24 july 2019
The Israeli High Court of Justice, on Wednesday is set to defend its decision to deport Human Rights Watch Director for Israel and Palestine, Omar Shakir, for supporting the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, Haaretz reported.
According to Human Rights Watch (HRW) stated that in a “dangerous interpretation” of the amendment to the 2017 Law on Entry, which authorizes the interior minister to refuse entry to activists or representatives of organizations who publicly call for a boycott of Israel or have made a commitment to participate in such a boycott.
On May 7, 2018 The interior minister revoked Shakir’s work visa and ordered him to leave the country, citing a dossier compiled by Israel’s Strategic Affairs and Public Diplomacy Ministry on the activities of the Human Rights Watch’s Israel and Palestine Director, which served as the basis for the government’s decision.
The interior minister based his decision on the government-compiled dossier on Shakir’s activism dating more than a decade before he began covering Israel and Palestine for Human Rights Watch, stating in a May 7, 2018 letter that the decision “does not constitute a principled or sweeping refusal for the organization to employ a foreign expert,” and that “no information has surfaced” regarding Shakir promoting boycotts during his time at Human Rights Watch.
HRW filed a lawsuit, in May 2018, and Shakir, challenging the government’s decision to revoke Shakir’s work permit and the constitutionality of a 2017 law barring entry to Israel for people who advocate so-called boycotts of Israel or Israeli settlements.
Human Rights Watch recommended in a report that businesses cease their activities in the settlements, recognizing that commercial entities also have a responsibility with regard to human rights breaches.
“Israel portrays itself as the region’s only democracy, but is set to deport a rights defender over his peaceful advocacy,” said Tom Porteous, deputy program director at Human Rights Watch.
The deportation ruling comes amid sustained efforts to muzzle criticism of Israel’s human rights record. The Interior Ministry has denied entry to a number of other international rights advocates, accused Israeli advocacy groups of “slander” and of discrediting the state or army, imposed extensive financial reporting requirements on Israeli rights groups that burden their advocacy, and subjected Palestinian rights defenders to travel restrictions and even arrest and criminal charges.
According to Haaretz, “the state doesn’t want to expel Shakir and Human Rights Watch from Israel, but rather from the territories, to stop the organization from scrutinizing the human rights situation there. Thus, this expulsion is no different at all from the assaults on Breaking the Silence or on B’Tselem.”
The author states that neither Human Rights Watch nor Shakir as its representative promotes boycotts of Israel. The advocacy in question focuses exclusively on the Israeli occupied West Bank. Human Rights Watch has found that businesses operating in West Bank settlements inherently benefit from and contribute to serious violations of international humanitarian law.”
Haaretz states that the boycotting of businesses is a non-violent, legitimate means of protest, and if the High Court approves the expulsion, its justices will have signed off on the expulsion of a Nobel Prize-winning organization from Israel. The heart of the petition is not Shakir but rather the ability to work for human rights in Israel. Amnesty has already announced that if Shakir is expelled it will have to reconsider its work there.
According to Human Rights Watch (HRW) stated that in a “dangerous interpretation” of the amendment to the 2017 Law on Entry, which authorizes the interior minister to refuse entry to activists or representatives of organizations who publicly call for a boycott of Israel or have made a commitment to participate in such a boycott.
On May 7, 2018 The interior minister revoked Shakir’s work visa and ordered him to leave the country, citing a dossier compiled by Israel’s Strategic Affairs and Public Diplomacy Ministry on the activities of the Human Rights Watch’s Israel and Palestine Director, which served as the basis for the government’s decision.
The interior minister based his decision on the government-compiled dossier on Shakir’s activism dating more than a decade before he began covering Israel and Palestine for Human Rights Watch, stating in a May 7, 2018 letter that the decision “does not constitute a principled or sweeping refusal for the organization to employ a foreign expert,” and that “no information has surfaced” regarding Shakir promoting boycotts during his time at Human Rights Watch.
HRW filed a lawsuit, in May 2018, and Shakir, challenging the government’s decision to revoke Shakir’s work permit and the constitutionality of a 2017 law barring entry to Israel for people who advocate so-called boycotts of Israel or Israeli settlements.
