The Russell Tribunal on Palestine - Barcelona Session

Launched on March 4, 2009, "The Russell Tribunal on Palestine (RTP) seeks to reaffirm the primacy of international law (to settle) the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (by focusing on) the enunciation of law by authoritative bodies (and) address(ing) the failure of application of law even though it has been so clearly identified. (It begins where the International Court of Justice) stopped: highlighting the responsibilities arising from the enunciation of law, including those of the international community, which cannot continue to shirk its obligations."

RTP is part of the BRussell Tribunal, named after famed philosopher, mathematician, and anti-war/anti-imperialism activist Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970), who warned over 50 years ago:

"Shall we put an end to the human race, or shall mankind renounce war" and live in peace, because there's no other choice.

Established in 1967, the BRussell Tribunal investigated Vietnam war crimes, more recently Iraq war ones and Bush administration imperialism continued under Obama. RTP exposes decades of Israeli crimes against  Palestinian civilians, calling for an end to colonialism, occupation and apartheid and for justice, equality, and peace.

The First Barcelona Session (March 1 - 3)

Hosted and endorsed by the Barcelona National Support Committee and Office of the Mayor of Barcelona, under the honorary presidency of Stephane Hessel, a jury of distinguished legal experts and human rights activists heard reports from authoritative experts on issues including:

-- the right to Palestinian self-determination;

-- illegal settlements and plundering Palestinian natural resources;

-- annexing East Jerusalem;

-- the Separation Wall; and

-- the EU/Israel Association Agreement

Panel Members

-- Mairead Corrigan Maguire, Nobel Peace laureate, 1976;

-- Ronald Kasrils, writer and activist;

-- Michael Mansfield, attorney and President of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers, UK;

-- Jose Antonio Martin Pallin, Emeritus Judge, Chamber II, Supreme Court, Spain;

-- Cynthia McKinney, former Georgia state legislator, US congresswoman, Green Party presidential candidate, and prominent civil and human rights activist;

-- Alberto San Juan, actor, Spain; and

-- Aminata Traore, author and former Mali Minister of Culture.

Experts Heard by the RTP

-- Madjid Benchikh (Algeria) - University of Cergy Pontoise Professor of Public International Law and former Law Faculty of Algiers dean;

-- Agnes Bertrand (Belgium) - researcher and Middle East specialist with APRODEV David Bondia (Spain) and University of Barcelona Professor of Public International Law and International Relations;

-- Francois Dubuisson (Belgium) - Free University of Brussels Law Professor;

-- Patrice Vouveret (France) - President of the Armaments Observatory;

-- James Phillips (Ireland) - lawyer;

-- Michael Sfard (Israel) - lawyer;

-- Phil Shiner (UK) - lawyer; and

-- Derek Summerfield (UK) - Kings College London Institute of Psychiatry honorary senior lecturer.

Witnesses

-- Veronique DeKeyer (Belgium) - EU Parliament member;

-- Ewa Jasiewicz (UK) - journalist and Operation Cast Lead eye witness;

-- Ghada Karmi (Palestine) - physician, author, Middle East expert, and University of Exeter Research Fellow at the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies;

-- Meir Margalit (Israel) - Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions and Jerusalem City Council member;

-- Daragh Murray - Palestinian Centre for Human Rights legal advisor; PCHR's Director, Raji Sourani, couldn't attend because Israel and Egypt keep him imprisoned in Gaza under siege;

-- Raul Romeva (Spain) - EU Parliament member;

-- Clare Short (UK) - British Parliament member and former Secretary of State for International Development;

-- Desmond Travers (Ireland) - retired Colonel and Goldstone Commission member.

Procedure

It followed "methodology applicable by any judicial body in terms of the independence and impartiality of its members." Israel's absence was no impediment. The evidence presented has been addressed by numerous other bodies, including:

-- the UN General Assembly and Security Council;

-- the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories;

-- the Goldstone Commission; and

-- various human rights organizations among others.

The RTP "simply dr(ew) attention to circumstances that are already widely recognized by the international community." Its proceedings dealt with:

-- Israeli international law violations;

-- EU breaches of specific and general international law rules; and

-- EU's failure to address Israeli international law violations and hold it accountable.

Findings and Conclusions

The RTP found Israel in violation of breaching virtually all international humanitarian laws as well as ones covering the rules of war and occupation, as follows:

(1) Failure to recognize Palestinian self-determination under provisions of the December 1960 UN General Assembly Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and all UN resolutions before and thereafter affirming Palestinian self-determination, including:

-- the UN Partition Plan (GA Resolution 181, 1947) granting Jews (with one-third of the population) 56% of historic Palestine, the rest to Palestinians with Jerusalem designated an international city under a UN Trusteeship Council;

-- GA Resolution 2131 (1965): Declaration on the Inadmissibility of Intervention in the Domestic Affairs of States and the Protection of Their Independence and Sovereignty, "reaffirming the principle of non-intervention," calling it "aggression;"

-- SC Resolution 242 (1967) calling for an end of conflict and withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from occupied territories; SC 338 (1973) repeated the same demand;

-- the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;

-- SC Resolution 298 (1971) affirming "acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible," calling Israel's failure to observe previous resolutions deplorable;

-- GA Resolution 3236 (1974) recognizing Palestinian self-determination and expressing "grave concern" that they've been "prevented from enjoying (their) inalienable rights (to) self-determination....national independence and sovereignty....without external interference....;"

-- GA Resolution 3314 (1974) on the Definition of Aggression in accordance with the UN Charter and Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and its judgment, calling it the supreme international crime against peace; 

-- numerous other SC and GA resolutions affirming the principles of international law, including Geneva's Common Article 1 obliging all nations to enforce them, stating specifically: "The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances;" and

-- Lisbon Treaty (December 2009) principles affirming fundamental freedoms, peace, democracy, human rights and dignity, justice, equality, the rule of law, security, tolerance, solidarity, mutual respect among peoples, the rights of the child, strict adherence to the UN Charter and international law, environmental protection, and sustainable development, and to prevent conflicts and combat social exclusion and discrimination.

(2) Failure to comply with the provisions of the Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (the Apartheid Convention), defined by the Rome Statute to include murder, extermination, enslavement, torture, arbitrary arrest, illegal imprisonment, denial of the right to life and liberty, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and other abusive acts imposed by one group on another. 

(3) Failure to observe international laws with regard to:

-- illegal acts of aggression, including inflicting mass deaths, injuries and destruction during Operation Cast Lead, mostly affecting civilians;

-- free movement, expression and the right of assembly;

-- imprisoning Gazans under siege; 

-- denying the universally acknowledged right of return; 

-- refusing Palestinians the right to their own resources "such as watercourses within their land;" 

-- annexing East Jerusalem in July 1980 despite SC Resolution 478 a month later declaring the Jerusalem Law null and void and requiring its immediate rescinding; 

-- constructing the Separation Wall on expropriated Palestinian land (ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice); 

-- denying Palestinians access to their own land, air space and coastal waters and control of their borders;

-- violating Fourth Geneva by building illegal settlements on expropriated land, dispossessing protected persons, and transferring its own civilian population to the territory it occupies;

-- the systematic use of torture, abuse and degrading treatment, illegal at all times, under all conditions with no allowed exceptions;

-- targeted assassinations and other willful killings of non-combatant civilians and others;

-- and numerous other systematic violations of fundamental international laws.

The RTP found EU states in violation by:

-- exporting weapons, munitions and components in support of Israel's aggressive wars;

-- buying produce from settlements; 

-- participating with settlements in research projects;

-- not holding Israel accountable for its crimes of war and against humanity in Operation Cast Lead and other acts of aggression;

-- not holding Israel liable for failing to observe international human rights laws in numerous EU-Israeli agreements;

-- upgrading its relations with Israel under the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership Agreement; 

-- tolerating illegal European commercial operations in the Occupied Territories, including the Jordan valley Tovlan landfill site and East Jerusalem tramline construction; and

-- failure to take determined steps to end the illegal Gaza siege, an act of slow-motion genocide through extreme depravation, causing a growing humanitarian crisis.

