center for Transnational Corporation’s monitoring and reporting on companies operating in apartheid South Africa, and a UN panel on the plunder of resources in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
These precedents also show the potential pitfalls of such initiatives: The South Africa list lacked support from member states, in part for being rolled out as part of the deliberation on sanctions – which came with concerns on their effects on innocent populations, including those whose liberation from apartheid was being sought. The DRC list failed to gain companies’ cooperation, highlighting the significance of clarifying the basis for legal obligations and constructing the right legal narratives about the purpose and function of such projects.
A key feature of the narrative surrounding the initiative in question is the potential for universalizing the standards set out and applied by the database to other ongoing cases of occupation maintained with the aim of forcibly acquiring or disposing of territory. This may include Western Sahara, Nagorno-Karabakh, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and, most recently, Crimea and eastern Ukraine. The much-needed guidance on the immitigable character of some business activity from the perspective of the business’ responsibilities to respect human rights may also be applied to other business environments characterized by structural violations of international law beyond cases of occupation, such as systemic abuses of labor rights, unlawful expropriation of land, and illicit exploitation of natural resources.
A further contribution of this mechanism is the protection it extends to domestic legal orders. Domestic laws that regulate corporate actors in their domicile countries are in most cases able to account for a business’ transnational activity by assigning consequences to certain rights, titles, and entitlement acquired by the company through its overseas activities. Such domestic regulation measures may not provide current victims with access to reparations, but they could provide a form of redress for future victims by challenging in a third state jurisdiction the involvement of companies in the structures that enable serious human rights abuses.
Support for the Database
To further the significance of the OHCHR’s work on this mechanism, and to gain support from third home states, Palestinian representatives should actively engage the UN, third states, and civil society to support this process. Key to this is the dissemination of accurate information about the database’s purpose, functions, and prospective contribution to international law enforcement. Supporting this initiative would offer guidance to business communities and investors on activities that may relate to a number of ongoing cases of occupation maintained with the aim of annexation or forcible secession.
Support from third states and the UN system is key to ensuring the continuation of the process and guaranteeing the integrity of the mechanism. European governments wary of the politics surrounding the database have noted that their support is conditional on the ability of the OHCHR to align its decision-making process with existing international standards. Some note explicitly that this caution is a result of the lack of clarity about the mandate for this mechanism and the UN’s failure so far to substantiate the link between, on the one hand, the international wrongs and the illegal situation to which such business actually contributes in all cases, and, on the other, the list of exemplary business activities in the 2013 UN fact-finding mission on settlements’ report, on which both HRC resolution 31/36 and the UN’s first progress report on the database’s establishment rely.
The OHCHR should elaborate and make public a robust normative framework that is accessible and understandable to business and non-expert stakeholders. This framework is necessary to substantiate the methodology and thresholds that it will use to decide on the inclusion of a company on the database. Since these features of the mechanism are critical to its proper function, their elaboration and publication should coincide with the timely publication of the names of the companies that have already been vetted. The UN’s surrender to political pressure and states’ reluctance to support this initiative risks creating an unacceptable precedent that brings the commitment of third states to implement the UNGP into disrepute.
Al-Shabaka Policy Member Valentina Azarova is a visiting academic at the Manchester International Law Centre (MILC), University of Manchester, and a strategic and legal adviser to the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN). Valentina received her PhD from the Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway. She was a co-founding member of the Al-Quds Bard College, Al-Quds University, where she directed and taught on the human rights program for five years (2009-2014). She also taught at Birzeit University’s Graduate Studies School (2014-2015). Since 2008, she has worked at HaMoked – Center for the Defence of the Individual; Al-Haq; and the MATTIN Group, and consulted a range of international and inter-governmental organisations on international law as it relates to the Israeli-Palestinian context. Her research concerns the role of third parties and the contribution of domestic and transnational regulatory processes to the enforcement of international law. Her publications can be accessed here.
Via the Al Shakaba Palestinian Policy Network.
05/21/18 Report: Israel Continues Judaization in Jerusalem, Ethnic Cleansing in Area C
As Israel ramps up construction of settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) with added cover from the Trump administration, we should recall that not only does the establishment and maintenance of the settlements constitute violations of international law, but so do all private transactions and business dealings in or related to the settlements, which Israel has effectively integrated into its national economy. UN Security Council Resolution 2334 of December 2016 affirmed that Israel’s settlement activity in the OPT has “no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law,” but did not clarify the nature of the legal consequences and risks that states and private actors may incur from activities in or related to the settlements.
Hundreds of businesses continue to operate freely and without consequence in some 250 settlements Israel has erected. In March 2016, member states of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) decided to act on this issue: Through HRC resolution 31/36 they tasked the UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights (OHCHR) with setting up a database of such businesses and reviewing it annually. The OHCHR announced [PDF] in a January 2018 report that it had created a list of 206 businesses, the names of which it intends to disclose “in a future update.”
The database is a unique transparency tool and soft power enforcement mechanism that could provide a service to states and their corporate nationals who may become involved in illegal business activities. Many states realize that the initiative is an opportunity to develop a blueprint for a tool that would monitor activities in high-risk business environments not only in Israel’s settlements, but in other ongoing cases of occupation and annexation. The mechanism would help states protect their legal orders and business communities from the consequences of breaches of international law entailed by business activities in settlements.
The OHCHR’s January 2018 report begins the process of elaborating the methodology and working procedures for this mechanism. During its latest session in March 2018, the HRC acknowledged the importance of this task and the need to continue to support the OHCHR in its endeavor. Member states stressed the need to ensure the integrity of the work and to provide political “safe space” for the elaboration of the mechanism’s proper normative framework and working procedures.
This initiative to address rights abuses in the context of Israel’s occupation has unsurprisingly drawn attacks. Israel, the US, and others claim the database is a “blacklist” that singles out Israel for criticism and encourages the adoption of sanctions and boycott measures against all Israeli entities. They also criticize the UN for spending scarce resources and acting outside its authority as an adjudicative body.
Some UN officials and states have argued for the need for another HRC resolution to allocate the financial and human resources required to establish and sustain the database. The importance of providing businesses with legal guidance and information about other businesses’ activities should drive states to ensure that the OHCHR is able to operate impartially and with the necessary means.