Human Rights Watch recommended in a report that businesses cease their activities in the settlements, recognizing that commercial entities also have a responsibility with regard to human rights breaches.
“Israel portrays itself as the region’s only democracy, but is set to deport a rights defender over his peaceful advocacy,” said Tom Porteous, deputy program director at Human Rights Watch.
The deportation ruling comes amid sustained efforts to muzzle criticism of Israel’s human rights record. The Interior Ministry has denied entry to a number of other international rights advocates, accused Israeli advocacy groups of “slander” and of discrediting the state or army, imposed extensive financial reporting requirements on Israeli rights groups that burden their advocacy, and subjected Palestinian rights defenders to travel restrictions and even arrest and criminal charges.
According to Haaretz, “the state doesn’t want to expel Shakir and Human Rights Watch from Israel, but rather from the territories, to stop the organization from scrutinizing the human rights situation there. Thus, this expulsion is no different at all from the assaults on Breaking the Silence or on B’Tselem.”
The author states that neither Human Rights Watch nor Shakir as its representative promotes boycotts of Israel. The advocacy in question focuses exclusively on the Israeli occupied West Bank. Human Rights Watch has found that businesses operating in West Bank settlements inherently benefit from and contribute to serious violations of international humanitarian law.”
Haaretz states that the boycotting of businesses is a non-violent, legitimate means of protest, and if the High Court approves the expulsion, its justices will have signed off on the expulsion of a Nobel Prize-winning organization from Israel. The heart of the petition is not Shakir but rather the ability to work for human rights in Israel. Amnesty has already announced that if Shakir is expelled it will have to reconsider its work there.
Israel’s Supreme Court will consider at a hearing on July 25, 2019, whether the Israeli government can deport a Human Rights Watch employee for speaking out on unlawful settlements, Human Rights Watch said today.
The case against Omar Shakir, the organization’s Israel-Palestine director, offers the court an opportunity to weigh in on the government’s crackdown on human rights activism in Israel.
“Deporting our director for doing his job is an attack not only on Human Rights Watch, but on the broader human rights movement,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, who will attend the hearing in Jerusalem. “If the government gets its way today with Human Rights Watch, who will it throw out next time?”
On May 7, 2018, the government moved to revoke the work visa that it had granted to Shakir a year earlier, invoking a 2017 amendment to the Law of Entry that instructs it to deny entry to persons who advocate for boycotts of Israel. This is the first time the government has used it to try to deport someone lawfully in the country.
Neither Human Rights Watch nor Shakir as its representative has ever called for a boycott of Israel, as the Israeli government itself has acknowledged. As part of its global campaign to ensure businesses uphold their human rights responsibilities and do not contribute to abuses, Human Rights Watch calls on companies to stop working in or with settlements in the West Bank, which are illegal under international law. It has not called for a consumer boycott of those companies.
The Jerusalem District Court upheld the government’s expulsion order on April 16, 2019, holding that such advocacy directed at companies constituted pro-boycott activity under the 2017 law. Human Rights Watch appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, which granted Shakir an injunction allowing him to remain in Israel while it heard the case.
Human Rights Watch argues that the 2017 law violates constitutionally protected fundamental liberties, including freedom of expression and the prohibition on discrimination based on political or ideological conviction. Individuals have the right to express their views through nonviolent means, including advocating for or against boycotts, the organization said.
Former Israeli officials and human rights groups filed motions to join the appeal. Amnesty International cited potential ramifications for rights groups, and a group of senior Israeli diplomats, including the former Israeli Foreign Ministry general director and ex-ambassadors to France and South Africa, expressed concern that the deportation will hurt Israel’s image.
Many others have criticized the deportation order, including 27 European states in a joint statement, 17 members of the US Congress, the UN secretary general, three UN human rights special rapporteurs, and numerous independent groups and academic associations.
The case comes amid increased Israeli government efforts to restrict and harass human rights activists. The Interior Ministry has denied entry to several international rights advocates, accused Israeli groups of “slander” and imposed burdensome financial reporting requirements, and harassed and arrested Palestinian rights defenders.
