29 july 2019
The National Bureau for Defending Land and Resisting Settlements said in his latest weekly report , that the Israeli occupation authorities continue the policy of ethnic cleansing and demolishing houses of Palestinians, especially in Jerusalem and its surroundings, ignoring all warnings issued by the UN, international groups and human rights organizations covered by the high court, demolished 100 apartments in Wadi Al-Homs being close to the Annexation Wall.
Worth mentioning here that the ICJ legal opinion issued on July 9th, 2004 affirmed that Israel violates the International Law and called for the removal of the wall as well as repairing damages of official and public institutions and departments, including village and municipal councils.
The buildings in question that were demolished owned by Ghaleb Abu Hadwan, Ali Hamadeh, Na’im Muslim, Ala ‘Amira, Akram Zawahra, Bilal Al-Kiswani, Rafat Obaidat, Jafar Abu Humaid, Tariq Al-ahamid and Moh’d Idris Abu Tair.
It should be noted that this area, which has been demolished by the Israeli occupation authorities fall within the areas A, taking into account that the buildings have obtained all the necessary permits, with an area estimated by 300 donums.
On the other hand, the demolition was met with widespread condemnation by humanitarian officials, Jamie McGoldrick, UNRWA Director of West Bank, Gwyn Lewis and the head of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, James Henin, they asserted that Israel’s actions violated international humanitarian law, and that the policy pursued by Israel in the destruction of Palestinian property is not in line with the obligations imposed by international humanitarian law, especially the 4th Geneva Convention of 1949.
With the endless US support for the occupation government and the settlers, the USA prevented an attempt by Kuwait, Indonesia and South Africa to issue a statement from the UN Security Council condemning the demolition of Palestinian homes.
On the other hand, the National Bureau welcomed McGoldrick, Lewis, Henin, Lenk and EU missions stances, which condemned the policy of demolishing Palestinian homes, and called on Israel to respect its obligations considering it as the occupying power.
The international community called on the ICC to invite General Prosecutor, Fatu Bensuda to refer the crimes of the demolition of Palestinian homes and crimes of ethnic cleansing to the judicial branch of the court as well as opening an immediate investigation. Within the same context, it warned Israel of demolishing Al-Khan Al-Ahmar village before the Knesset elections, which will be held on Sep. 17th.
Last week, the settler movement” Regaim” published large ads in the newspapers, under the headline “State of Terror Behind the Curve,” claiming that the Palestinians built 28651 new buildings in area C, which is under Israeli control according to Oslo Accord. The “Regaim” movement is calling on ministers and Knesset members to begin working immediately to prevent the establishment of a terrorists state.
Yisrael Beiteinu Chairman Avigdor Lieberman said that Al-Khan Al-Ahmmar is “an indication of Palestinian Authority’s control of the state’s land. On July 10, Netanyahu stated that Israel under his leadership will not repeat the mistakes of the past. “
Since 2017, the Israeli occupation authorities have facilitated the construction of about 16 new settlement outposts scattered throughout the West Bank, from the southern Hebron hills to the northern Jordan Valley, in the Gush Etzion settlement blocs between Bethlehem and Hebron, and from Matei Binyamin from Jerusalem to Ariel settlement on Salfit lands. Construction is being carried out on land that the occupation considered as “state land”, although decisions have been issued to demolish some of them, but not implemented.
The Peace Now Movement conducted a survey of 16 settlement outposts, noting that since 2012, 31 new illegal outposts have been established, including 21 farms that occupy large areas for grazing cattles. Fifteen outposts were also legitimized and turned into settlements or neighborhoods in existing settlements. In the meantime, the occupation authorities are legitimizing 35 settlement outposts.
Within the context of supporting the Israeli judiciary in general and the settlers in particular, the Judge of the Israeli Lod Court attempted to put pressure on the Israeli Attorney General’s Office to amend the indictment against a settler involved in the burning and murder of Dawabsha family in Duma, Nablus, at the end of July 2015.
Worth mentioning here that the ICJ legal opinion issued on July 9th, 2004 affirmed that Israel violates the International Law and called for the removal of the wall as well as repairing damages of official and public institutions and departments, including village and municipal councils.