It is crucial that the database be represented in the public debate and in diplomatic circles as the only kind of mechanism that the UN and its member states could have contemplated in line with international law: a tool for compliance control and transparency. Instead, thus far it has widely been misrepresented as a “blacklist.” Only an approach that understands the contribution of this interpretative exercise to the international rule of law can provide the OHCHR with bases to refute the criticisms against the initiative and enable it to engage states to support the project in the face of attempts to obstruct it.
When Harms Cannot Be Mitigated
The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights [PDF] require businesses to assess whether their operations have a harmful effect on human rights and to mitigate such harms by, for instance, engaging with local communities and altering particular production or supply lines. Businesses are required to abstain from activity in business environments where harms cannot be mitigated. HRC resolution 31/36 affirms that a business undertaking operations in Israel’s settlements is unable to mitigate the adverse impact of its activities on the severity and frequency of violations of human rights.
The reason for this is that all transactional activities with entities based or operating in Israeli settlements contribute to the systemic violations of individual and collective human rights that result from the wrongful appropriation, allocation, and enjoyment of property rights vis-à-vis land and other natural resources. Thus any business that is based or operates in the settlements is contributing to illicit financial flows generated from illicitly constituted and wrongfully enjoyed property rights. To guarantee their compliance with international standards, businesses must therefore terminate all their business activities that extend to the settlements. If the business fails to do so, the home state authority must shoulder the burden of regulating the business’ activities and protecting domestic subjects from exposure to the risks created by such transnational activities.
In establishing the database, the OHCHR is tasked with providing interpretative guidance on the ways in which companies and individuals acting as procurers, investors, and consumers may contribute to and benefit from violations of international law in occupation. While many such cases may not meet the high threshold of civil and criminal liability for complicity, they may still be liable to legal risks under provisions of domestic law of the business’ domicile country. They may also detrimentally affect the legal order of the company’s home state if it fails to regulate the proceeds and rights acquired by its business in the context of such transnational activities. Put differently, a company whose activities fall outside the international framework may nevertheless incur consequences under its home state’s domestic law.
The database is a chance to calibrate the application of the UNGP to business environments in situations of occupation in a manner that would raise both businesses’ and home states’ awareness of their responsibilities and of the risks they incur when engaging in certain business activities in settlements in occupied territory. States that have committed to the implementation of the UNGP in their domestic law and policy would benefit from guidance ensuring that their domestic regulatory authorities are appropriately equipped to provide adequate regulation of activities in the settlements and certain types of transactions related to them.
The database should ultimately be looking to provide guidance that would generate a deterrence effect. It would help third party states protect their legal orders and subjects from inadvertent involvement in violations of international law. Therefore, home states are not only obligated in international law but also have a self-interest in providing the necessary guidance and regulatory incentives in domestic law that would enable such calls of judgment by their corporate nationals. Legal characterizations are also likely to encourage larger businesses to vet potential business partners for their involvement in abuses in occupied territory.
The Database: Not a “Blacklist”
The task of establishing the database is the very kind of initiative that the OHCHR is expected to undertake in order to guide and further states’ and corporate actors’ respect for international law in testing environments. With HRC resolution 31/36, states have entrusted the OHCHR to clarify the type of business activities that the UN fact-finding mission on settlements deemed to have “directly and indirectly enabled, facilitated, and profited from the construction and growth of the settlements.”
Despite this important task, both proponents and opponents have dubbed the database a “blacklist” – a semantic twist that is intended to undo the image of a soft mechanism with a mandate to document, report, and engage interested parties into a coercive tool that shames offenders into compliance. This unfounded image of the database’s function and purpose intends to mislead states and business of its proper purpose in line with the OHCHR’s mandate. The database is neither tasked with the adjudication [PDF] of the responsibility and liability of concerned parties, nor is it institutionally equipped to engage in law enforcement activities.
This punitive vision of the database has arguably already alienated key target audiences. To enable the database to offer a real service to states and businesses as duty-bearers, it should take a cooperative and non-adversarial approach to compliance control. This approach will ensure the mechanism’s legitimacy and the credibility of its decision-making process with regard to entities or individuals included in the database, along with ensuring the mechanism’s ability to formulate and follow a robust methodology and set out a normative framework that sensitizes foreign home states and their business communities to their responsibilities in international law.
A Robust Normative Framework
The OHCHR must show that it is committed to making the database a transparent and proactive monitoring mechanism intended to further compliance with international law. To this end, the OHCHR should aim to engage in a detailed presentation of the normative framework, criteria, and methodology it will use to decide on the kinds of business relations it will aim to include in the database. It must answer the following questions clearly and transparently: Why are the settlements a business environment in which all forms of business relations have an adverse impact on human rights? Which businesses and which specific types of transactions would be deemed to be wrongfully contributing to and benefiting from settlements?
It should also make public its rules of procedure, including the avenues for businesses to address the mechanism, challenge its decisions, and provide up-to-date information about their activities. These elements would serve the dual purpose of due process in specific instances, as well as facilitate the dissemination of knowledge and generate pre-emptive deterrence in different industry circles.
The OHCHR’s first progress report on the establishment of the database published in January 2018 does not provide clear guidance on these questions. It indicated that all business activities in settlements would contribute to the rampant human rights abuses caused by their existence and maintenance, but it does not explicate the basis for the strict liability standard that entails a prohibition on all such activities. Nor does it explain what modalities of business transactions are caught by this standard, which are not “remote and minimal.”
A robust approach to these normative questions is critical to the legitimacy of the UN’s decision to include a business on the database, as well as for convincing businesses and their home states of the value of this regulatory initiative.
Learning from Past Initiatives
Since 2013, 18 European government advisories have warned businesses of the economic, financial, and legal risks of conducting business in Israel’s settlements in occupied territory. This advice has coincided with a notable wave of decisions by companies in such countries as Norway, Denmark, and the Netherlands to terminate contracts and abstain from undertaking activities in or related to the settlements. The database would provide authoritative guidance on the basis of such decisions in international law and further the urgency of accelerating such practices.