An independent, international, nonpartisan, nongovernmental organization, Human Rights Watch promotes respect for human rights. It investigates and exposes human rights violations in almost 100 countries, including all 19 in the Middle East and North Africa and has worked in Israel for more than 30 years.
Human Rights Watch shared the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize as a founding member of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. It accepts no government funding.
Human Rights Watch challenges violations by Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, and the Israeli government. In 2018, Human Rights Watch investigated abuses by Israeli forces, documented systematic arbitrary arrests and torture of critics and opponents by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, and reviewed Palestine’s record on women’s rights.
“Cuba, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, and Venezuela are among the handful of countries that have blocked access for Human Rights Watch,” Roth said. “Does Israel really want to join that club?”
The case against Omar Shakir, the organization’s Israel-Palestine director, offers the court an opportunity to weigh in on the government’s crackdown on human rights activism in Israel.
“Deporting our director for doing his job is an attack not only on Human Rights Watch, but on the broader human rights movement,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, who will attend the hearing in Jerusalem. “If the government gets its way today with Human Rights Watch, who will it throw out next time?”
On May 7, 2018, the government moved to revoke the work visa that it had granted to Shakir a year earlier, invoking a 2017 amendment to the Law of Entry that instructs it to deny entry to persons who advocate for boycotts of Israel. This is the first time the government has used it to try to deport someone lawfully in the country.
Neither Human Rights Watch nor Shakir as its representative has ever called for a boycott of Israel, as the Israeli government itself has acknowledged. As part of its global campaign to ensure businesses uphold their human rights responsibilities and do not contribute to abuses, Human Rights Watch calls on companies to stop working in or with settlements in the West Bank, which are illegal under international law. It has not called for a consumer boycott of those companies.
The Jerusalem District Court upheld the government’s expulsion order on April 16, 2019, holding that such advocacy directed at companies constituted pro-boycott activity under the 2017 law. Human Rights Watch appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, which granted Shakir an injunction allowing him to remain in Israel while it heard the case.
Human Rights Watch argues that the 2017 law violates constitutionally protected fundamental liberties, including freedom of expression and the prohibition on discrimination based on political or ideological conviction. Individuals have the right to express their views through nonviolent means, including advocating for or against boycotts, the organization said.
Former Israeli officials and human rights groups filed motions to join the appeal. Amnesty International cited potential ramifications for rights groups, and a group of senior Israeli diplomats, including the former Israeli Foreign Ministry general director and ex-ambassadors to France and South Africa, expressed concern that the deportation will hurt Israel’s image.
Many others have criticized the deportation order, including 27 European states in a joint statement, 17 members of the US Congress, the UN secretary general, three UN human rights special rapporteurs, and numerous independent groups and academic associations.
The case comes amid increased Israeli government efforts to restrict and harass human rights activists. The Interior Ministry has denied entry to several international rights advocates, accused Israeli groups of “slander” and imposed burdensome financial reporting requirements, and harassed and arrested Palestinian rights defenders.
An independent, international, nonpartisan, nongovernmental organization, Human Rights Watch promotes respect for human rights. It investigates and exposes human rights violations in almost 100 countries, including all 19 in the Middle East and North Africa and has worked in Israel for more than 30 years.
Human Rights Watch shared the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize as a founding member of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines. It accepts no government funding.
Human Rights Watch challenges violations by Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, and the Israeli government. In 2018, Human Rights Watch investigated abuses by Israeli forces, documented systematic arbitrary arrests and torture of critics and opponents by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, and reviewed Palestine’s record on women’s rights.
“Cuba, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, and Venezuela are among the handful of countries that have blocked access for Human Rights Watch,” Roth said. “Does Israel really want to join that club?”
23 july 2019
The Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor (Euro-Med) said today that Israel’s demolition of Palestinian residential buildings in Jerusalem and displacement of civilians from their homes constituted a war crime.
On Monday, Euro-Med sent urgent letters to United Nations representatives urging them to take urgent steps to prevent the Israeli authorities demolishing residential buildings in Wadi al-Hummus area of Sur Baher neighborhood in Jerusalem.