The RTP asks EU member states:

-- to rectify their breaches by fulfilling their international humanitarian law obligations. 

-- implement an EU Parliament resolution requiring the suspension of the EU-Israeli Association Agreement, ending Israel's impunity;

-- observe the Goldstone Report recommendation to collect evidence and exercise Universal Jurisdiction (UJ) against alleged Israeli and Palestinian violators; 

-- repeal requirements that they be member state residents and other impediments to assure all suspected war criminals are held accountable;

-- ensure member state UJ laws and procedures have teeth, are enforced, including by mutual cooperation;

-- ensure no measures weaken or subvert UJ laws to assure no safe havens exist;

-- have the Austrian, French, Greek and Italian Parliaments enact laws complying with Fourth Geneva's Article 146, requiring "effective penal sanctions for persons committing, or ordering to be committed, any" Convention breaches, including "the obligation to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, such grave breaches, and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts;"

-- have individuals, groups and organizations use all available means to ensure EU member states comply with their international law obligations; and

-- support the global BDS movement to hold Israel accountable.

The RTP "calls on the European Union and (its) member states to impose" diplomatic, trade and cultural sanctions to end the impunity Israel "has enjoyed for decades." If EU nations won't do it, European citizens must pressure them by all available means. 

No longer:

-- can Israel's international law breaches be tolerated; 

-- should people demanding justice be denied; 

-- should Palestinians have to endure colonialism, occupation and apartheid; or

-- accept anything less than justice, equality and peace.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://prognewshour.progressiveradionetwork.org/

http://lendmennews.progressiveradionetwork.org/

Explaining Israeli crimes

 Israeli Unaccountability and Denial: Suppressing the Practice of Torture - by Stephen Lendman

The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PACTI - stoptorture.org) "believes that torture and ill-treatment of any kind and under all circumstances is incompatible with the moral values of democracy and the rule of law." Yet it's systematically practiced by the Israeli Police, General Security Service (GSS), Israeli Prison Service (IPS), and Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).

In December 2009, PACTI published its latest report titled, "Accountability Denied: The Absence of Investigation and Punishment of Torture in Israel," explaining "the many layers of immunity that protect" the guilty, specifically the GSS, the focus of this report.

Immunity insures that GSS interrogation torture and abuse complaints never become criminal investigations, indictments, or legal hearings. Israel's State Attorney and Attorney General assure it "under a systemic legal cloak" giving torturers "unrestricted protection."

Since 2001, victims submitted over 600 torture complaints to authorities. None were investigated - "the first step" before indictments, prosecutions, and convictions. As a result, GSS interrogators have blanket immunity to operate freely "behind closed doors (making) torture an institutionalized method of interrogation in Israel, enjoying the full backing of the legal system." As in America, torture is official Israeli policy.

Torture in Israeli Law - A Barrier of Loopholes

Israel's Supreme Court ruling in Public Committee against Torture in Israel et al v. the Government of Israel et al (the HCJ Torture Petition) established the current legal basis, even though international law prohibits it unequivocally, at all times, under all conditions, with no allowed exceptions - a matter universally binding even on non-signatory states. Israel, however, signed and ratified the 1984 Convention against Torture. Yet no Israeli law explicitly bans it, except for several provisions relating to torture, including assault, abuse of defenseless persons, and the explicit prohibition of force or threats by a public employee toward interrogees.

However, Israeli court rulings ban torture, and the Supreme Court interpreted the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty to mean torture is unacceptable and prohibited. Earlier, "psychological pressure (and) a moderate degree of physical pressure" were permissible, based on the Landau Commission's recommendations that GSS interrogators may commit such acts on the basis of necessity.

The Commission condemned the practice but approved using it to obtain evidence for convictions in criminal proceedings, saying coercive interrogation tactics were necessary against "hostile (threats or acts of) terrorist activity and all expressions of Palestinian nationalism."

This notion protects defendants in a criminal trial "for an act that was required in an immediate manner in order to save his life, liberty, person, or property or those of another from danger of grave injury accruing from a given situation at the time of the act when he had no course of action other than to commit this act."

In its 1999 ruling, Supreme Court President Aharon Barak established a milestone in the struggle against torture by recognizing its prohibition in international law, calling it "absolute (with) no exceptions and no balances."

Yet the High Court of Justice (HCJ) legitimized coercive interrogations in three 1996 cases - by plaintiffs Bilbeisi, Hamdan and Mubarak for interim injunctions against abusive GSS practices. Ones cited included violent shaking, painful shackling, hooding, playing deafeningly loud music, sleep deprivation, and lengthly detainments. After due consideration, the HCJ ruled painful shackling illegal, but not the other practices.

The Court's 1999 ruling went further, but equivocated by adding loopholes to allow torture, so effectively its prohibition was empty. Although it reversed the Landau Commission's recommendations, it ruled that pressure and a measure of discomfort are legitimate interrogation side-effects provided they're not used to break a detainee's spirit. It also sanctioned physical force in "ticking bomb" cases, in violation of international laws allowing no exceptions ever. Moreover, Israeli security forces routinely claim detainees are security threats enough to justify abusive interrogations.

In his ruling, Court President Barak justified physical force to save lives, saying interrogators may employ the "necessity defense" to justify them. In so doing, he authorized sweeping use of the most abusive practices, while at the same time prohibiting torture "absolute(ly with) no exceptions and no balances."

The Court let "the Attorney General....guide himself concerning the circumstances (to assure) interrogators who are alleged to have acted in an individual case from a sense of 'need' are not to be prosecuted." These guidelines thus "serve as a priori authorization" to practice torture freely. In other words, the Court wanted to "have its cake and eat it too: to declare an absolute prohibition of torture," yet let it continue.

The Necessity Defense

Despite the Israeli High Court's equivocal position, international law prohibits torture under all conditions with no exceptions. The notion of "no other alternative" is false, disingenuous, criminal, and illogical as experts say torture doesn't work and isn't used for information.

The US Army Field Manual 34-52 Chapter 1 says:

"Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear."

US experts, including generals, CIA and FBI interrogators, diplomats, politicians and others concur. So do foreign officials and Israeli experts. Yet the practice persists, not for information but to abuse and punish maliciously. The "necessity" rationale is a red herring.

Yet shortly after the HCJ's ruling, Israel's Attorney General and State Attorney's Office Criminal Department head published two key documents:

"GSS Interrogations and the Necessity Defense - A Framework for the Discretion of the Attorney-General (and) Circumstances in Which GSS Interrogators Who Acted out of a Sense of 'Need' Are Not to be Prosecuted."

They establish guidelines authorizing abusive practices to gain "vital information to prevent tangible danger or grave injury to state security or to human life, liberty, and integrity, and when there is no other reasonable means in the circumstances of the matter to prevent this injury, the Attorney General will consider refraining from instigating criminal proceedings." 

In other words, anything goes, anytime, for any reason under the "necessity defense" even though torture is justified nor does it work.

Yet in 2006, a GSS interrogator told Haaretz writer Nir Hasson that "authorization to use force in interrogations is given at least by the head of the interrogation team, and sometimes comes directly from the head of the GSS." 

GSS, in fact, openly admits that a priori permission is granted for it - the result of legal loopholes permitting it in violation of international law.

Torture, Lies and No Investigation

The Officer in Charge of GSS Interrogee Complaints (OCGIC) is responsible for handling them together with his counterpart in the State Attorney's Office. Yet Israel has no policy for responding and one in place undermines the process.

GSS' "culture of lying" began with the April 1984 "Bus (or Kav) 300" affair referring to a bus highjacking by Palestinians and the allegation that GSS agents executed two of them taken captive. A secret commission was appointed to investigate. Those testifying lied. The commission determined that blows to the head killed the two detainees, but no one was held responsible.

GSS head Avraham Shalom claimed he acted "with authority and permission." Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir said nothing, but President Chaim Herzog pardoned four GSS official to quash further actions - the first time in Israeli history that the president pardoned someone before being tried and convicted, even though the investigation revealed lawless acts including torture.