The regulatory logic that underpins the database is not unknown to international organizations. While the database may be the first of its kind established by the OHCHR, it is not the first UN initiative to monitor and inform publics about companies committing human rights violations. Previous efforts include the UN Center for Transnational Corporation’s monitoring and reporting on companies operating in apartheid South Africa, and a UN panel on the plunder of resources in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
These precedents also show the potential pitfalls of such initiatives: The South Africa list lacked support from member states, in part for being rolled out as part of the deliberation on sanctions – which came with concerns on their effects on innocent populations, including those whose liberation from apartheid was being sought. The DRC list failed to gain companies’ cooperation, highlighting the significance of clarifying the basis for legal obligations and constructing the right legal narratives about the purpose and function of such projects.
A key feature of the narrative surrounding the initiative in question is the potential for universalizing the standards set out and applied by the database to other ongoing cases of occupation maintained with the aim of forcibly acquiring or disposing of territory. This may include Western Sahara, Nagorno-Karabakh, Northern Cyprus, Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and, most recently, Crimea and eastern Ukraine. The much-needed guidance on the immitigable character of some business activity from the perspective of the business’ responsibilities to respect human rights may also be applied to other business environments characterized by structural violations of international law beyond cases of occupation, such as systemic abuses of labor rights, unlawful expropriation of land, and illicit exploitation of natural resources.
A further contribution of this mechanism is the protection it extends to domestic legal orders. Domestic laws that regulate corporate actors in their domicile countries are in most cases able to account for a business’ transnational activity by assigning consequences to certain rights, titles, and entitlement acquired by the company through its overseas activities. Such domestic regulation measures may not provide current victims with access to reparations, but they could provide a form of redress for future victims by challenging in a third state jurisdiction the involvement of companies in the structures that enable serious human rights abuses.
Support for the Database
To further the significance of the OHCHR’s work on this mechanism, and to gain support from third home states, Palestinian representatives should actively engage the UN, third states, and civil society to support this process. Key to this is the dissemination of accurate information about the database’s purpose, functions, and prospective contribution to international law enforcement. Supporting this initiative would offer guidance to business communities and investors on activities that may relate to a number of ongoing cases of occupation maintained with the aim of annexation or forcible secession.
Support from third states and the UN system is key to ensuring the continuation of the process and guaranteeing the integrity of the mechanism. European governments wary of the politics surrounding the database have noted that their support is conditional on the ability of the OHCHR to align its decision-making process with existing international standards. Some note explicitly that this caution is a result of the lack of clarity about the mandate for this mechanism and the UN’s failure so far to substantiate the link between, on the one hand, the international wrongs and the illegal situation to which such business actually contributes in all cases, and, on the other, the list of exemplary business activities in the 2013 UN fact-finding mission on settlements’ report, on which both HRC resolution 31/36 and the UN’s first progress report on the database’s establishment rely.
The OHCHR should elaborate and make public a robust normative framework that is accessible and understandable to business and non-expert stakeholders. This framework is necessary to substantiate the methodology and thresholds that it will use to decide on the inclusion of a company on the database. Since these features of the mechanism are critical to its proper function, their elaboration and publication should coincide with the timely publication of the names of the companies that have already been vetted. The UN’s surrender to political pressure and states’ reluctance to support this initiative risks creating an unacceptable precedent that brings the commitment of third states to implement the UNGP into disrepute.
Al-Shabaka Policy Member Valentina Azarova is a visiting academic at the Manchester International Law Centre (MILC), University of Manchester, and a strategic and legal adviser to the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN). Valentina received her PhD from the Irish Centre for Human Rights, National University of Ireland, Galway. She was a co-founding member of the Al-Quds Bard College, Al-Quds University, where she directed and taught on the human rights program for five years (2009-2014). She also taught at Birzeit University’s Graduate Studies School (2014-2015). Since 2008, she has worked at HaMoked – Center for the Defence of the Individual; Al-Haq; and the MATTIN Group, and consulted a range of international and inter-governmental organisations on international law as it relates to the Israeli-Palestinian context. Her research concerns the role of third parties and the contribution of domestic and transnational regulatory processes to the enforcement of international law. Her publications can be accessed here.
Via the Al Shakaba Palestinian Policy Network.
05/21/18 Report: Israel Continues Judaization in Jerusalem, Ethnic Cleansing in Area C
The Israeli authorities must immediately cancel plans to demolish the Palestinian Bedouin village of Khan al-Ahmar and the forcible eviction of the community living there, said Amnesty International, ahead of the anticipated arrival of bulldozers on 1 June after the demolition was authorized by Israel’s Supreme Court last week.
Residents of the village are set to be transferred to a site near the former Jerusalem municipal garbage dump near the village of Abu Dis.
"Last week’s outrageous decision by the Supreme Court to allow the Israeli army to demolish the entire village of Khan al-Ahmar was a devastating blow to the families who have spent nearly a decade campaigning and fighting a legal battle to remain on their land and maintain their way of life. Going ahead with the demolition is not only cruel, it would also amount to forcible transfer, which is a war crime,” said Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa, Magdalena Mughrabi.
"The Israeli authorities have shattered thousands of Palestinian lives, exposing men, women and children to years of trauma and anxiety through their deeply discriminatory policy of first denying building permits, and then bulldozing people’s homes, schools, and herding structures,” said Magdalena Mughrabi. “Instead of consistently punishing Palestinians for building without permits, the Israeli authorities must stop their construction and expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank as a first move towards removing Israeli civilians living in such settlements.”
“The Supreme Court’s ruling is extremely dangerous and may set a precedent for other communities that oppose Israeli plans to relocate them to urban centres. The Israeli authorities must abide by their international legal obligations and abandon any plans to forcibly transfer Khan al-Ahmar and any other communities."
Khan al-Ahmar is inhabited by about 180 residents from the Jahalin Bedouin tribe. It is surrounded by several illegal Israeli settlements east of Occupied Jerusalem.
For more than 60 years, members of the Jahalin Bedouin tribe have been struggling to maintain their way of life. Forced from their lands in the Negev desert in the 1950s, they have been continually harassed, pressured and resettled by successive Israeli governments, Amnesty’s report read.