The United Nations Rapporteur on the situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories, the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, and the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief were the recipients of these letters.
The letters stated that the Israeli authorities' displacement of residents from their homes and the placing of explosive materials inside Palestinian buildings constituted a war crime under the Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Euro-Med's regional director for the Middle East and North Africa, Anas al-Jarjawi, said that "Israeli officials should know that arbitrary demolition and displacement aren't time-barred and that they will be brought to justice for these actions."
Al-Jarjawi said that it is the duty of the UN to ensure the implementation of international law, specifically the Geneva Conventions. The UN must also make it clear to the Israeli officials that if the demolitions and displacement continue, those responsible will be held accountable to judicial authorities outside Israel, he added.
According to Palestinian and Israeli reports, the Israeli authorities demolished about 70 apartments in 10 buildings in the Palestinian Authority controlled neighborhood of East Jerusalem.
The Israeli authorities issued the demolition orders under the pretext that houses were near the Israeli wall that separates Jerusalem from the occupied West Bank.
"The Israel security excuse is not enough to proceed with the demolitions, especially against the buildings built on Palestinian land and under the supervision of the Palestinian National Authority," Euro-Med legal researcher Mohammed Emad said.
Emad stressed the need for urgent action by the UN special rapporteurs and highlighted the urgent need for relief for the dozens of families displaced during the demolitions.
According to Euro-Med, international law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Fourth Geneva Convention, prohibits an occupying power from demolishing the property of citizens of the occupied territory. International human rights law also guarantees the right to housing and the protection of private property.
The rights organization stressed that housing is a prerequisite for other rights such as the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to physical and psychological health, the right to privacy and the right to family life. Hence, the Israeli authorities, in light of their control over the Palestinian territories, are obliged to respect the right to housing for Palestinian citizens.
At the end of its statement, Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor demanded the United Nations and the Security Council intervene immediately to prevent the Israeli authorities from violating Palestinians' rights in Wadi al-Hummus.
The organization called on the international community to exert all forms of pressure on the Israeli authorities to abide by basic international law. The rights organization also called on Israel to protect the civilian population and their homes from constant assaults by security forces and through the court system.
Euro-Med concluded by warning that the demolitions are one of the most common crimes against the Palestinians, extending as far back as the 1967 demolition of the Mughrabi neighborhood of Jerusalem.
On Monday, Euro-Med sent urgent letters to United Nations representatives urging them to take urgent steps to prevent the Israeli authorities demolishing residential buildings in Wadi al-Hummus area of Sur Baher neighborhood in Jerusalem.
The United Nations Rapporteur on the situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories, the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing, and the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief were the recipients of these letters.
The letters stated that the Israeli authorities' displacement of residents from their homes and the placing of explosive materials inside Palestinian buildings constituted a war crime under the Statute of the International Criminal Court.
Euro-Med's regional director for the Middle East and North Africa, Anas al-Jarjawi, said that "Israeli officials should know that arbitrary demolition and displacement aren't time-barred and that they will be brought to justice for these actions."
Al-Jarjawi said that it is the duty of the UN to ensure the implementation of international law, specifically the Geneva Conventions. The UN must also make it clear to the Israeli officials that if the demolitions and displacement continue, those responsible will be held accountable to judicial authorities outside Israel, he added.
According to Palestinian and Israeli reports, the Israeli authorities demolished about 70 apartments in 10 buildings in the Palestinian Authority controlled neighborhood of East Jerusalem.
The Israeli authorities issued the demolition orders under the pretext that houses were near the Israeli wall that separates Jerusalem from the occupied West Bank.
"The Israel security excuse is not enough to proceed with the demolitions, especially against the buildings built on Palestinian land and under the supervision of the Palestinian National Authority," Euro-Med legal researcher Mohammed Emad said.
Emad stressed the need for urgent action by the UN special rapporteurs and highlighted the urgent need for relief for the dozens of families displaced during the demolitions.
According to Euro-Med, international law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Fourth Geneva Convention, prohibits an occupying power from demolishing the property of citizens of the occupied territory. International human rights law also guarantees the right to housing and the protection of private property.