This and other findings led to the Landau Commission's formation and its revelations that GSS personnel lied to courts, denied using torture, and the coverup included top officials, mindful of their lawless acts. The Commission quoted an internal 1982 GSS memorandum instructing interrogators to lie, yet recommended no criminal action.

Public discussion, however, led to two amendments to the Police Ordinance - Amendment No. 12 in 1994 and No. 18 in 2004. The first one extended Police Investigation Department (PID) authority to include investigating GSS employee offenses during or in connection with interrogations.

The second one allowed investigations of all suspected GSS offenses in the performance of their duties, including those unrelated to interrogations. However, while police personnel investigations are submitted directly to the PID, the Attorney General must authorize whether GSS ones will be sent there. As a result,  complaints about them have never been investigated, and justice has consistently been denied.

"In hindsight....the amendments created a hermetic barrier preventing criminal investigation(s), since the Attorney General has chosen not to forward even a single case (to) the PID (and) the Israel Police has not opened a single investigation in this field."

In addition, since a GSS official is authorized to investigate complaints, in practice, a clear conflict of interest exists, and it's evident in consistent whitewashings. From January 2001 - December 2008, PACTI submitted 598 interrogee complaints to the State Attorney's Office. None were forwarded for criminal investigation. For example, in 2007:

-- OCGIC opened 47 examinations;

-- as of June 20, 2008, processing for 30 were completed; but

-- "not a single complaint relating to a GSS investigator was forwarded for investigation and no steps (including disciplinary action) were taken against the interrogators." 

The years 2005, 2006 and earlier ones were no different. On October 20, 2009, PACTI submitted a freedom of information request to the Ministry of Justice for pertinent 2008 and 2009 information. As of yearend 2009, no reply was received. It appears torture and abuse aren't serious enough to warrant investigation and disciplinary action. As a result, it continues unpunished and unabated.

Past Department of Special Tasks responses have been brief and obstructionist with "formulaic phrases" like: 

-- "The complaints in your letter are baseless.

-- The interrogation was pursued in accordance with the procedures.

-- After the interrogators have been questioned and the complainant's claims have been examined one by one, the Attorney General has reached the conclusion that no defect occurred in the interrogators' behavior. Accordingly, there is no cause to take any legal action against them."

No clarifications were given, and at times, responses had no relevance to the complaints or why they were dismissed. PACTI concluded that thorough investigations weren't undertaken, and whatever was done was "laundered," making the conclusions reached worthless.

Worse still, lawyers may not represent complainants (no longer suspects) during interrogations or prepare them in advance. They occur without prior notification. The atmosphere is tense, and PACTI learned about complainants being shackled and having no rights, "whose words are to be regarded with great suspicion." In other words, their complaints may do more harm than good. Submitting them may make them a future target, and GSS accounts are always accepted as factual, no matter how false and inaccurate.

The Illogic of Letting the Abuser Be the Investigator

How can "a body responsible for investigating torture and improper means of interrogation" be the one responsible for the abuse. "Such a body cannot operate as a substitute for a criminal investigation; the investigation must be transparent and open to public criticism." Doing otherwise discredits the entire process and "defies common sense, Israeli law and international law...."

Also, letting torturers investigate their own crimes discourages complainants. Why bother under a fundamentally unfair system, one with further harmful implications for the abused.

The system is rigged to fail. Abuse gets rubber-stamp approval, and authorization goes right to the top, granting sweeping immunity for the most grievous offenses, justice always being denied. By order of the Attorney General and State Attorney's Office (via Prime Ministerial authorization), "an impenetrable barrier (shields) criminal investigation(s)" and GSS prosecutions. 

Grave consequences result. Abuses and a culture of lying persist as well as a "disrespect for the rule of law and for the values of human rights. It denies relief to victims seeking to repair the physical and psychological damage they have suffered, and it also imposes an obstacle, preventing (them) from securing their right to claim compensation through a civil proceeding." 

Being Palestinian under Israeli control carries great risks, best attested to by victims.

The Legal Obligation to Investigate Abuses and Penalize Those Responsible

Numerous international laws prohibit torture, including the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture, Geneva Conventions and Common Article 3, the Nuremberg Principles, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, and others.

The prohibition is sweeping, applies universally, and no exceptions are allowed. Israel committed to observe it, yet systematically is in violation.

The Convention against Torture defines it as follows:

"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful actions."

Actions not meeting the definition of torture come under the definition of "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment," otherwise called abuse, but the line between the two is thin and often crossed.

The Obligation to Investigate

The Convention against Torture obligates member states to investigate and punish torturers. The same is true for the UN Committee against Torture (responsible for implementing the Convention), the UN Human Rights Committee (responsible for implementing the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), and the main international tribunal rulings - all requiring independent, impartial, efficient, effective and reliable action to hold those responsible accountable.

The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture is also mandated to investigate torture globally, including complaints and legal issues as well as regular fact-finding missions to specific countries under conditions of free inquiry, unrestricted movement, and the ability to conduct confidential interviews with victims, witnesses, human rights defenders, and NGOs, after which reports are prepared for the Human Rights Council and made available to the public.

The European Court of Human Rights and Inter-American Committee of Human Rights stipulated that states must report their investigatory results to complainants and publish them. The Istanbul Protocol includes the most detailed publication requirements, stating:

"A written report, made within a reasonable time, shall include the scope of the inquiry, procedures and methods used to evaluate evidence as well as conclusions and recommendations based on findings of fact and on applicable law. On completion, this report shall be made public. It shall describe in detail specific events that were found to have occurred and the evidence upon which such findings were based, and list the names of witnesses who testified with the exception of those whose identities have been withheld for their own protection. The State shall, within a reasonable period of time, reply to the report of the investigation, and, as appropriate, indicate steps to be taken in response."

In addition, prosecuting guilty parties must occur in compliance with Article 12 of the Convention. Also, integrating torture offenses comes under under the provisions of Article 4(1) and definition in Article 1. Minimum penalties aren't established, but recommendations range from six to 20 years, depending on the severity of the offense. Under no circumstances should pardons be granted. Doing so violates the Convention's Article 2(1) and encourages recurrences.

Israel is a signatory to the Convention against Torture and is obligated to observe its provisions. Yet as early as 1994, the UN Committee against Torture, in a departure from its usual practice, demanded that Israel submit a special report following the HCJ ruling explicitly permitting "physical pressure" against interrogees. After examining the report, the Committee concluded that GSS interrogation methods constitute torture in violation of fundamental international law, including so-called "ticking bomb" cases.

In its most recent May 2009 report, the Committee addressed Israeli violations with respect to conditions of detention and imprisonment, protracted isolation, illegal facilities, detaining minors, and using force during military operations. Concern was also raised about failure to include torture in Israeli law, and that:

"....the 'necessity defense' exception may still arise in cases of 'ticking bombs,' i.e., interrogation of terrorist suspects or persons otherwise holding information about potential terrorist attacks....The Committee is concerned that GSS interrogators who use physical pressure in 'ticking bomb' cases may not be criminally responsible if they resort to the necessity defense argument."

The Committee against Torture's unequivocal recommendation was for Israel to "completely remove necessity as a possible justification for the crime of torture." The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Human Rights Committee expressed the same view, including that "all allegations of torture and ill-treatment are promptly and effectively investigated and perpetrators prosecuted and, if applicable (appropriate) penalties....imposed."

Of great concern was that none of the 600 torture complaints against GSS interrogators from 2001 through 2008 led to a criminal investigation and prosecution. It called Israel's behavior particularly grave and urgently in need of change. Everyone up the chain of command is responsible, including commanders, the Attorney General, and others materially involved.

Torture and inhumane treatment are crimes under international law. In armed conflict, they're war crimes, and when civilian populations are attacked, they're crimes against humanity. Defendants may be tried by their home countries, or in others under the universal jurisdiction principle, an obligation borne by all Geneva Convention parties. They may also be tried in the International Criminal Court in the Hague, a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression.

Culpable persons include planners, order issuers, and assistants. Vicarious liability is also recognized and may be imposed on commanders and civilian leaders based on crimes committed by their subordinates on explicit or implicit orders given. 

To prove guilt, it must be established that they either knew or should have known about crimes, yet they made no effort to stop them, or when committed, punish offenders.