In late August 2017, Israeli Minister of Defence Avigdor Lieberman announced that the Israeli government would evacuate the entire community within several months. On 24 May, Israel’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of demolishing the entire village of Khan al Ahmar, including its school which is constructed from rubber tyre and provides education for some 170 children from five different Bedouin communities.
The Court ruled that the village was built without relevant building permits, even though these are impossible for Palestinians to obtain in the Israeli-controlled areas of the occupied West Bank known as Area C.
Khan al-Ahmar is located about two kilometres south of Kfar Adumin settlement in the occupied West Bank. The Bedouin community living there suffers from recurring Israeli settler violence, including on children, as well as attacks on their homes. The Israeli authorities have refused to connect the village to water and electricity supplies, and have restricted their grazing land.
Since 1967, Israel has forcibly evicted and displaced entire communities and demolished more than 50,000 Palestinian homes and structures.
Residents of the village are set to be transferred to a site near the former Jerusalem municipal garbage dump near the village of Abu Dis.
"Last week’s outrageous decision by the Supreme Court to allow the Israeli army to demolish the entire village of Khan al-Ahmar was a devastating blow to the families who have spent nearly a decade campaigning and fighting a legal battle to remain on their land and maintain their way of life. Going ahead with the demolition is not only cruel, it would also amount to forcible transfer, which is a war crime,” said Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa, Magdalena Mughrabi.
"The Israeli authorities have shattered thousands of Palestinian lives, exposing men, women and children to years of trauma and anxiety through their deeply discriminatory policy of first denying building permits, and then bulldozing people’s homes, schools, and herding structures,” said Magdalena Mughrabi. “Instead of consistently punishing Palestinians for building without permits, the Israeli authorities must stop their construction and expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank as a first move towards removing Israeli civilians living in such settlements.”
“The Supreme Court’s ruling is extremely dangerous and may set a precedent for other communities that oppose Israeli plans to relocate them to urban centres. The Israeli authorities must abide by their international legal obligations and abandon any plans to forcibly transfer Khan al-Ahmar and any other communities."
Khan al-Ahmar is inhabited by about 180 residents from the Jahalin Bedouin tribe. It is surrounded by several illegal Israeli settlements east of Occupied Jerusalem.
For more than 60 years, members of the Jahalin Bedouin tribe have been struggling to maintain their way of life. Forced from their lands in the Negev desert in the 1950s, they have been continually harassed, pressured and resettled by successive Israeli governments, Amnesty’s report read.
In late August 2017, Israeli Minister of Defence Avigdor Lieberman announced that the Israeli government would evacuate the entire community within several months. On 24 May, Israel’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of demolishing the entire village of Khan al Ahmar, including its school which is constructed from rubber tyre and provides education for some 170 children from five different Bedouin communities.
The Court ruled that the village was built without relevant building permits, even though these are impossible for Palestinians to obtain in the Israeli-controlled areas of the occupied West Bank known as Area C.
Khan al-Ahmar is located about two kilometres south of Kfar Adumin settlement in the occupied West Bank. The Bedouin community living there suffers from recurring Israeli settler violence, including on children, as well as attacks on their homes. The Israeli authorities have refused to connect the village to water and electricity supplies, and have restricted their grazing land.
Since 1967, Israel has forcibly evicted and displaced entire communities and demolished more than 50,000 Palestinian homes and structures.
Israeli forces continued with systematic crimes in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt) for the week of 24 – 30 May, 2018.
Israeli forces continued to use excessive force against Palestinian peaceful protestors in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
Six Palestinian civilians succumbed to their wounds, 5 of whom were injured during the Great March of Return, in the Gaza Strip.
120 Palestinian civilians, including 19 children, 5 women and 2 journalists, were wounded in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.
Israeli forces continued to use force against Palestinian civilians, who participated in peaceful demonstrations organized within the activities of the “Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege” in the Gaza Strip, which witnessed for the 9th week in a row peaceful demonstrations along the eastern and northern Gaza Strip border area.
During the reporting period, in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli forces wounded 101 Palestinian civilians, including 16 children, 3 women, and 2 journalists; two of the wounded are in serious condition. Meanwhile, 6 civilians succumbed to their wounds. In the West Bank, 19 Palestinian civilians, including 3 children and 2 women, were wounded.
In the same context, medical sources in the Palestinian Ministry of Health declared that 6 civilians succumbed to their wounds; 5 of whom were wounded during the Great March of Return on 14 May 2018, which was the bloodiest day since the beginning of the activities of “Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege” while the sixth was wounded on 18 March 2018. Those killed were identified as:
During the reporting period, Investigations and Field Observations by PCHR’s Fieldworkers Confirm the Following:
Israeli Settlement Activities and Settlers’ Attacks against the Palestinian Civivlians and their Property:
As part of the Israeli settlers’ attacks against the Palestinian civilians and their property, on 27 May 2018, a number of settlers cut 700 grapevines in al-Fahs area, south of Hebron. The settlers also wrote racist slogans in Hebrew on an agricultural barrack in the attacked lands. It should be mentioned that this is the third time the settlers cut grapevines in Hebron within May only as 1100 grapevines were cut on 16 and 23 May 2018. On 28 May 2018, settlers cut 100 fruitful grapevines in Kafr Malek village, northeast of Ramallah.
Use of Force against Demonstrations in Protest against the U.S. President’s Decision to Recognize Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel:
Continuing the demonstrations in protest against the U.S. President Donald Trump’s declaration to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move the U.S. Embassy to it, Palestinian civilians organized protests against the decision throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. They further organized peaceful demonstrations where ten thousands of civilians participated, for the ninth Friday in a row, in commemoration of the 42nd Anniversary of the Land Day in the Gaza Strip. The demonstrations were called as “The Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege.” The demonstrations were as follows during the reporting period:
Gaza Strip:
Six Civilians Succumbed to Their Wounds:
West Bank:
Settlement activities and attacks by settlers against Palestinian civilians and property
Israeli forces’ attacks
Israeli settlers’ attacks
Recommendations to the International Community
PCHR warns of the escalating settlement construction in the West Bank, the attempts to legitimize settlement outposts established on Palestinian lands in the West Bank and the continued summary executions of Palestinian civilians under the pretext that they pose a security threat to the Israeli forces. PCHR reminds the international community that thousands of Palestinian civilians have been rendered homeless and lived in caravans under tragic circumstances due to the latest Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip that has been under a tight closure for almost 11 years. PCHR welcomes the UN Security Council’s Resolution No. 2334, which states that settlements are a blatant violation of the Geneva Conventions and calls upon Israel to stop them and not to recognize any demographic change in the oPt since 1967.