The rights organization stressed that housing is a prerequisite for other rights such as the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to physical and psychological health, the right to privacy and the right to family life. Hence, the Israeli authorities, in light of their control over the Palestinian territories, are obliged to respect the right to housing for Palestinian citizens.
At the end of its statement, Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor demanded the United Nations and the Security Council intervene immediately to prevent the Israeli authorities from violating Palestinians' rights in Wadi al-Hummus.
The organization called on the international community to exert all forms of pressure on the Israeli authorities to abide by basic international law. The rights organization also called on Israel to protect the civilian population and their homes from constant assaults by security forces and through the court system.
Euro-Med concluded by warning that the demolitions are one of the most common crimes against the Palestinians, extending as far back as the 1967 demolition of the Mughrabi neighborhood of Jerusalem.
22 july 2019
Israeli authorities have proceeded with the demolition of 10 Palestinian buildings, containing some 70 apartments, in Wadi al Hummus, part of Sur Baher neighbourhood in occupied East Jerusalem.
The majority of the buildings are located in Area A and B of the West Bank where, according to the Oslo Accords, all civil issues are under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority.
Israel’s settlement policy, including actions taken in that context, such as forced transfers, evictions, demolitions and confiscations of homes, is illegal under international law.
In line with the EU’s long-standing position, we expect the Israeli authorities to immediately halt the ongoing demolitions.
The continuation of this policy undermines the viability of the two-state solution and the prospect for a lasting peace and seriously jeopardizes the possibility of Jerusalem serving as the future capital of both States.
Video: Israeli soldiers cheer and celebrate the demolition
The majority of the buildings are located in Area A and B of the West Bank where, according to the Oslo Accords, all civil issues are under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority.
Israel’s settlement policy, including actions taken in that context, such as forced transfers, evictions, demolitions and confiscations of homes, is illegal under international law.
In line with the EU’s long-standing position, we expect the Israeli authorities to immediately halt the ongoing demolitions.
The continuation of this policy undermines the viability of the two-state solution and the prospect for a lasting peace and seriously jeopardizes the possibility of Jerusalem serving as the future capital of both States.
Video: Israeli soldiers cheer and celebrate the demolition
17 july 2019
Group of 12- and 13-year-old boys accused of assaulting schoolmate at knife point, recording attack on their phones and sharing it with friends; victim being treated for mental health issues while her alleged rapists were released due to their age
The lawyer for the family of an 11-year-old girl allegedly raped at knife-point by a group of boys some four months ago says the state is not treating the case with the gravity it deserves due to his clients' lack of social status.
According to suspicions, the girl, who lives in central Israel, was attacked by a group of 12- and 13-year-old boys who reportedly attended the same educational institute.
The girl was apparently invited by a friend to play with the boys in an abandoned building near her school. There, the boys allegedly raped her repeatedly at knife-point.
Since then, the boys - who recorded the assault on their phones and shared it with their friends - have been questioned and released due to their age while their alleged victim is receiving treatment at a mental health facility.
Hillel Babayev, the lawyer for the girl's family, accused the state of neglecting the young victim after her attack.
"I've seen everything in my line of work, but a case as serious and shocking and shameful as this I haven't come across," Babayev said.
"The police and the Education Ministry are responsible for the lack of support for the girl and her family. They aren't taking this terrible case seriously because the girl and her family are not wealthy."
The alleged victim told Ynet's sister publication Yedioth Ahronoth that she did not understand why her attackers had not been held responsible for the assault.
"The boys filmed everything on their cell phones, and sent the video to their friends," she said. "I'm angry at them and angry at my friend who left me there alone. I was scared of them and I was scared of the knife that they took out.
"I want them to suffer. They should be punished and not be allowed back to school. It's very had for me. I'm having a really hard time, and I even tried to commit suicide."
She said: "I didn't know what they were planning. They told me that they wanted to play with me, and so I agreed to go with them. I wasn't scared at all. I didn't think they would do anything bad to me or harm me. I think that everything was planned ahead of time. They called me over to an abandoned shelter because they wanted to do bad things to me, even though I didn't agree."