The buildings in question that were demolished owned by Ghaleb Abu Hadwan, Ali Hamadeh, Na’im Muslim, Ala ‘Amira, Akram Zawahra, Bilal Al-Kiswani, Rafat Obaidat, Jafar Abu Humaid, Tariq Al-ahamid and Moh’d Idris Abu Tair.
It should be noted that this area, which has been demolished by the Israeli occupation authorities fall within the areas A, taking into account that the buildings have obtained all the necessary permits, with an area estimated by 300 donums.
On the other hand, the demolition was met with widespread condemnation by humanitarian officials, Jamie McGoldrick, UNRWA Director of West Bank, Gwyn Lewis and the head of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in the occupied Palestinian territory, James Henin, they asserted that Israel’s actions violated international humanitarian law, and that the policy pursued by Israel in the destruction of Palestinian property is not in line with the obligations imposed by international humanitarian law, especially the 4th Geneva Convention of 1949.
With the endless US support for the occupation government and the settlers, the USA prevented an attempt by Kuwait, Indonesia and South Africa to issue a statement from the UN Security Council condemning the demolition of Palestinian homes.
On the other hand, the National Bureau welcomed McGoldrick, Lewis, Henin, Lenk and EU missions stances, which condemned the policy of demolishing Palestinian homes, and called on Israel to respect its obligations considering it as the occupying power.
The international community called on the ICC to invite General Prosecutor, Fatu Bensuda to refer the crimes of the demolition of Palestinian homes and crimes of ethnic cleansing to the judicial branch of the court as well as opening an immediate investigation. Within the same context, it warned Israel of demolishing Al-Khan Al-Ahmar village before the Knesset elections, which will be held on Sep. 17th.
Last week, the settler movement” Regaim” published large ads in the newspapers, under the headline “State of Terror Behind the Curve,” claiming that the Palestinians built 28651 new buildings in area C, which is under Israeli control according to Oslo Accord. The “Regaim” movement is calling on ministers and Knesset members to begin working immediately to prevent the establishment of a terrorists state.
Yisrael Beiteinu Chairman Avigdor Lieberman said that Al-Khan Al-Ahmmar is “an indication of Palestinian Authority’s control of the state’s land. On July 10, Netanyahu stated that Israel under his leadership will not repeat the mistakes of the past. “
Since 2017, the Israeli occupation authorities have facilitated the construction of about 16 new settlement outposts scattered throughout the West Bank, from the southern Hebron hills to the northern Jordan Valley, in the Gush Etzion settlement blocs between Bethlehem and Hebron, and from Matei Binyamin from Jerusalem to Ariel settlement on Salfit lands. Construction is being carried out on land that the occupation considered as “state land”, although decisions have been issued to demolish some of them, but not implemented.
The Peace Now Movement conducted a survey of 16 settlement outposts, noting that since 2012, 31 new illegal outposts have been established, including 21 farms that occupy large areas for grazing cattles. Fifteen outposts were also legitimized and turned into settlements or neighborhoods in existing settlements. In the meantime, the occupation authorities are legitimizing 35 settlement outposts.
Within the context of supporting the Israeli judiciary in general and the settlers in particular, the Judge of the Israeli Lod Court attempted to put pressure on the Israeli Attorney General’s Office to amend the indictment against a settler involved in the burning and murder of Dawabsha family in Duma, Nablus, at the end of July 2015.
Israel’s unlawful open-fire policy during the demonstrations along the Gaza perimeter fence – which were upheld by the Supreme Court – have so far resulted in hundreds of Palestinian deaths and thousands of injuries.
Official sources now admit that they were well aware that people were being killed when even the State did not claim that this is justified.
Despite this, no-one has taken action to amend the open-fire regulations. Instead, the military continued with its trial-and-error approach, ignoring the fact that human lives were at stake: people whose lives have been taken, and families who have been permanently devastated.
Al Ray Palestinian Media Agency reports that on 22 July, 2019, it emerged that the officials were fully aware, at every stage, of the gulf between their declarations and reality.
Carmela Menashe, a reporter for Kan News, reported that the military has now decided to change the open-fire regulations for snipers “after it emerged that firing at the lower limbs above the knee led, in most cases, to death, despite the fact that this was not the objective.