Institutionalized torture can't be maintained without higher up authorization and tacit or explicit approval of the practice. In the case of the Bush administration, culpability went right to the top, documented in revealed torture memorandums, memos, findings Executive Orders, and National and Homeland Security Presidential Directives.

In sum, states are obligated to investigate torture complaints and hold guilty parties accountable. "The State of Israel has failed to meet these requirements, to which it is obligated under international law." The UN Committee against Torture noted this lawlessness for years. Israel did nothing to address it. To date, the practice continues unabated, authorized by the highest government officials and IDF commanders in violation of fundamental international law.

According to PACTI:

"There can be no doubt that all branches of (Israel's) government - the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary - have provided GSS interrogators with multiple layers of protection. There can also be no doubt that (they) exploited these (protections) to emerge unscathed after committing unconscionable actions in moral and legal terms. (It's) essential to end the era in which torturers enjoy immunity in Israel or elsewhere." Nothing less is tolerable or acceptable.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to the Lendman News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/Lendman

Torture is official Israeli policy.

 Human Rights Abuses in Israel and Occupied Palestine - by Stephen Lendman

Founded in 1972, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) is its leading human and civil rights organization through activities involving litigation, legal advocacy, education, and public outreach. Each year it publishes an annual report covering flagrant violations, positive trends, if any, and "significant human rights-related processes" affecting Israelis and Palestinians.

Its latest December 2009 one is examined below, discussing "a disturbing (government-sponsored) trend that has (gained) currency in Israel over the past year - both in public discourse and sometimes in practice - to make human rights conditional: on fulfilling some obligation, having financial means, or belonging (or not belonging) to certain groups."

For example, free expression is targeted, and Israeli Arabs threatened, denied equality, education,  employment, and their citizenship without "declaring loyalty" to Israel - in other words, on condition they abandon their national identity, culture, language, and historic heritage that's the equivalent of asking Jews  to renounce Judaism.

Financial means involves regarding social rights, including healthcare and education, as commodities, accessible to those who can pay. And for Occupied Palestinians, Gaza was devastated by war, remains under siege, and sustains near daily assaults, killings, and targeted assassinations. 

In the West Bank, security forces enforce land seizures, home demolitions, displacement, segregation, isolation, closures, movement and travel restrictions, the Separation Wall's construction, daily home invasions, arrests, attacks on peaceful protestors, imprisonments, and torture of detainees under a rigid "matrix of control" involving checkpoints, bypass roads, roadblocks, curfews, electric fences, and various other harassments to cow all Palestinians into submission or make them give up and leave.

Since 1948, Israel denied its Arab citizens fundamental human and civil rights and increasingly fewer of them to many Jews. In the Territories, it's far worse under military occupation and Israeli laws affording no protections to Palestinians. Nor has the Supreme Court upheld the law that should be sacrosanct in a legitimate democracy. When it's compromised, no one is immune from abuse and neglect as greater numbers in Israel are learning, including Jews.

Threatening Free Expression

Losing it threatens all other freedoms. It's a basic legal right even Israel's Supreme Court recognizes, but not absolutely having repeatedly ruled that curtailing it is justified in extreme public danger situations or if national security may be undermined.

However, the "true test of freedom of expression lies in allowing the airing of views that are extreme, controversial, or infuriating." It's the state's obligation to protect them, especially in times of crisis, including war. But during Operation Cast Lead, Israel failed the test.

Protest demonstrations were attacked, dispersed, and silenced. Participants were arrested, then intimidated by dubious charges. Against Israeli Arabs, excessive force and preemptive detentions were used, then bogus indictments made based on charges of "participating in unlawful gatherings."

Legally, authorities overstepped so egregiously that harsher measures may follow, and against Palestinians they're commonplace, including targeted killings and torture.

Israel also restricted the foreign media, prohibiting on the scene access to report accurately on the conflict. For their part, the Israeli media largely supported the government. Overall, war coverage restrictions caused Israel's journalistic freedom rating to drop sharply as measured by international human rights organizations. Dissent was minimally tolerated, and repressing it continued post-war. "Not only were critics silenced, they were accused and vilified, and their critiques unaddressed."

During 2009, anti-democratic Knesset bills also limited free expression, including the Nakba Law threatening individuals with imprisonment for mourning on Israel's Independence Day. Organizations risked loss of their public funding for doing it.

The Incitement Law threatens prison for anyone denying Israel's existence as a Jewish, democratic state, and the proposed Loyalty to Israel Law rescinds Israeli citizenship for anyone unwilling to pledge loyalty to the state.

These mostly target Arab Israelis and get strong government backing. Also introduced was a bill almost completely banning demonstrations adjacent to the homes of public officials and service providers, or others responsible for public welfare. After passing its first Knesset reading, the Internal Affairs Committee asked for revisions.

Harassing Human Rights Organizations and Activists

In 1998, the UN General Assembly adopted the "Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms." It obligates all state parties to respect them and protect organizations and activists from violence, threats, retaliatory action and any discrimination connected to their work.

Israel is a signatory, but systematically violates the letter and spirit it expresses. Over the past two years and earlier, anti-democratic and free expression constraints have increased. Targeted senior political figures sought to undermined the legitimacy of their critics lawlessly. 

For example, when the discharged combat veterans organization, Breaking the Silence, published a pamphlet critical of Operation Cast Lead, government response was harsh. Instead of investigating eyewitness war crimes testimonies, officials vilified the group to undermine its credibility, and the Foreign Ministry asked the Netherlands, Britain, and Spain to half their funding.

After the July Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) report about physicians' involvement in torture, Israeli Medical Association (IMA) chairman Dr. Yoram Blachar asked its members to sever ties with PHR-Israel.

The Prevention of Inflation Law passed its first Knesset reading in May 2008 - "in brazen violation of the basic precepts of providing protection and care to asylum seekers." One of its provisions includes long prison terms for convicted "infiltrators" and human rights activists helping them.

Harassing Human Rights Activists in the Occupied Territories

Harassment and other measures there are far worse than in Israel, including violence committed by security forces and settlers. IDF actions include:

-- declaring West Bank areas closed military zones to deny activists access to them;

-- arresting, detaining, indicting, convicting, and imprisoning activists as a deterrent; and

-- dispersing demonstrations with excessive force, using rubber-coated metal bullets, at times live rounds, stun grenades, tear gas, and other repressive measures against peaceful protesters

Discriminating Against Israeli Arabs

The Israeli government appointed the Or Commission to investigate early violence at the beginning of the second Intifada in which police killed 12 Israeli Arabs and one Palestinian. It recommended that the state "act to erase the stain of discrimination against Arab citizens in all its various forms and expression," but thereafter they worsened in even more severe forms.

Israeli Arabs enjoy no rights in a state affording them only to Jews. Worse still, they're portrayed as enemies, and in the past year, proposed racist laws threaten their free expression, political participation, language, culture, historic heritage, and all their rights unless they swear loyalty to the Jewish state and Zionist vision.

The Proposed Nakba Law

Public outrage over its original version got it revised to exclude imprisonment, but included is a clause withdrawing public funding from any state-supported body holding activities commemorating the Nakba in any way. It's now removed from Arab school curricula, and banning it denies Arab Israelis their collective identity, memory, and free expression right to their opinions, especially one this important.

Removal of Arab Place Names from Road Signs

In July, Minister of Transportation Yisrael Katz ordered Arab road signs replaced with Arabic transliterations of Hebrew names, but doing so violates the Supreme Court's recognition of Arabic as an official language in Israel.

Conditioning Rights on Military Service

In August, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the Ministry's diplomatic training will be conditional on completing military or national service henceforth. As a result, the Israeli Railways fired 40 Arab train junction crossing guards when a condition was added to the vacancy announcement requiring all employees to have performed IDF service. 

Conditional Citizenship

If passed, the proposed Loyalty to Israel Law will make Israeli citizenship conditional on signing a loyalty oath to "the Jewish, Zionist, and democratic State of Israel, its symbols and values." It will also obligate all citizens to perform military or other national service, and will authorize the Interior Minister to revoke the citizenship of anyone refusing to sign. In late May, the Ministerial Committee for Legislative Affairs rejected the bill.