According to Channel 13 television, which first reported on the case, the boys were investigated by the police and then released due to their age. They later returned to school while their victim underwent psychiatric treatment and is apparently experiencing difficulties returning to her normal activities.
The girl's parents said that until they saw the video, their daughter had not told them anything about the attack.
"She was threatened and she was afraid to say anything," her father said. "She feels that it's her fault and she is being allowed to feel like this.
"We are trying to help her, but her condition is very bad. She cries and calls out 'help me.' She doesn't understand why the boys were released, but she is being confined, far from her home. She's post-traumatic, and deeply depressed."
The case file has been sent by the police to the prosecutor's office in central Israel, where a decision on charges will be made in the coming days.
The lawyer for the family of an 11-year-old girl allegedly raped at knife-point by a group of boys some four months ago says the state is not treating the case with the gravity it deserves due to his clients' lack of social status.
According to suspicions, the girl, who lives in central Israel, was attacked by a group of 12- and 13-year-old boys who reportedly attended the same educational institute.
The girl was apparently invited by a friend to play with the boys in an abandoned building near her school. There, the boys allegedly raped her repeatedly at knife-point.
Since then, the boys - who recorded the assault on their phones and shared it with their friends - have been questioned and released due to their age while their alleged victim is receiving treatment at a mental health facility.
Hillel Babayev, the lawyer for the girl's family, accused the state of neglecting the young victim after her attack.
"I've seen everything in my line of work, but a case as serious and shocking and shameful as this I haven't come across," Babayev said.
"The police and the Education Ministry are responsible for the lack of support for the girl and her family. They aren't taking this terrible case seriously because the girl and her family are not wealthy."
The alleged victim told Ynet's sister publication Yedioth Ahronoth that she did not understand why her attackers had not been held responsible for the assault.
"The boys filmed everything on their cell phones, and sent the video to their friends," she said. "I'm angry at them and angry at my friend who left me there alone. I was scared of them and I was scared of the knife that they took out.
"I want them to suffer. They should be punished and not be allowed back to school. It's very had for me. I'm having a really hard time, and I even tried to commit suicide."
She said: "I didn't know what they were planning. They told me that they wanted to play with me, and so I agreed to go with them. I wasn't scared at all. I didn't think they would do anything bad to me or harm me. I think that everything was planned ahead of time. They called me over to an abandoned shelter because they wanted to do bad things to me, even though I didn't agree."
According to Channel 13 television, which first reported on the case, the boys were investigated by the police and then released due to their age. They later returned to school while their victim underwent psychiatric treatment and is apparently experiencing difficulties returning to her normal activities.
The girl's parents said that until they saw the video, their daughter had not told them anything about the attack.
"She was threatened and she was afraid to say anything," her father said. "She feels that it's her fault and she is being allowed to feel like this.
"We are trying to help her, but her condition is very bad. She cries and calls out 'help me.' She doesn't understand why the boys were released, but she is being confined, far from her home. She's post-traumatic, and deeply depressed."
The case file has been sent by the police to the prosecutor's office in central Israel, where a decision on charges will be made in the coming days.
15 july 2019
Israeli courts sentenced Palestinian children to be jailed in Ofer Israeli prison in addition to heavy financial penalty, which reached to total 26,000 Shekels in last June only.
The Palestinian Prisoners Affairs Committee revealed in a report issued on Monday that 23 children were arrested in Ofer jail, 15 of whom were arrested from their homes, 7 from the streets, while one was arrested for not having a permit.
The report also said that there are currently 116 children in the Israeli jails, and that five children were brutally assaulted by Israeli soldiers during investigation and arrest.
The committee confirmed that ‘Israel’ sees arrested Palestinians, especially children, as a permanent source of income. Heavy financial penalty are being imposed on them, which turned military courts into a tool to blackmail and loot Palestinian families.
The Palestinian Prisoners Affairs Committee revealed in a report issued on Monday that 23 children were arrested in Ofer jail, 15 of whom were arrested from their homes, 7 from the streets, while one was arrested for not having a permit.