Going forward, soldiers have been briefed to shoot below the knee and then at the ankle.” A senior officer at the military’s Counter-Terrorism School stated that the snipers’ objective “is not to kill but to injure, and accordingly one of the lessons learned related to the direction toward which they fire…
At first, we told them to shoot at the leg. We saw that this can result in fatalities, so we told them to shoot below the knee, then we fine-tuned the regulations to shooting at the ankle.”
The decision to change the regulations only now, after more than a year during which they led to the deaths of at least 206 Palestinians, including 37 minors, and the injury of thousands, in no way suggests that the military attaches great value to human life.
On the contrary, it shows that the military consciously chose not to regard those standing on the other side of the fence as humans. In its naivety, the High Court of Justice approved this practice. Both the military and the courts bear the responsibility for this criminal policy.
Background
In March of 2018, thousands of residents of the Gaza Strip began demonstrating along the fence that separates Gaza from Israel, demanding an end to the siege of the Gaza Strip and the implementation of the right of return. From the outset, following the announcement of the first demonstration, Israel portrayed the protests as an existential threat to the state and regarded the participants as dangerous terrorists.
As a result of this approach, the military implemented lethal open-fire regulations from the first day of the protests: regulations that are patently unlawful and immoral.
As part of this policy, the military permitted the use of live fire against demonstrators on the other side of the fence and posed no danger to anyone, certainly not the armed and well-protected security forces stationed at a considerable distance from them.
B’Tselem urged soldiers to refuse to obey these regulations and to refrain from shooting at unarmed protestors.
The regulation were legally challenged at the High Court of Justice. In its response to the petition, the State defended the regulations, declaring that “there can be no doubt regarding their legality.”
The State emphasized that the regulations were approved by the Military Advocate General and the Attorney General, and that they permit live fire “solely in order to address violent disturbances that present a clear and present danger to IDF forces or to Israeli civilians.”
The State added that “the rules permit precise fire at the legs of a main rioter or main instigator in order to eliminate the danger from the violence disturbance of the peace.”
The State further added that “there is an orderly process in place for operational debriefing and implementation of lessons learned; ” that “forces have been provided with clarifications and highlights designed to further limit, insofar as possible, the scope of injuries;” and that incidents involving fatalities have been referred for “review by the General Staff Mechanism for Fact-Finding Assessments which investigates exceptional incidents.”
The Court accepted this position verbatim and made no attempt to challenge it. Supreme Court Vice President, Justice Hanan Melcer, held that the regulations permit live fire solely when “there is an immediate, clear and present danger to IDF forces or Israeli civilians,” and allow only “precise fire at the legs of a main rioter or main instigator in order to eliminate the danger from the violence disturbance of the peace, with the goal of eliminating the anticipated imminent danger.”
Supreme Court President Esther Hayut concurred with Justice Melcer, similarly accepting each and every one of the State’s claims regarding the great caution the military exercises in the use of life fire, “in order to minimize as far as possible the potential harm to uninvolved civilians who participate in [the demonstrations].”
In the months since the beginning of the demonstrations, a gap between the State’s claims and the horrifying outcomes of the actual implementation of the unlawful open-fire regulations approved by the High Court grew wider. To date, the military has killed at least 206 Palestinian demonstrators using live fire, 37 of whom were minors under the age of 18.
According to figures published by OCHA, more than 7,800 Palestinians have been injured by live fire. According to the World Health Organization, physicians have had to perform amputations in 139 cases – 30 of which involved minors and 121 involved the lower limbs. Moreover, 24 people have been left paralyzed as the result of spinal injuries.
Human rights organizations, including B’Tselem, as well as various media outlets, reported these outcomes in real time.
Despite this, officials refused to change the open-fire regulations, persistently repeating that the regulations are legal and proportionate, and that they permit live fire only as a last resort, in the absence of any other alternative.
Official sources now admit that they were well aware that people were being killed when even the State did not claim that this is justified.
Despite this, no-one has taken action to amend the open-fire regulations. Instead, the military continued with its trial-and-error approach, ignoring the fact that human lives were at stake: people whose lives have been taken, and families who have been permanently devastated.