Globally, citizenship is a basic right, but not in Israel where it's conditional, especially for Arabs. For example, in May, Interior Minister Eli Yishai ordered the citizenship of four Arabs revoked because they were suspected of harming state security. Doing so tells Israeli Arabs that their citizenship is conditional, not guaranteed, and can be revoked for any reason if state authorities wish.

Violating the Right to Housing

At issue again is making it conditional on swearing loyalty to Israel to keep Arabs out of Jewish communities. In addition, a June agreement between the state and Jewish National Fund (JNF) authorizes the transfer of some privately (central region) owned land to the state in exchange for undeveloped Negev and Galilee substitute areas. The idea again is discrimination, treating Jews one way and Arabs another by seizing their land for Jews only development.

Violating Free Expression and Political Involvement

It primarily affects Arabs, one example being in towns and villages where they protested against the Gaza war.  They were met with harassment, violence, and mass arrests, unlike the guidelines for Jews. Also, preemptive arrests were made, targeting Arab activists and public figures on suspicion they might protest the war.

These are police state tactics, reflected in all ways Israeli Arabs and Palestinians are treated. They portray a troubling picture portending worse ahead to deny non-Jews equal rights and strike hard when they peacefully protest. And yet the Orr Commission stressed that:

"It is imperative that we act to uproot manifestations of prejudice against the Arab sector that were demonstrated even by the most respected senior police officers. The police must impress upon its officers the idea that the Arab public as a whole is not their enemy, and must not be treated as such."

They are, worse than in October 2000, proving Israeli Arabs aren't respected or safe under Jewish rule, let alone given equal rights.

Racist Views

By considering Arabs enemies and unwanted, mistreating, excluding, and discriminating against them is sanctioned, and Jews support it. According to the Israel Democracy Institute's 2009 Democracy Index:

-- 53% of Jews support Arab emigration from Israel;

-- 54% of Jews and Arabs agree that only citizens loyal to the state deserve civil rights;

-- 38% of Jews believe Jews deserve more rights than others; and

-- only 33% of native Jews and 23% of new immigrants want Arab parties in the government, even though their members are Israeli citizens.

Overall, the survey authors say the data indicate broad support for revoking Arab political rights, ones only to be afforded Jews as more evidence that a democratic Israel is more illusion than fact.

Bedouin Rights

Tens of thousands live in so-called unrecognized villages, some pre-dating Israel's founding. Yet Israel won't recognize them, excludes them from regional and municipal planning, denies them basic services, calls Bedouin settlements illegal, and forcibly expels their residents from land they own. 

Those remaining are given two choices - live under appalling conditions or voluntarily move to one of seven recognized townships or rural villages, live in poverty and unemployment, and relinquish all rights to their land, heritage, and traditional lifestyle.

Yet in December 2008, the Commission for the Resolution of Arab Settlement in the Negev, chaired by retired Supreme Court Justice Eliezer Goldberg (the Goldberg Commission), issued some unprecedented statements. It called Israel's policies against Bedouin citizens inappropriate, saying they're recognized residents, not "trespassers," and the state should legalize their status and allow them to build on their land.

Nonetheless, the report didn't unequivocally say how, and presented impediments that could indefinitely delay or even halt village recognition. Also, it didn't clearly recommend guidelines to assure basic services and essential infrastructure to spur economic development. As a result, Bedouin rights are still denied, and they continue being uprooted from their land.

Criminal Justice Rights

In 2006, a Supreme Court ruling bolstered the right to legal representation by affording persons suspected of a serious crime the right to have all interrogations videotaped, in cases involving a possible sentence of 15 or more years. Otherwise, forced confessions can be extracted through torture or other harsh means.

Nonetheless, due process is ignored if individuals are suspected of a security offense. In these cases, they may be detained and interrogated for several days in isolation, with no access to counsel, their family, or a judge. After arrest, oversight can last up to 96 hours. Afterwards, meeting with a lawyer can be delayed another three weeks and video documentation isn't required, so the most abusive practices can be employed out of sight and unreported, yet confessions gotten this way can convict.

In Occupied Palestine, it's far worse for any offense. Suspects can be held for eight days before being brought before a military judge, not a civil one. In addition, draconian regulations prevent contact with a lawyer, and authorities aren't obligated to document interrogations. 

According to the 2002 Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law, suspects can be held up to 14 days with no judicial oversight and prevented from attorney contact for up to three weeks during which he or she can, and most often is, brutalized under the most horrific conditions. B'Tselem reported that 85% of Palestinian detainees are tortured, a longstanding practice, unconstrained and unreported.

Hatred and Racism

In mid-2008, the Oz unit replaced the Immigration Police and began intensifying residency law enforcement against asylum-seekers and migrant workers invited to work as nurses, in agriculture, and for construction. Now they're accused of causing unemployment and dehumanized by being called "burglars, junkies, and street people."

As a result, human rights activists and others expressed outrage, and so didn't some cabinet and Knesset members. In July, it forced Prime Minister Netanyahu to announce a three month expulsion suspension to provide time to devise a more equitable policy, so far not done for either refugees, migrant workers or asylum seekers.

In addition, in the past year, they've been targeted, called "foreigners," racially slurred, made to feel unwelcome, and sometimes harmed by violence and killings. Subsets of Israeli society are also affected, including Arabs, ethnic Ethiopians, Russians, gays and lesbians, and even ultra-Orthodox Jews.

Rights of the Elderly

They're one of Israel's fastest growing groups, the result of a falling birth rate and increased life expectancy. Yet the collapse of the Pensioners Party in the last parliamentary election reduced their status to an excluded and deprived population. As a result, many suffer from ageism, exclusion, discrimination and poverty. In fact, elder Israeli poverty ranks among the highest in western countries.

Pensions are no longer linked to the average wage, but to the Consumer Price Index, so their future value will likely drop. In addition, long-term care issues are deteriorating because to qualify, elders and their adult children must pass a means test. Chronic care facilities are getting less funding, and growing numbers of institutions can't maintain minimal medical standards, or must reduce staff and the care they afford.

In employment, the 2004 Retirement Age Law lets employers ousts workers who reach retirement age, regardless of their skills, desire, or need to stay employed. Unlike other western countries, Israel fires on the basis of age.

The 1988 Equal Opportunity in Employment Law, prohibiting discrimination age bias, is now weak and not enforced. In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that for persons past their retirement age, the state can deny them jobs in preference to younger workers - saying this doesn't constitute age discrimination.

Even persons as young as 50 are affected as employers illegally get away with discriminating against them on the basis of age. 

Chronic care insurance is another issue. The 1995 National Insurance Law assured it, but economic pressures weakened it and social benefits overall as Israel succumbed to the same neoliberal pressures afflicting all western countries, some more than others, but all heading in the same direction. The result is society's most vulnerable are greatly impacted, including seniors. In Israel, elders are increasingly viewed as dependent, weak, less wanted, and burdensome. The result is less care and more impoverishment when they most need help.

The Right to Education

Private schools have long existed in Israel, but now they're proliferating at the expense of public ones. The term "private" refers to ones not under state auspice or regional councils, including those in the Amal or ORT network, kibbutz schools, Arab schools run by the Church, and Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) schools.

Now private secular ones have appeared with specific educational agendas or philosophies, and others noted for their small class size, high-quality teachers, or particular distinction making them desirable to some Israelis.

Private or not, they're all part of the "recognized but unofficial" education system and get 75% of the funding given official state schools. In May 2007, an amendment to the State Education Law passed requiring regional councils to provide comparable funding.

"The entire subject of 'recognized but unofficial' schools is a complex one that raises profound questions about the right of parents to make decisions about their children's education, equality in education, the legitimacy of State intervention (in deciding content) and the character of a given school (by setting conditions for public funding), and more."

Violating the Right to Equality in Education

Admissions policies restrict entry to recognized but unofficial schools to relatively few students. Criteria include entrance exams, admission committee decisions, and more. Discrimination thus exists, favoring some over others despite Ministry of Education directives prohibiting them.