PCHR hopes this resolution will pave the way for eliminating the settlement crime and bring to justice those responsible for it. PCHR further reiterates that the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, are still under Israeli occupation in spite of Israel’s unilateral disengagement plan of 2005. PCHR emphasizes that there is international recognition of Israel’s obligation to respect international human rights instruments and international humanitarian law. Israel is bound to apply international human rights law and the law of war, sometimes reciprocally and other times in parallel, in a way that achieves the best protection for civilians and remedy for the victims.
Israeli forces continued to use excessive force against Palestinian peaceful protestors in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
Six Palestinian civilians succumbed to their wounds, 5 of whom were injured during the Great March of Return, in the Gaza Strip.
120 Palestinian civilians, including 19 children, 5 women and 2 journalists, were wounded in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.
Israeli forces continued to use force against Palestinian civilians, who participated in peaceful demonstrations organized within the activities of the “Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege” in the Gaza Strip, which witnessed for the 9th week in a row peaceful demonstrations along the eastern and northern Gaza Strip border area.
During the reporting period, in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli forces wounded 101 Palestinian civilians, including 16 children, 3 women, and 2 journalists; two of the wounded are in serious condition. Meanwhile, 6 civilians succumbed to their wounds. In the West Bank, 19 Palestinian civilians, including 3 children and 2 women, were wounded.
In the same context, medical sources in the Palestinian Ministry of Health declared that 6 civilians succumbed to their wounds; 5 of whom were wounded during the Great March of Return on 14 May 2018, which was the bloodiest day since the beginning of the activities of “Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege” while the sixth was wounded on 18 March 2018. Those killed were identified as:
- Ahmed ‘Ali Mustafa Qatoush (28) from al-Zawaydah was hit with a bullet to the knee in eastern al-Bureij in the central Gaza Strip and succumbed to his wounds on 24 May 2018.
- Muhanad Baker Mohammed abu Tahoun (20) from al-Nussairat was hit with a bullet to the head in eastern al-Bureij in the central Gaza Strip and succumbed to his wounds on 24 May 2018.
- Yaser Sami Sa’ed al-Deen Habib (25) from al-Shija’iyah was hit with a bullet to the neck in eastern al-Zaytoun neighborhood in eastern Gaza and succumbed to his wounds on 25 May 2018
- Hussein Salem Abu ‘Aweidah (41) from al-Sha’af neighbourhood was hit with a bullet to the back in eastern al-Zaytoun neighborhood in eastern Gaza and succumbed to his wounds on 26 May 2018.
- Naser ‘Aref ‘Abdel Ra’ouf al-‘Arini (27) from al-Twam neighborhood in Jabalia was hit with a bullet to the abdomen in eastern Abu Safiyah Hill in eastern Jabalia and succumbed to his wounds on 28 May 2018.
- Naji Maysarah ‘Abdullah Ghunaim (23) from al-Brazil neighborhood in Rafah City was hit with an explosive bullet to the right thigh and succumbed to his wounds on 30 May 2018.
During the reporting period, Investigations and Field Observations by PCHR’s Fieldworkers Confirm the Following:
- The demonstrations have been entirely peaceful with an outstanding participation of women, elderlies and children, as the fieldworkers have not witnessed any armed manifestations.
- The Israeli Forces unprecedentedly and heavily stationed along the border fence and inside the military sites surrounding the area along with intensive flight of the Israeli warplanes.
- Tear gas canisters were intensively and unprecedentedly fired from the drones and by the Israeli soldiers stationed along the border fence or in the military sites. The tear gas has spared none, including PCHR’s staff that was in the field.
- Ambulances, medical staff, and field medical points were deliberately and directly targeted and prevented from approaching those wounded in addition to causing injuries among them.
- Journalists were directly targeted, causing injuries among them.
- The Israeli fire deliberately targeted the upper part of the body as dozens sustained wounds to the head and chest and many are in critical condition; thus, the number of deaths is likely to increase.
Israeli Settlement Activities and Settlers’ Attacks against the Palestinian Civivlians and their Property:
As part of the Israeli settlers’ attacks against the Palestinian civilians and their property, on 27 May 2018, a number of settlers cut 700 grapevines in al-Fahs area, south of Hebron. The settlers also wrote racist slogans in Hebrew on an agricultural barrack in the attacked lands. It should be mentioned that this is the third time the settlers cut grapevines in Hebron within May only as 1100 grapevines were cut on 16 and 23 May 2018. On 28 May 2018, settlers cut 100 fruitful grapevines in Kafr Malek village, northeast of Ramallah.
Use of Force against Demonstrations in Protest against the U.S. President’s Decision to Recognize Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel:
Continuing the demonstrations in protest against the U.S. President Donald Trump’s declaration to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and move the U.S. Embassy to it, Palestinian civilians organized protests against the decision throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip. They further organized peaceful demonstrations where ten thousands of civilians participated, for the ninth Friday in a row, in commemoration of the 42nd Anniversary of the Land Day in the Gaza Strip. The demonstrations were called as “The Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege.” The demonstrations were as follows during the reporting period:
Gaza Strip:
- At approximately 15:30 on Friday, 25 May 2018, thousands of Palestinian protestors swarmed to the Return encampments established by the Supreme National Authority for the Great March of Return; 350 meters away from the border fence between Israel and the Gaza Strip, east of al-Buraij in the central Gaza Strip. A number of young men approached the border fence, set fire to tires and threw stones at Israeli soldiers stationed behind the border fence. The soldiers fired live bullets and tear gas canisters at the protestors and the participants’ gathering in the Return encampment. The clashes continued until the evening. As a result, 9 civilians were wounded. Five of them were hit with live bullets and 4 others were directly hit with tear gas canisters. The wounded were transferred via an ambulance belonging to the Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) to al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir al-Balah. Doctors classified their injuries between minor and moderate.