Al Ray Palestinian Media Agency reports that on 22 July, 2019, it emerged that the officials were fully aware, at every stage, of the gulf between their declarations and reality.
Carmela Menashe, a reporter for Kan News, reported that the military has now decided to change the open-fire regulations for snipers “after it emerged that firing at the lower limbs above the knee led, in most cases, to death, despite the fact that this was not the objective.
Going forward, soldiers have been briefed to shoot below the knee and then at the ankle.” A senior officer at the military’s Counter-Terrorism School stated that the snipers’ objective “is not to kill but to injure, and accordingly one of the lessons learned related to the direction toward which they fire…
At first, we told them to shoot at the leg. We saw that this can result in fatalities, so we told them to shoot below the knee, then we fine-tuned the regulations to shooting at the ankle.”
The decision to change the regulations only now, after more than a year during which they led to the deaths of at least 206 Palestinians, including 37 minors, and the injury of thousands, in no way suggests that the military attaches great value to human life.
On the contrary, it shows that the military consciously chose not to regard those standing on the other side of the fence as humans. In its naivety, the High Court of Justice approved this practice. Both the military and the courts bear the responsibility for this criminal policy.
Background
In March of 2018, thousands of residents of the Gaza Strip began demonstrating along the fence that separates Gaza from Israel, demanding an end to the siege of the Gaza Strip and the implementation of the right of return. From the outset, following the announcement of the first demonstration, Israel portrayed the protests as an existential threat to the state and regarded the participants as dangerous terrorists.
As a result of this approach, the military implemented lethal open-fire regulations from the first day of the protests: regulations that are patently unlawful and immoral.
As part of this policy, the military permitted the use of live fire against demonstrators on the other side of the fence and posed no danger to anyone, certainly not the armed and well-protected security forces stationed at a considerable distance from them.
B’Tselem urged soldiers to refuse to obey these regulations and to refrain from shooting at unarmed protestors.
The regulation were legally challenged at the High Court of Justice. In its response to the petition, the State defended the regulations, declaring that “there can be no doubt regarding their legality.”
The State emphasized that the regulations were approved by the Military Advocate General and the Attorney General, and that they permit live fire “solely in order to address violent disturbances that present a clear and present danger to IDF forces or to Israeli civilians.”
The State added that “the rules permit precise fire at the legs of a main rioter or main instigator in order to eliminate the danger from the violence disturbance of the peace.”
The State further added that “there is an orderly process in place for operational debriefing and implementation of lessons learned; ” that “forces have been provided with clarifications and highlights designed to further limit, insofar as possible, the scope of injuries;” and that incidents involving fatalities have been referred for “review by the General Staff Mechanism for Fact-Finding Assessments which investigates exceptional incidents.”
The Court accepted this position verbatim and made no attempt to challenge it. Supreme Court Vice President, Justice Hanan Melcer, held that the regulations permit live fire solely when “there is an immediate, clear and present danger to IDF forces or Israeli civilians,” and allow only “precise fire at the legs of a main rioter or main instigator in order to eliminate the danger from the violence disturbance of the peace, with the goal of eliminating the anticipated imminent danger.”
Supreme Court President Esther Hayut concurred with Justice Melcer, similarly accepting each and every one of the State’s claims regarding the great caution the military exercises in the use of life fire, “in order to minimize as far as possible the potential harm to uninvolved civilians who participate in [the demonstrations].”
In the months since the beginning of the demonstrations, a gap between the State’s claims and the horrifying outcomes of the actual implementation of the unlawful open-fire regulations approved by the High Court grew wider. To date, the military has killed at least 206 Palestinian demonstrators using live fire, 37 of whom were minors under the age of 18.
According to figures published by OCHA, more than 7,800 Palestinians have been injured by live fire. According to the World Health Organization, physicians have had to perform amputations in 139 cases – 30 of which involved minors and 121 involved the lower limbs. Moreover, 24 people have been left paralyzed as the result of spinal injuries.
Human rights organizations, including B’Tselem, as well as various media outlets, reported these outcomes in real time.
Despite this, officials refused to change the open-fire regulations, persistently repeating that the regulations are legal and proportionate, and that they permit live fire only as a last resort, in the absence of any other alternative.