The report also said that there are currently 116 children in the Israeli jails, and that five children were brutally assaulted by Israeli soldiers during investigation and arrest.
The committee confirmed that ‘Israel’ sees arrested Palestinians, especially children, as a permanent source of income. Heavy financial penalty are being imposed on them, which turned military courts into a tool to blackmail and loot Palestinian families.
14 july 2019
The judge rejects the edict by Afula Municipality which prohibits all non-residents from entering the part, effectively cutting off access to the area to residents of nearby Arab villages; the lawyers for the 50,000 city deny the decision was racially motivated
A court on Sunday ordered a predominantly Jewish town in northern Israel to lift a ban on non-resident visitors to its parks, a prohibition that a rights group said was aimed at keeping Arabs out.
The town of Afula denied the edict was racially motivated.
In instructing the town to lift the order, Judge Danny Sarfati stopped short of accusing it of racism and cited a legal opinion by Israel's attorney general, who said municipal parks were public property open to all.
Afula imposed the prohibition a month ago, effectively cutting off access to the 10-hectare (25-acre) park by residents of nearby Arab villages who frequented the popular site.
"This was really to exclude Palestinian citizens from entering the park," said Fady Khoury, a lawyer with Adalah, an Arab rights group that raised the challenge in Nazareth district court.
Lawyers for Afula, a city of 50,000 people, contended the restrictions stemmed solely from a desire to reduce overcrowding during the summer months and keep maintenance costs down.
"We don't argue with the law," Avi Goldhammer, a lawyer for the city, said after the court ruling. "If the law permits everyone to come inside this park, OK."
Israel's Arab citizens make up 21% of the population and often identify as Palestinian. They were angered last year by the passage of a Nation-State Law declaring that only Jews have the right to self-determination in Israel.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who supported the bill, said the legislation did not detract from the equal individual rights enjoyed by all of Israel's citizens.
On Saturday, guards inspected identification cards at several entrances to Afula Municipal Park, where families strolled past playgrounds and petting zoos and joggers ran along trails lined with Israeli flags.
In the nearby Arab village of Sulem, Shua'a Zoabi said he often brought his children to the park in Afula.
"There is no space for our kids to play in our village. Public investment here is terribly low," Zoabi said.
The ban, he said, was a "racist restriction" against Arabs, many of whom contend that their communities face discrimination in areas such as health, education and housing.
A court on Sunday ordered a predominantly Jewish town in northern Israel to lift a ban on non-resident visitors to its parks, a prohibition that a rights group said was aimed at keeping Arabs out.
The town of Afula denied the edict was racially motivated.
In instructing the town to lift the order, Judge Danny Sarfati stopped short of accusing it of racism and cited a legal opinion by Israel's attorney general, who said municipal parks were public property open to all.
Afula imposed the prohibition a month ago, effectively cutting off access to the 10-hectare (25-acre) park by residents of nearby Arab villages who frequented the popular site.
"This was really to exclude Palestinian citizens from entering the park," said Fady Khoury, a lawyer with Adalah, an Arab rights group that raised the challenge in Nazareth district court.
Lawyers for Afula, a city of 50,000 people, contended the restrictions stemmed solely from a desire to reduce overcrowding during the summer months and keep maintenance costs down.
"We don't argue with the law," Avi Goldhammer, a lawyer for the city, said after the court ruling. "If the law permits everyone to come inside this park, OK."
Israel's Arab citizens make up 21% of the population and often identify as Palestinian. They were angered last year by the passage of a Nation-State Law declaring that only Jews have the right to self-determination in Israel.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who supported the bill, said the legislation did not detract from the equal individual rights enjoyed by all of Israel's citizens.
On Saturday, guards inspected identification cards at several entrances to Afula Municipal Park, where families strolled past playgrounds and petting zoos and joggers ran along trails lined with Israeli flags.
In the nearby Arab village of Sulem, Shua'a Zoabi said he often brought his children to the park in Afula.
"There is no space for our kids to play in our village. Public investment here is terribly low," Zoabi said.
The ban, he said, was a "racist restriction" against Arabs, many of whom contend that their communities face discrimination in areas such as health, education and housing.