Because these schools are heavily subsidized, the entire public must have access without discrimination, but they don't. High tuition charges create another barrier, leaving out most Israeli children because of affordability.

Public schools are also affected. For example, parents prefer schools offering targeted curricula - such as the Nature School and School for the Arts, both in Tel Aviv. Despite the prohibition, both require entrance exams and charge high tuitions.

Although some specialized schools offer financial aid to needy families, few, in fact, are helped, even for "specialized track" public schools that also charge additional tuition and require a personal interview to determine child eligibility for a special program. The result is a two-track system - one for well-off families, the other for those with limited means, unable to provide their children with the best.

Decline of Public Schools

They've declined as recognized but unofficial schools have grown in popularity. As a result, compared to OECD countries, class sizes are larger, teacher salaries lower, and student achievement mediocre. It's no surprise that 61% of parents polled prefer private to public education. They're publicly funded, have better teachers, and attract children from more affluent families. 

In contrast, public education is deteriorating, and the more it does, the greater the incentive for parents to prefer private ones - if they can afford them.

Recently, Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar said he'll introduce legislation to broaden the ministry's discretionary powers "to weigh whether or not to grant recognition to an institution based on educational and financial considerations," including if doing so would adversely affect public schools. It's a positive step, but much more is needed, so far not gotten to reverse a discriminatory trend showing no signs of being stopped.

The Right to Housing

The August 2004 Israel Lands Administration (ILA) decision #1015 created admissions committees to agricultural communities and small communal settlements. They consider applications from candidates wanting land to settle there, and recommend whether or not to permit them, using dubious criteria based on "social compatibility" standards, heavily discriminating against minority or other unwanted groups.

"These are up-scale, rural, or private home developments built on what was once kibbutz and moshav fields, not the property of the State and offering a high standard of living at an affordable price," based on a discriminatory selection process.

Sectoral Marketing and Acquisition Groups

Discrimination also affects apartments letting private developers market them to specific groups of their choosing, thus screening in "quality neighbors" as a selling point to attract others like them. It results in closed communities leading to social gaps as wealthier neighborhoods get the best public services, while others deteriorate.

The Right to Social Security

In 2009, the global economic crisis impacted Israel hard, especially jobs with a sharp rise in unemployment, and those without them discovered that since 2000, social safety net protections have deteriorated. 

In addition, unemployment insurance has eroded to one of the lowest among western countries, and eligibility became more stringent. As a result, those qualifying have decreased by about 50%. In 2007, less than one-fourth of Israel's unemployed were entitled to monthly stipends. Those without them struggle for any means of support, making them vulnerable to exploitation.

"The drastic cut to income-support and unemployment insurance has been one element in Israel's high ranking in the (OECD's) Inequality Index."

The Wisconsin Plan

In summer 2005, it began as an experimental pilot project administered by private companies with the goal of reintegrating income-support recipients into the workforce. However, its primary focus was to reduce the number of people on income-support roles, so widespread criticism resulted.

Private companies have a conflict of interest for being compensated by the number they remove. They also don't invest sufficiently in services to encourage employment, such as retraining, on-site childcare, and programs to complete academic degrees.

Rather than help the unemployed, they try to "re-educate" them with sanctions to force them to cope in the current adverse job market "through means that weaken their ability to stand up for their rights." Participants thus feel degraded and helpless, with no government measures to stop this.

The Right to Health Care

The 1994 National Health Insurance Law was enacted to provide all Israelis with universal healthcare coverage. That was then. This is now under budget cutting pressure and privatization, leaving workers and the most vulnerable isolated and helpless.

The public health system most rely on has deteriorated greatly in quality, forcing recipients to pay more and get less. The result is two parallel unequal, systems - high quality for the well-off and less of it for all others, with gaps between them measured by statistical health indicators across regions, socioeconomic levels, and ethnic groups.

Several features in particular stand out, showing how Israeli health care shifted from a right to a commodity based on the ability to pay, as well as a new proposal to establish another healthcare fund as a profit-making enterprise.

Dental care isn't covered at all, forcing many families to forego it. However, in May 2009, the Health Ministry announced that it would assume funding of basic preventive dental care for every school child, thus assuring it regardless of financial means, and funding it from the allocation for new medicines. It's a small step in the right direction, but the broader one looks bleak.

Co-payments

The 1998 Economic Arrangements Law let the national health funds increase co-payment amounts for medical services and drugs as well as additional fees. Ever since, they've been rising, and according to the Central Bureau of Statistics, 32% of 2008 national health expenditures was funded by direct payments, including dental care.

The result is greater numbers of Israelis foregoing care because they can't afford it. The Israeli Medical Association believes co-pays should be abolished for some services, mainly preventive care, and proposes other ways "to achieve the appropriate balance between ensuring medical care for all and efficiency in the system."

Supplementary Insurance

They fill gaps uncovered in the standard health basket for those who can afford it. About 24% of the population doesn't have it. Of these, 52% declined because of cost. In addition, 32% of those in poor health have none, including the elderly impacted by higher premiums with age. Not only does supplementary insurance not provide solutions for everyone, it's actually "widening the gap between lower and middle classes, and expediting the process that is turning health care from a right into a commodity."

Two trends have thus emerged:

-- an ongoing decline in services and drugs provided by the state, and the increase in what individuals receive based on their ability to pay; and

-- the promotion of supplementary insurance to well-off people, leaving the rest disempowered and left out.

Instead of fixing the system, policy makes it worse by catering to the needs of people who can afford them, not the rest.

The Fifth Health Fund

It's another symptom of commoditization, contradicting the National Health Insurance Law defining national health funds as public bodies and declaring new funds must be non-profit. However, spending cut priorities pressured national health funds to privatize, and got the idea included in the 2009-2010 Economic Arrangements Law, so far not voted on in the Knesset, but may be to enhance competition and efficiency. Instead of solving public healthcare problems, it will further undermine social solidarity and deepen the existing inequality, the very direction Israel is heading.

Rights in the Occupied Territories

Israel's preemptive, indiscriminate, Operation Cast Lead attack against Gazan civilians took a devastating toll, compounding the existing humanitarian crisis with the Territory under siege. Of course, medical services were greatly impacted, including willful attacks against hospitals, other health facilities, ambulances, and providers. In addition, Gaza's entire infrastructure was savaged, affecting electricity, water and sewage facilities already severely compromised.

Israel committed wanton crimes of war and against humanity continuing to this day, causing incalculable human suffering further impacted by closure and isolation. Post-conflict, Israel obstructed and vilified independent investigations, then denied serious charges in their aftermath, including by their own combat veterans based on their personal experiences they went public on to reveal.

A year later, nothing is resolved. Gaza remains under siege. Sub-minimal amounts of basic goods are allowed in, including construction materials, essential equipment, raw materials, and spare part necessary to function and rebuild. Tens of thousands have no shelter, relying on temporary facilities, crowded quarters with relatives, or tents that aren't suitable in Gaza's winter. Israel violates every obligation imaginable to protect civilians under international humanitarian law, and attacking them indiscriminately is a grievous war crime.

West Bank Discrimination and Segregation 

Around a half million West Bank settlers have created a "regime of separation and institutionalized discrimination, voiding the principle of 'equality before the law' of all (meaning). Within the same teritorial boundaries and under the same regime, two populations live side-by-side, (separated and unequal), with entirely (different) infrastructure and bound by two (judicial) systems" that are entirely dissimilar.

Jews have full rights, Palestinians none under oppressive military occupation. Inequality is pervasive in all respects, with Palestinians forced into shrinking cantons surrounded and isolated by settlements, expanding by expropriating their land and making conditions for them untenable, "in absolute contravention of the principles of international law" assuring the rights of protected people under occupation.

Separate Roads

In October 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that closing the main road connecting Beit Awa and Dura in the western Hebron Hills, affecting tens of thousands of Palestinians, was disproportionate. But it failed to address the greater issue - that separate roads for Jews only are illegitimate, illegal, and must cease.

Citing disproportionality only, the Court avoided the core issue of segregation and discrimination favoring Jews over Arabs, leaving the impression of its support.