Ahead of the UN Human Rights Council meeting on 18 March 2019, on the findings of the UN commission of inquiry into the 2018 Gaza protests, B’Tselem has issued a position paper [pdf] explaining that Israel’s promise to “investigate” 11 incidents in which protesters were killed is mere propaganda.
In a letter [pdf], B’Tselem’s director, Hagai El-Ad called upon the head of the commission, Santiago Canton, to reject the tapestry of lies Israel has woven while killing more unarmed protesters: “A real change in Israeli policy will only take place if the international community demands it clearly and unequivocally, and if it stops allowing Israel to do no more than offer hollow promises of ‘investigation’.”
In the position paper, B’Tselem explains why announcing investigations is a standard ploy that Israel employs to ease international pressure whenever its unlawful policy elicits criticism.
For the past year, Israel has implemented an unlawful open-fire policy towards Palestinians protesting near the Gaza perimeter fence, which permits live fire at unarmed protesters who pose no danger to anyone. Mere days after the protests began, in response to an international outcry over the dozens of fatalities, Israel employed its tried-and-true tactic in such situations and swiftly announced it would “investigate exceptional incidents”.
Recently, leading up to the scheduled publication of the conclusions by the UN Human Rights Council international commission of inquiry on the matter, the IDF Spokesperson has again begun to flaunt this fig leaf: eleven Military Police investigations regarding “specific incidents,” all still pending. Meanwhile, the regulations remain unchanged and are still being implemented in the field. People are still being killed or wounded, and no one is questioning the policy or being held to account for it.
Israel’s announcement has, at least so far, achieved its goal: welcomed by the international community, it has eased pressure on Israel, enabling the policy that has led thus far to 200 persons killed and more than 6,300 injured to continue unchanged.
Earlier this year, Israel’s High Court of Justice found this hollow promise satisfactory in ruling on a petition against the open-fire policy, and refused to order that it be changed. In their ruling the justices relied, among other things, on the assurance that the military would investigate “exceptional incidents”, while Israel continues to implement its lethal policy.
The “investigations” carried out by the military whitewashing mechanism, under the leadership of the Military Advocate General (MAG), are meaningless other than their role in aiding Israel’s effort to silence international criticism. They do not lead to adopting any measures against any of the people responsible for harm to Palestinians, as from the very outset the investigations do not probe the responsibility at the level of officials who set out and approved the policy or the unlawful orders.
The investigations do not deter the troops serving on the ground, as they are so few and far between, and even in cases in which an investigation was actually launched, it was then almost invariably closed without any further measures. Nor do the investigations achieve justice for the victims or their families.
This is standard procedure for Israel:
In Operation Cast Lead, which ran from December 2008 to January 2009 in the Gaza Strip, Israel killed 1,391 Palestinians. At least 759 (55%) had been uninvolved in the hostilities, including 318 children under 18. Injured people bled to death while the military denied them passage to hospital.
Palestinians were shot while waving a white flag. The MAG Corps “examined” over 400 incidents, and ordered the launching of at least 52 “investigations.” Soldiers were convicted in three cases only – on charges of theft, using a child as a human shield, and unlawful use of a weapon.
In Operation Protective Edge in the summer of 2014, Israel killed 2,203 Palestinians, including 1,392 (63%) who were uninvolved in the hostilities; 528 were under 18. Entire families were killed when their homes were hit in an air strike.
The MAG Corps established a “special examination mechanism” to examine and investigate instances defined as “exceptional” and then conveyed its recommendations to the MAG. As before, it was found that all had been lawful and above board, apart from one case in which three soldiers were convicted of stealing NIS 2,420. This episode of whitewashing is not yet complete: some of the “investigations” are still underway.
None of this is a random fluke: Israel does not wish to truly investigate, and therefore has created mechanisms that are incapable of carrying out full investigations. Israel’s sole purpose is to create a façade of an intention to investigate in order to silence criticism.
However, investigations and accountability are no merely theoretical issue or one of image. They are a matter of life and death. Investigations are necessary so that senior officials realize that they cannot give unlawful orders, and to demonstrate to the troops in the field the parameters of the use of force. When propaganda diversion tactics succeed in preventing accountability, there is a price to pay, and it is measured in human lives.