- At approximately 16:00, hundreds of civilians, including women and children started swarming into the demonstration yard in the Return encampment, east of Khuza’ah village, east of Khan Younis n the southern Gaza Strip to participate in the “Holding over Despite the Closure” Friday as named by the Supreme National Authority for the March of Return and Breaking the Siege. Dozens of civilians moved into the north of the camp, set fire to tires, chanted national slogans and raised flags. Some of them attempted to approach the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel. Israeli forces stationed behind hills and sand barriers and in military vehicles along the border fence sporadically and limitedly opened fire at the protesters and fired tear gas canisters at them and in the center of the camp. The shooting and teargasing sporadically continued for until approximately 19:00 on the same day. As a result, 29 civilians, including 2 children, were wounded. Four of them were hit with live bullets and 25 were directly hit with tear gas canisters. They received medical treatment in the field hospital and at Nasser, Gaza European and the Algerian Hospitals.
- At approximately 17:00 on the same Friday, Israeli forces stationed behind the border fence between the Gaza strip and Israel, east of Abu Safiyah Hill, northeast of Jabalia in the northern Gaza Strip, fired live and rubber bullets and tear gas canisters at hundreds of civilians for the ninth Friday within the activities of “The Return March and Breaking Siege” upon a call from the Supreme National Authority. The protestors set fire to tires and threw stones from far distances at Israeli soldiers stationed behind sand barriers. The clashes continued until approximately 19:30. As a result, 9 civilians were wounded. Three of them were hit with live bullets and 6 civilians were directly hit with tear gas canisters. The wounded civilians were transferred via ambulances belonging to PRCS, Medical Services, Union of Health Work Committees and the Ministry of Health to the Indonesian Hospital. Doctors classified their injuries between moderate and minor while the injury of one civilian as serious.
- Around the same time, thousands of civilians gathered in eastern side of Malakah intersection, east of al-Zaytoun neighborhood, east of Gaza City, to participate in the “The Great March of Return and Breaking Siege” activities. A number of them threw stones at Israeli soldiers stationed behind the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel. The soldiers fired live and rubber bullets and tear gas canisters at them. As a result, 42 civilians, including 3 children, 2 women and photojournalist ‘Ali Hasan Jadallah (27), were wounded. The journalist who works at the Anadolu Agency was hit with a tear gas canister to the chest.
- Around the same time, thousands of Palestinian civilians, including women and children within entire families, swarmed to the Return encampment established by the Supreme National Authority for the Great March of Return and Breaking Siege, east of al-Shwakah village, east of Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, around 300 meters away from the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel. The protestors raised the Palestinian flags, chanted national slogans, set fire to tires and flew paper kites. A number of them approached the border fence and threw stones at Israeli soldiers. The soldiers fired live bullets and tear gas canisters at the protestors. The clashes continued until approximately 19:00. As a result, 11 civilians, including 4 children, a woman and a journalist, were wounded. Two of them were hit with live bullet shrapnel and 9 were directly hit with tear gas canisters, including photojournalist Amir Mohammed Rushdi al-Maghari (22). The wounded civilians were taken to field hospitals in the camp and their wounds were classified as moderate. Two of them were transferred to Abu Yusuf al-Najjar Hospital in Rafah city. During the clashes, the Israeli soldiers targeted an ambulance belonging to the Ministry of Health with a tear gas canister. As a result, the ambulance crew comprised of a driver, a paramedic and 2 wounded civilians who were inside the ambulance suffered tear gas inhalation.
- At approximately 00:15 on Sunday, 27 May 2018, Israeli soldiers stationed behind the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel fired live bullets and flare bombs at dozens of Palestinian young men who gathered in the Return camp near the border fence, east of al-Shawkah, east of Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip. However, no casualties were reported.
- At approximately 18:00 on Monday, 28 May 2018, Israeli soldiers stationed behind the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel opened fire at a 20-year-old civilian from Khuza’ah. As a result, he was hit with 2 live bullets to the legs while he was at the vicinity of the Return encampment. The wounded civilian was transferred to Gaza European hospital to receive medical treatment. Doctors classified their injuries as moderate.
- At approximately 18:10 on Wednesday, 30 May 2018, Israeli soldiers opened fire at a group of young and children who were about 150 meters away from the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel, east of al-Buraij in the central Gaza Strip during their participation in the March of Return. As a result, a 15-year-old child from al-Maghazi was hit with a live bullet to the back and penetrated his chest. The child was admitted to al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir al-Balah via a PRCS ambulance and then was referred to al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.
Six Civilians Succumbed to Their Wounds:
- At approximately 19:00 on Thursday, 24 May 2018, medical sources at al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City announced the death of Ahmed ‘Ali Mustafa Qatoush (28) from al-Zawaidah succumbing to his previous wounds. According to PCHR’s investigations, Qatoush was hit with a live bullet to the right knee during his participation in the Great Return March on Monday, 14 May 2018, east of al-Buraij in the central Gaza Strip. He was admitted to al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir al-Balah and then was referred to al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City due to his serious injury to continue his medical treatment. He stayed at the hospital until his death was announced.
- At approximately 21:00 on the same Thursday, medical sources at al-Ahli Hospital in Hebron announced the death of Muhanned Baker Mohammed Abu Tahoun (20) from al-Nuseirat in the central Gaza Strip succumbing to his previous wounds. According to PCHR’s investigations, Abu Tahoun was hit with a live bullet to the head during his participation in the Great Return March on 14 May 2018, east of al-Buraij in the central Gaza Strip. He was admitted to al-Aqsa Hospital in Deir al-Balah and then was referred to al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City due to his serious injury. On 23 May 2018, Qatoush was referred to al-Ahli hospital in Hebron in the West Bank where he died in the next day.
- On Friday, 25 May 2018, Palestinian Ministry of Health announced the death of Yasser Sami Sa’ad Eden Habib (25) from al-Sheja’ieyah neighborhood, east of Gaza City, succumbing to his wounds. According to PCHR’s investigations, Habib was hit with a live bullet to the neck during his participation in the Great Return March on 14 May 2018, in the eastern side of Malakah intersection, east of al-Zaytoun neighborhood, east of Gaza City. Habib was admitted to al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City and then was referred to Mar Youssef Hospital in East Jerusalem to continue his medical treatment. Habib stayed at the hospital until his death was announced.