Separate roads are only one example of how Israel restricts West Bank free movement for about 2.5 million Palestinians, keeps another 1.5 million under siege in Gaza, and gets away with it.

Criminal Injustice - Separate and Unequal Systems

West Bank settlers are governed by civil law, protecting the rights of the accused, "anchored in Israeli legislation and legal precedents." In contrast, Palestinians live under military law that's far more repressive in military courts under IDF officers, affording no judicial fairness.

One example is different periods of detention for Jews and Arabs. Under military rule, it's harsh, excessive, and inconsistent with the obligation to respects basic rights under international law, including for suspects not charged. Instead, administrative detentions are ordered during which interrogations include torture and other abusive treatment.

Some differences for Jews and Arabs include:

-- preliminary detainment until judicial review - 24 hours for Jews most often; eight days for Palestinians;

-- maximum detainment for interrogation, prior to remand request - 15 days for Jews; 20 for security crimes; 30 days for Palestinians;

-- total detainment for investigative purposes - 30 days for Jews; 35 for security crimes, and only the Supreme Court can authorize extensions; 98 days for Palestinians with additional three month extensions; and

-- arrest until the end of legal proceedings and before a verdict - 9 months for Jews with only Supreme Court ordered extensions; two years for Palestinians, with renewable six month extensions.

Moreover, youths are treated no differently, with those as young as 16 considered adults. For Jews, it's 18.

For Palestinians, prison sentences are the norm. They may be long or indefinite whatever the charged offense, with or without cause, and are often based on secret evidence unavailable to counsel. Convicted or administratively detained minors are then incarcerated with adults.

Access to Resources

West Bank Palestinians endure water shortages, an irregular supply, and poor quality, especially in summer and arid years. As a result, health is adversely impacted as are farmers needing water for agriculture and their livestock.

According to the WHO, the minimal daily human water needs (for home, municipal and industrial use) is 100 liters per person. Palestinians get about 66 liters despite enough West Bank water for everyone. The problem is who get it and for what, with Jews afforded  disproportionate amounts at the expense of Palestinian needs.

One-third of Palestinian communities, comprising 10% of its West Bank population, aren't connected to the water system, so must collect rainwater in cisterns near their homes for all their needs. Even so, the Civil Administration often destroys them, even in particularly arid areas, forcing residents to rely on well groundwater, supplemented by expensive water from private suppliers. For many families, it's too great a burden because of widespread poverty.

Even communities connected to the main water system receive limited and irregular supplies, well below their needs, and in summer conditions may be acute with water available only once every few days and only for a few hours. Again, other sources must compensate.

Right to Personal Security - Discrimination in Law Enforcement

Israeli security forces protect Jews well, employing diverse measures for their safety. For Palestinians, it's another matter, including not preventing settler violence that harm their livelihoods, property and lives. Incidents include violent assaults, harassment, trespassing, land theft, and property destruction, yet security forces do nothing to stop them, nor are settlers prosecuted for their crimes.

At times, attacks are known about in advance, yet hardly ever stopped. As a rule, IDF soldiers and commanders don't enforce the law against Jews. Their only obligation is to protect them and intervene when Palestinians defend themselves.

Police, in fact, typically don't use their authority against Jewish criminal suspects. Nor do they consider Palestinian complaints seriously or investigate properly when they're lodged. Cases most often are closed due to "unknown perpetrators" or insufficient evidence to prosecute.

Undermining Democratic Foundations - Legislative Initiatives

In recent years, numerous laws and amendments have been improper, including ones affecting civil liberties like free expression and the right to protest peacefully. Examples include:

-- the Biometric Database Law: in 2009, a bill advanced to create a biometric database to store fingerprints and facial features of all Israeli citizens and residents - a measure no other democratic country has and one that will give government officials police state power, to use  abusively, especially against Israeli Arabs;

-- The Economic Arrangements Law: it's a legal travesty giving the executive branch power to make radical changes in Israel's socioeconomic policies, with no checks and balances, in violation of basic human, civil and social rights; even worse, since enactment, new provisions have been added without debate or proper consideration; critics call it a "legislative monster" with good reason;

-- Expanding the Wisconsin Plan nationally without public debate: as a pilot project in four Israeli regions, it  reduces the number of people getting income support, and forces them into low-paying jobs instead of better ones they once held; and

-- Land Reform - Land Grab: the proposal involves privatizing land, the composition of the council to administer it, and procedures for planning and building - all having social, environmental, and financial impact; even so, the reform "was bulldozed through the Knesset in a problematic legislative process."

Contempt of Court - Ignoring Supreme Court Rulings

Proposed laws are undermining the Court by allowing the circumventing of its decisions, violating human rights in the process. For example, a proposed amendment will prevent Palestinians from submitting compensation claims against the state for IDF-committed injury to their person or property during non-wartime activity. In December 2006, the High Court rejected a similar amendment.

Of concern also is the trend over the past two years of governments disregarding High Court of Justice and Administrative Court rulings. Doing so is police state tyranny, not democratic rule now fading even for Jews.

For example:

-- "binding arrangements" of migrant workers to their original employers - earlier, the High Court ruled them illegal and instructed the state to make new employment arrangements within six months for workers employed in nursing, agriculture and industry; it wasn't done so "binding arrangemens" are unchanged;

-- national priority areas - in February 2006, an expanded seven justice Supreme Court panel ruled that assigning this status to certain regions for the allocation of educational resources was illegal and discriminatory against Israeli Arabs and ordered change in 12 months; as of November 2009, it hasn't been implemented;

-- dismantling sections of the Separation Wall - several times, the High Court ordered its route changed because it illegally and disproportionately violated the basic rights of Palestinian residents; most often the state treated Court rulings as "recommendations only," ignoring them;

-- fortification of Sderot schools - in May 2007, the Court ordered it for Sderot and western Negev communities near Gaza; delays and extensions followed;

-- East Jerusalem classroom shortages - several times the Court ordered the Ministry of Education and Jerusalem Municipality to build hundreds of additional classrooms for Palestinian children; so far, compliance has been minimal, and no serious effort has been made to alleviate a critical shortage; and

-- Interior Ministry disregard for the Administrative Court rulings - these courts are the main venue for adjudicating entry and immigration to Israel; yet the Interior Ministry doesn't abide by its rulings or change its policies when ordered.

Final Comments

Israel is in crisis mode - in all respects for Israeli Arabs and occupied Palestinians, and increasingly for Jews having their human, civil, and social rights compromised and eroded. 

Israeli democracy is flawed and illusory. Its denied entirely to non-Jews, afforded solely to privileged ones, governing how America does for the rich at the expense most others. It mocks the rule of law, and is heading the country for police state-imposed dystopia if the present trend continues. That should concern Jews and Arabs alike to want it stopped, and ally in common cause to do it. 

Imagine a different kind of Israel, free and democratic, treating all its people equitably. Imagine the same kind of America, not the broken society now in place. Imagine if enough people in both countries stopped imagining and became activist. That's how change always comes, from the grassroots by committed people not quitting until they get it. What worked before can work again, and it better before conditions become so bad it won't matter.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to the Lendman News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/Lendman

Jews are also affected

 Focus on Israel: Harvesting Haitian Organs - by Stephen Lendman

On January 15, Haaretz reported that:

"The Israel Defense Forces' aid mission to Haiti left Israel overnight (January 14) with equipment for setting up an emergency field hospital. Around 220 soldiers and officers (were) in the delegation, including 120 medical staff (to) operate the hospital in the Haitian capital, Port-au-Prince."

According to Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it includes "40 doctors, 25 nurses, paramedics, a pharmacy, a children's ward, a radiology department, an intensive care unit, an internal department and a maternity ward (able to) treat approximately 500 patients each day," including in two surgery rooms.

On January 20, Lebanon's Al-Manar TV reported on the mission, citing a damning You Tube video posted by an American named T. West from a group called AfriSynergy Productions.

"The video presents something to think about while exploiting the horrible tragedy that has befallen Haiti where Israeli occupation soldiers are engaged in organ trafficking."