The international community must stop buying into Israel’s propaganda ploys concerning so-called “investigations”. There is no rational basis to expect Israel to carry out a real investigation. It does not have the slightest interest in investigating the policy itself, condemning it or demanding accountability from those responsible.
Therefore, the international community must make the most of its power and influence to compel Israel to change its policy and immediately cease the gunfire at protesters who pose no danger.
In a letter [pdf], B’Tselem’s director, Hagai El-Ad called upon the head of the commission, Santiago Canton, to reject the tapestry of lies Israel has woven while killing more unarmed protesters: “A real change in Israeli policy will only take place if the international community demands it clearly and unequivocally, and if it stops allowing Israel to do no more than offer hollow promises of ‘investigation’.”
In the position paper, B’Tselem explains why announcing investigations is a standard ploy that Israel employs to ease international pressure whenever its unlawful policy elicits criticism.
For the past year, Israel has implemented an unlawful open-fire policy towards Palestinians protesting near the Gaza perimeter fence, which permits live fire at unarmed protesters who pose no danger to anyone. Mere days after the protests began, in response to an international outcry over the dozens of fatalities, Israel employed its tried-and-true tactic in such situations and swiftly announced it would “investigate exceptional incidents”.
Recently, leading up to the scheduled publication of the conclusions by the UN Human Rights Council international commission of inquiry on the matter, the IDF Spokesperson has again begun to flaunt this fig leaf: eleven Military Police investigations regarding “specific incidents,” all still pending. Meanwhile, the regulations remain unchanged and are still being implemented in the field. People are still being killed or wounded, and no one is questioning the policy or being held to account for it.
Israel’s announcement has, at least so far, achieved its goal: welcomed by the international community, it has eased pressure on Israel, enabling the policy that has led thus far to 200 persons killed and more than 6,300 injured to continue unchanged.
Earlier this year, Israel’s High Court of Justice found this hollow promise satisfactory in ruling on a petition against the open-fire policy, and refused to order that it be changed. In their ruling the justices relied, among other things, on the assurance that the military would investigate “exceptional incidents”, while Israel continues to implement its lethal policy.
The “investigations” carried out by the military whitewashing mechanism, under the leadership of the Military Advocate General (MAG), are meaningless other than their role in aiding Israel’s effort to silence international criticism. They do not lead to adopting any measures against any of the people responsible for harm to Palestinians, as from the very outset the investigations do not probe the responsibility at the level of officials who set out and approved the policy or the unlawful orders.
The investigations do not deter the troops serving on the ground, as they are so few and far between, and even in cases in which an investigation was actually launched, it was then almost invariably closed without any further measures. Nor do the investigations achieve justice for the victims or their families.
This is standard procedure for Israel:
In Operation Cast Lead, which ran from December 2008 to January 2009 in the Gaza Strip, Israel killed 1,391 Palestinians. At least 759 (55%) had been uninvolved in the hostilities, including 318 children under 18. Injured people bled to death while the military denied them passage to hospital.
Palestinians were shot while waving a white flag. The MAG Corps “examined” over 400 incidents, and ordered the launching of at least 52 “investigations.” Soldiers were convicted in three cases only – on charges of theft, using a child as a human shield, and unlawful use of a weapon.
In Operation Protective Edge in the summer of 2014, Israel killed 2,203 Palestinians, including 1,392 (63%) who were uninvolved in the hostilities; 528 were under 18. Entire families were killed when their homes were hit in an air strike.
The MAG Corps established a “special examination mechanism” to examine and investigate instances defined as “exceptional” and then conveyed its recommendations to the MAG. As before, it was found that all had been lawful and above board, apart from one case in which three soldiers were convicted of stealing NIS 2,420. This episode of whitewashing is not yet complete: some of the “investigations” are still underway.
None of this is a random fluke: Israel does not wish to truly investigate, and therefore has created mechanisms that are incapable of carrying out full investigations. Israel’s sole purpose is to create a façade of an intention to investigate in order to silence criticism.
However, investigations and accountability are no merely theoretical issue or one of image. They are a matter of life and death. Investigations are necessary so that senior officials realize that they cannot give unlawful orders, and to demonstrate to the troops in the field the parameters of the use of force. When propaganda diversion tactics succeed in preventing accountability, there is a price to pay, and it is measured in human lives.