- At approximately 14:00 on Saturday, 26 May 2018, Palestinian Ministry of Health announced the death of Husein Salem Abu ‘Oueidah (41), from al-Sha’af, succumbing to his wounds. According to PCHR’s investigations, Abu ‘Ouweidah was hit with a live bullet to the back during his participation in the Great Return March on 14 May 2018, in the eastern side of Malakah intersection, east of al-Zaytoun neighborhood, east of Gaza City. He was admitted to al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City and then was referred to a hospital in Israel to continue his medical treatment due to his serious injury. He stayed at the hospital until his death was announced.
- At approximately 13:00 on Monday, 28 May 2018, medical sources at the Indonesian hospital in Jabalia announced the death of Nasser Abdul Ra’ouf al-‘Areni (27) from al-Twam neighborhood in the northern Gaza Strip, succumbing to his wounds. According to PCHR’s investigations, al-‘Areni was hit with a live bullet to the abdomen during his participation in the Great Return March on 14 May 2018,east of Abu Safiyah Hill, east of Jabalia. Al-‘Areni was admitted to the Indonesian Hospital where he underwent 4 surgeries in which parts of the internal organs were removed due to its laceration. Al-‘Areni stayed at the hospital until his death was announced. It should be noted that al-‘Areni was supposed to leave the hospital on Monday 28 May 2018 to receive medical treatment at Mar Youssef Hospital in occupied Jerusalem after he obtained a permit and his parents were waiting a call from the Medical Coordination Department when he is leaving, but he died.
- At approximately 11:30 on Wednesday, 30 May 2018, medical sources in Gaza European Hospital in Khan Yunis announced the death of Naji Maisarah Abdullah Ghuneim (23) from al-Brazil neighborhood in Rafah, succumbing to his wounds. Ghuneim was hit with a live bullet to the right thigh during his participation in the Great March of Return on 18 May 2018, in al-Shawkah village, east of Rafah near the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel. Ghuneim was admitted to Abu Yusuf al-Najjar Hospital in Rafah and then referred to Gaza European Hospital in Khan Yunis. He was later referred to al-Mutala’ Hospital in Jerusalem due to his serious injury. He was hit with an explosive live bullet, cutting the main artery, and leading to severe bleeding. Ghuneim was admitted to the ICU where his death was announced.
West Bank:
- At approximately 10:20 on Friday, 25 May 2018, a group of Palestinian civilians protested at the northern entrance to Qalqiliyah “Eyal” They chanted national slogans demanding to end occupation, condemning removing the U.S embassy to occupied Jerusalem and the Israeli forces’ crimes against Palestinian protestors along the eastern border of the Gaza Strip. The protestors set fire to tires and threw stones at Israeli soldiers stationed at the abovementioned checkpoint. The soldiers fired rubber bullets, sound bombs and tear gas canisters at the protestors and chased them. they also arrested 2 civilians, including a child, namely Motiam Khaldoun Mohammed Redwan (17) and Tha’er Ashraf Mohammed Zaid (19).
- At approximately 16:00 on Saturday, 25 May 2018, a group of Palestinian civilians moved from Kufor Qaddoum village, northeast of Qalqiliyah, to the eastern entrance to the village, which has been closed for 15 years in favor of the entrance to “Kedumim” settlement established on the village lands. The protestors chanted national slogans demanding end of occupation, condemning the U.S President Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital Israel and condemning the Israeli forces’ crimes against Palestinian protestors along the eastern border of the Gaza Strip within “The Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege” activities. The protestors set fire to tires, threw stones at Israeli soldiers stationed behind sand barriers. The soldiers fired rubber bullets, sound bombs and tear gas canisters at them. As a result, a 23-year-old civilian was hit with a rubber bullet to the head. On Friday afternoon, 24 May 2018, a similar demonstration was organized at the abovementioned entrance. As a result, many civilians suffered tear gas inhalation.
Settlement activities and attacks by settlers against Palestinian civilians and property
Israeli forces’ attacks
- At approximately 10:00 on Sunday, 27 May 2018, Israeli forces accompanied with a vehicle of the Israeli Civil Administration moved into Kherbit al-Mofaqarah, east of Yatta, south of Hebron. They stationed between Palestinian civilians’ houses and then an Israeli Civil Administration officer took photos of the houses and handed the residents notices to stop construction works under the pretext of non-licensing in areas classified as area (C). The houses, which were notified, belong to No’man Shehdah al-Barakandi, Fasdel Hasan al-Hamamdah, Hussain Ahmed al-Hamamadah, Maher Khalil al-Hamamdah, and Jamal Mousa al-Barakandi.
Israeli settlers’ attacks
- On Sunday, 27 May 2018, a number of Israeli settlers cut with saws over 700 grapevines belonging to Mohamed Shokri Na’iem Abu Rajab and his 3 siblings in al-Fahs area lands, south of Hebron. Israeli settlers wrote racist slogans in Hebrew on an agricultural container located in the abovementioned land. It should be noted that this is the 3rd time the Israeli forces cut grapevines in Hebron during this May. On 16 May 2018, the settlers cut 400 grapevines in al-Morajamah area, north of Hebron. On 23 May 2018, the settlers cut around 700 grapevines in lands adjacent to the bypass road (60).
- On Monday, 28 May 2018, a group of Israeli settlers, from “Kochav Shahar“ settlement, uprooted over 100 fruitful grapevines in Kafur Malek village, east of Ramallah. The attacked a plot of land belonging to Eyad Sa’ied Mo’adi.
Recommendations to the International Community
PCHR warns of the escalating settlement construction in the West Bank, the attempts to legitimize settlement outposts established on Palestinian lands in the West Bank and the continued summary executions of Palestinian civilians under the pretext that they pose a security threat to the Israeli forces. PCHR reminds the international community that thousands of Palestinian civilians have been rendered homeless and lived in caravans under tragic circumstances due to the latest Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip that has been under a tight closure for almost 11 years. PCHR welcomes the UN Security Council’s Resolution No. 2334, which states that settlements are a blatant violation of the Geneva Conventions and calls upon Israel to stop them and not to recognize any demographic change in the oPt since 1967.