Israel faced these charges before. In November 2009, Alison Weir's article in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs headlined, "Israeli Organ Trafficking and Theft: From Moldova to Palestine." She cited an August Donald Bostrom article in Sweden's Aftonbladet suggesting that Israel illicitly removes body parts, including from Palestinians.

She stated:

"....Israeli organ harvesting - sometimes with Israeli governmental funding and the participation of high Israeli officials, prominent Israeli physicians, and Israeli ministries - have been documented for many years. Among the victims have been Palestinians."

Nancy Scheper-Hughes is a UC Berkeley Professor of Medical Anthropology, founder of Organ Watch, author of scholarly books and articles on the subject, and "unflinchingly honest in (citing) the Israeli connection."

"Israel is at the top," she states. "It has tentacles reaching out worldwide. (It has) a pyramid system at work that's awesome....they have brokers everywhere, bank accounts everywhere; they've got recruiters, they've got translators, they've got travel agents who set up the visas."

They pay "the poor and the hungry to slowly dismantle their bodies" or simply take what they want from fresh corpses. Body parts are commodities, to be harvested and sold to the rich, even though organ sales are prohibited in most countries, but not in international law.

Relevant International Law 

The UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime calls organ extraction for profit human exploitation. In 2008, Israel banned the practice, but it persists.

On October 13, 2009 at a UN press conference on the subject, Marja Ruotanen, Director of Cooperation of the Council of Europe, stated:

"We have legislation and definitions covering the trafficking in human beings for the purpose of organ removal, but the study points out that there is a legal vacuum for the traffic in organs, tissues and cells (OTC)."

Human trafficking for any purpose is a crime. Global instruments cover OTC trafficking, but missing are "internationally agreed-upon definitions within an international convention." One is needed that clearly defines the practice, protects donors, but prosecutes brokers, medical staff, and others engaging in it. 

Chair of the Department of Medical Ethics of the University of Pennsylvania, Arthur Caplan, and Austria's Public Prosecutor, Carmen Prior, say many nations are taking steps to address the issue, emphasizing that OTC material should only be gotten by "voluntary altruism." In other words, donated, not sold for profit.

Caplan explained that "money for parts" violates "basic human dignity and medical ethics." It also exploits the poor, and they stay poor after the sale. Also, their organ quality is usually low, and procedures used to extract them often harm buyers and sellers.

UN Secretary-General Special Adviser on Gender Issues and Advancement of Women, Rachael Mayanja, didn't predict when the world body will begin work on a convention, but she hoped it would be soon. Discussions to this point are "just the beginning," she said, "and it gives us an impetus to go forward."

Kawther Salam - "The Body Snatchers of Israel"

Salam is a West Bank-based Palestinian journalist, active in reporting on human rights abuses by the Israeli military (IDF). In 2003, she was one of 28 writers in 13 countries to receive a Hellman/Hammett Grant from Human Rights Watch "in recognition of (her) courage in the face of political persecution."

On August 24, 2009, her above titled article presented what she "witnessed, saw, observed and heard during (her) 22 years of journalistic work under the Israeli military occupation in the West Bank and Gaza."

She states that from the early 1970s, the IDF kept bodies of Palestinians they killed, then later buried them in secret, numbered graves. In other cases, Israel's civil administration and military commanders returned corpses to families on condition they be buried immediately, late at night, for "security reasons."

They followed funeral processions in "armored grey cars," monitoring them through burial. Why so, asked Salam? "If the burial is normal, and the organs of the victims were not stolen, then why should they be buried in the dark of the night? The families of the victims all knew that they were receiving empty bodies, filled with cotton, to be buried in the middle of the night."

Salam said she "personally....witness(ed) Israeli soldiers and military vehicles kidnapping the bodies of dead Palestinians from (hospital) emergency rooms. In other cases, (she) saw the soldiers following the Palestinians to the cemetery, to steal the body from the family before burial. This practice became so widespread that many people started carrying the bodies of the murdered to be buried at home, in the garden, under the house or under trees, instead of waiting for the ambulance to take them to the hospital."

She said "everybody in Palestine" knows that Israel steals bodies for their organs. It was common IDF practice to "kidnap" Palestinians from emergency rooms in Hebron, Nablus, Ramallah, Jenin, and most everywhere throughout Occupied Palestine, then transfer them to an Israeli hospital. 

Her article lists names of IDF commanders and civil administration officials involved in the practice. "Everybody knew" they were doing it, yet their families were told sincere efforts were made "to release the bodies of their relatives from the military headquarters," calling it a favor, when, in fact, their organs were stolen.

Perhaps "thousands of bodies and even people known to have been alive were transferred to the Abu Kabir" Forensic Institute near Tel Aviv, Israel's only autopsy facility involved in organ trafficking, a matter that became a scandal inside the country. Its director, Dr. Yehuda Hiss, admitted doing it, never was held accountable, and until recently remained the institute's chief pathologist.

In 2002 and 2005, he was investigated over the large scale theft of body parts, the practice Yediot Aharonot journalists broke, saying he had "price listings" for organs sold to universities and medical schools.

On January 4, 2002, Israel National News.com headlined, "Abu Kabir Operating Organ Warehouse," saying Hiss was:

"accused of a long list of charges from inappropriate behavior as a medical professional to criminal acts such as the illegal sale of and dealings in organs and body parts, removing organs from deceased persons without consent, and misrepresenting organs in returned bodies."

Other allegations were that:

"in some cases (organs he took without consent were stuffed with) toilet paper rolls and metallic rods in their place to fill the voids and hide the theft of the organs. A court-ordered search of the institute revealed large supplies of stored organs illegally taken from bodies," thousands taken without permission.

During the first Intifada and other times, Salam said she "personally witnessed how the Israeli military were kidnapping Palestinian bodies and gravely injured people from the emergency room of Princess Alia hospital in Hebron (and dead bodies from) Al-Ahli hospital." The area was declared a military zone, the hospitals surrounded and invaded, and no one was allowed to move inside them. 

Israeli organ harvesting is a longstanding practice, well known by "most if not all the Israeli medical establishment (who) keep silent because they either get money, or they are rewarded in other ways...."

Jerusalem Center for Democracy and Human Rights  Director, Salim Khalleh, said JDCHR documented 270 cases of "reserved" Palestinian bodies, buried in numbered graves in secret cemeteries, or in numbered compartments of cooling facilities.

According to the Palestinian National Authority (PA) Director of the Department of Statistics, Abed Al-Naser Ferwana, many Palestinians were murdered in detention during the second Intifada, their bodies kept in secret Israeli cemeteries, some released weeks later. He calls this more proof that their organs were harvested illegally.

Israeli "Transplant Tourism"

Rich Israelis take advantage, availing themselves of what's called "transplant tourism," traveling wherever a needed organ can be found, sometimes from fresh corpses, usually from the desperately poor.

The Israeli government acts as facilitator, providing subsidies of up to $80,000 for "transplant holidays." According to Scheper-Hughes, Israeli officials exhibit "amazing tolerance....toward outlawed 'transplant tourism.' "

She said the Israeli Ministry of Defense is involved in a practice by which "bodies are broken, dismembered, fragmented, transported, processed, and sold in the interests of a more socially advantaged population....," Israel engaging in more of this globally than any other nation.

Its medical teams apparently are doing it in Haiti, exploiting fresh corpses and the living. The Manar TV cited You Tube said "there are people operating in Haiti who do not have a conscience and are members of the search and rescue teams, including the Israeli occupation forces," far from home harvesting Haitian organs, and the pickings are plentiful.

Apparently, the publicity about providing humanitarian aid is cover for this illicit operation, another crime against humanity among Israel's growing list, matched and exceeded by its Washington benefactor with generations more practice.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to the Lendman News Hour on RepublicBroadcasting.org Monday - Friday at 10AM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on world and national issues. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://republicbroadcasting.org/Lendman

Israel doesn't offer humanitarian aid

An answer to neo liberalism - bottom-up rights are those rights, core minimum obligations and empowerment rights and nonretrogression, left out of human rights instruments which need to be struggled for by the discontented. These rights, which largely affect the independent peoples and the most disadvantaged, entail an ethical globalization.