The international community must stop buying into Israel’s propaganda ploys concerning so-called “investigations”. There is no rational basis to expect Israel to carry out a real investigation. It does not have the slightest interest in investigating the policy itself, condemning it or demanding accountability from those responsible.
Therefore, the international community must make the most of its power and influence to compel Israel to change its policy and immediately cease the gunfire at protesters who pose no danger.
28 july 2019
Palestinian children hold posters of Mohammed Halabi, the Gaza director of World Vision, during a 2016 protest in Rafah to support him
In recent years, a crackdown by Israeli authorities on human rights NGOs – particularly those focused on Palestinian rights – has caused considerable concern internationally, attracting attention in both the media and at the governmental level.
Yet, perhaps the most egregious case of Israel’s targeting of the humanitarian sector has been taking place over the last three years with almost zero coverage.
In June 2016, Israeli authorities arrested Mohammed Halabi at the Gaza Strip’s Erez crossing. Halabi, a father of five, was working as the Gaza director for the international humanitarian NGO World Vision, and was returning from a meeting in Jerusalem at the time of his arrest.
Alarm bells ringing
Seven weeks later, Israel’s internal security agency, the Shin Bet, announced with much fanfare spectacular charges against Halabi – namely, that he had used his role to redirect tens of millions in World Vision funds to Hamas, as part of a decade-long conspiracy to infiltrate the charity.
Incredibly, however, three years on, there has been no conviction. The trial has seen some 120 court sessions, in what has been described by the Palestinian Commission of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs as “one of the longest trials” ever. Halabi maintains his innocence.
Alarm bells should have been ringing from the start – in particular, due to the appalling conditions Halabi has been subjected to, and the ongoing denial of his right to due process. After his detention, the World Vision staffer was held for three weeks without access to a lawyer (the maximum such period in non-“security” cases is 48 hours).
Halabi, his family, and lawyers have provided multiple and credible accounts of torture at the hands of Shin Bet interrogators – indeed, even “several witnesses the prosecution has presented to court have also accused Israeli intelligence officers of torturing them during interrogation”.
Local and global human rights groups, such as Amnesty International, have long recorded the routine use of torture by Israeli authorities. Meanwhile, as documented by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Halabi’s lawyer was only given access “to all previously undisclosed evidence one year and a half after the start of the trial” and “permitted to start examining defence witnesses 24 months into the trial”.
In addition, Halabi reportedly “never receives accurate translations of the court proceedings”, and Israel has also refused to allow his lawyer “to visit Gaza and meet witnesses who could bolster his case” or to grant permits for witnesses to come and testify in court.
Judicial farce
Extraordinarily, in March 2017, the judge himself urged Halabi to accept a plea deal, on the grounds that Palestinian suspects in “security” cases are almost always convicted: “You’ve read the numbers and the statistics,” the judge told him. “You know how these issues are handled.”
But it’s not just the judicial farce that undermines the case against Halabi; it is also the matter of the evidence, or lack thereof. After World Vision pointed out that the amount of money allegedly diverted to Hamas exceeded the NGO’s total budget, an Israeli government spokesperson said the exact figures were irrelevant.
In recent years, a crackdown by Israeli authorities on human rights NGOs – particularly those focused on Palestinian rights – has caused considerable concern internationally, attracting attention in both the media and at the governmental level.
Yet, perhaps the most egregious case of Israel’s targeting of the humanitarian sector has been taking place over the last three years with almost zero coverage.
In June 2016, Israeli authorities arrested Mohammed Halabi at the Gaza Strip’s Erez crossing. Halabi, a father of five, was working as the Gaza director for the international humanitarian NGO World Vision, and was returning from a meeting in Jerusalem at the time of his arrest.
Alarm bells ringing
Seven weeks later, Israel’s internal security agency, the Shin Bet, announced with much fanfare spectacular charges against Halabi – namely, that he had used his role to redirect tens of millions in World Vision funds to Hamas, as part of a decade-long conspiracy to infiltrate the charity.
Incredibly, however, three years on, there has been no conviction. The trial has seen some 120 court sessions, in what has been described by the Palestinian Commission of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs as “one of the longest trials” ever. Halabi maintains his innocence.