PCHR hopes this resolution will pave the way for eliminating the settlement crime and bring to justice those responsible for it. PCHR further reiterates that the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, are still under Israeli occupation in spite of Israel’s unilateral disengagement plan of 2005. PCHR emphasizes that there is international recognition of Israel’s obligation to respect international human rights instruments and international humanitarian law. Israel is bound to apply international human rights law and the law of war, sometimes reciprocally and other times in parallel, in a way that achieves the best protection for civilians and remedy for the victims.
- PCHR calls upon the international community to respect the Security Council’s Resolution No. 2334 and to ensure that Israel respects it as well, in particular point 5 which obliges Israel not to deal with settlements as if they were part of Israel.
- PCHR calls upon the ICC this year to open an investigation into Israeli crimes committed in the oPt, particularly the settlement crimes and the 2014 offensive on the Gaza Strip.
- PCHR Calls upon the European Union (EU) and all international bodies to boycott settlements and ban working and investing in them in application of their obligations according to international human rights law and international humanitarian law considering settlements as a war crime.
- PCHR calls upon the international community to use all available means to allow the Palestinian people to enjoy their right to self-determination through the establishment of the Palestinian State, which was recognized by the UN General Assembly with a vast majority, using all international legal mechanisms, including sanctions to end the occupation of the State of Palestine.
- PCHR calls upon the international community and United Nations to take all necessary measures to stop Israeli policies aimed at creating a Jewish demographic majority in Jerusalem and at voiding Palestine from its original inhabitants through deportations and house demolitions as a collective punishment, which violates international humanitarian law, amounting to a crime against humanity.
- PCHR calls upon the international community to condemn summary executions carried out by Israeli forces against Palestinians and to pressurize Israel to stop them.
- PCHR calls upon the States Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC to work hard to hold Israeli war criminals accountable.
- PCHR calls upon the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions to fulfill their obligations under article (1) of the Convention to ensure respect for the Conventions under all circumstances, and under articles (146) and (147) to search for and prosecute those responsible for committing grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions to ensure justice and remedy for Palestinian victims, especially in light of the almost complete denial of justice for them before the Israeli judiciary.
- PCHR calls upon the international community to speed up the reconstruction process necessary because of the destruction inflicted by the Israeli offensive on Gaza.
- PCHR calls for a prompt intervention to compel the Israeli authorities to lift the closure that obstructs the freedom of movement of goods and 1.8 million civilians that experience unprecedented economic, social, political and cultural hardships due to collective punishment policies and retaliatory action against civilians.
- PCHR calls upon the European Union to apply human rights standards embedded in the EU-Israel Association Agreement and to respect its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights when dealing with Israel.
- PCHR calls upon the international community, especially states that import Israeli weapons and military services, to meet their moral and legal responsibility not to allow Israel to use the offensive in Gaza to test new weapons and not accept training services based on the field experience in Gaza in order to avoid turning Palestinian civilians in Gaza into testing objects for Israeli weapons and military tactics.
- PCHR calls upon the parties to international human rights instruments, especially the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), to pressurize Israel to comply with its provisions in the oPt and to compel it to incorporate the human rights situation in the oPt in its reports submitted to the relevant committees.
- PCHR calls upon the EU and international human rights bodies to pressurize the Israeli forces to stop their attacks against Palestinian fishermen and farmers, mainly in the border area.
25 may 2018
Israel and Palestine Director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), Omar Shakir, was given leave to remain in the country, yesterday, after the Jerusalem District Court blocked his deportation order.
Two weeks ago, Israel’s Ministry of Interior had ordered Shakir to leave Israel or be forcibly expelled on 24th May. The reason for this decision had been Shakir’s alleged support of the BDS campaign; he denied these claims and insists he has instead been targeted for his criticism of the Israeli government.
According to the PNN, yesterday’s last-minute reversal allows Shakir to stay until 2ndJuly, when a court hearing is scheduled to determine whether he can work long-term in the region. The Ministry of Interior’s order was frozen by Jerusalem District Court on the grounds that it had been based on ‘old facts’.
HRW announced the court’s verdict shortly after they had organised a press conference in Jerusalem, which was set to update journalists on the legal proceedings filed by Shakir and HRW to block his deportation order. In light of yesterday’s announcement, the news conference, due to be held today, shortly before Shakir left the country, has been cancelled.
This month has seen a crackdown on human rights officials by Israel. As well as Shakir’s mistreatment, The Mossawa Center’s director Jafar Farah was arrested last week in Haifa and his knee was broken by Israeli police during his incarceration.
By allowing Shakir to remain, Israel might hope to stem the tide of international criticism over its recent handling of human rights officials.
Two weeks ago, Israel’s Ministry of Interior had ordered Shakir to leave Israel or be forcibly expelled on 24th May. The reason for this decision had been Shakir’s alleged support of the BDS campaign; he denied these claims and insists he has instead been targeted for his criticism of the Israeli government.
According to the PNN, yesterday’s last-minute reversal allows Shakir to stay until 2ndJuly, when a court hearing is scheduled to determine whether he can work long-term in the region. The Ministry of Interior’s order was frozen by Jerusalem District Court on the grounds that it had been based on ‘old facts’.
HRW announced the court’s verdict shortly after they had organised a press conference in Jerusalem, which was set to update journalists on the legal proceedings filed by Shakir and HRW to block his deportation order. In light of yesterday’s announcement, the news conference, due to be held today, shortly before Shakir left the country, has been cancelled.
This month has seen a crackdown on human rights officials by Israel. As well as Shakir’s mistreatment, The Mossawa Center’s director Jafar Farah was arrested last week in Haifa and his knee was broken by Israeli police during his incarceration.
By allowing Shakir to remain, Israel might hope to stem the tide of international criticism over its recent handling of human rights officials.
Page: 23 - 22 - 21 - 20 - 19 - 18 - 17 - 16 - 15 - 14 - 13 - 12 - 11 - 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3