Alarm bells should have been ringing from the start – in particular, due to the appalling conditions Halabi has been subjected to, and the ongoing denial of his right to due process. After his detention, the World Vision staffer was held for three weeks without access to a lawyer (the maximum such period in non-“security” cases is 48 hours).
Halabi, his family, and lawyers have provided multiple and credible accounts of torture at the hands of Shin Bet interrogators – indeed, even “several witnesses the prosecution has presented to court have also accused Israeli intelligence officers of torturing them during interrogation”.
Local and global human rights groups, such as Amnesty International, have long recorded the routine use of torture by Israeli authorities. Meanwhile, as documented by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Halabi’s lawyer was only given access “to all previously undisclosed evidence one year and a half after the start of the trial” and “permitted to start examining defence witnesses 24 months into the trial”.
In addition, Halabi reportedly “never receives accurate translations of the court proceedings”, and Israel has also refused to allow his lawyer “to visit Gaza and meet witnesses who could bolster his case” or to grant permits for witnesses to come and testify in court.
Judicial farce
Extraordinarily, in March 2017, the judge himself urged Halabi to accept a plea deal, on the grounds that Palestinian suspects in “security” cases are almost always convicted: “You’ve read the numbers and the statistics,” the judge told him. “You know how these issues are handled.”
But it’s not just the judicial farce that undermines the case against Halabi; it is also the matter of the evidence, or lack thereof. After World Vision pointed out that the amount of money allegedly diverted to Hamas exceeded the NGO’s total budget, an Israeli government spokesperson said the exact figures were irrelevant.
Halabi appears in an Israeli court in Beersheva in August 2016
In August 2016, “Western diplomats” told Haaretz that they had not received any intelligence or evidence about Halabi. The following year, an Australian government investigation “found no evidence taxpayer money was misused by the World Vision NGO in the Gaza Strip”.
World Vision, which initiated two separate inquiries – carried out by Deloitte for World Vision International, and Ernst and Young for World Vision Australia – reiterated as recently as May that it had still not seen “any evidence” to support the Israeli authorities’ allegations.
Comments by multiple sources – including World Vision, Israeli media, and Halabi’s family – suggest a key role might have been played by an ex-World Vision employee who “bore a grudge” after being fired by Halabi. Having left Gaza, the individual is allegedly “now acting as a witness in the Israeli case”.
Confession under torture
In the immediate aftermath of the indictments being announced, a senior Israeli official declared that “the evidence is the confession of the detainee”. This “confession” was obtained from Halabi when he had no legal representation and was subject to torture – and one that he subsequently retracted.
So, what is going on here?
The 2016 indictments were headline news internationally, and Israeli officials went to great efforts to publicise the allegations among journalists and diplomats.
Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan claimed the indictments proved substantial links between aid groups and “terrorist” organisations, adding for good measure: “I imagine that in the World Vision organisation, which is very anti-Israeli, they turned a blind eye.”
Israel’s Foreign Ministry focused on “spread[ing] the news …among liberal and religious groups who support World Vision”, and the ministry’s then-director, Dore Gold, wrote to foreign ministries around the world, baldly asserting that Halabi “is actually a major figure in the Hamas terrorist organisation”.
Even as the court case drags on, Israel and its supporters have repeated the accusations against Halabi as fact, as part of a broader agenda. A recent publication [pdf] by Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry, for example, cites the unproven allegations as proof of “international relief organisations” having ties with Hamas. NGO Monitor, a serial harasser of civil society groups, states on its website that Halabi was “revealed … to be a Hamas terrorist”.
Disturbing silenceIncreasing attention is being paid to the deteriorating atmosphere for human rights groups at the hands of Israeli authorities; even a UK minister recently acknowledged reports of “pressure exerted against NGOs, particularly those critical of Israel’s conduct in the occupied Palestinian territories”.
But while examples such as the ongoing efforts to deport Human Rights Watch official Omar Shakir – and to a lesser extent, legislative and financial steps targeting NGOs – have elicited international criticism, there is a disturbing silence over the Halabi case.
The nightmare experienced by Halabi and his family exposes the routine violence and corruption of Israel’s Shin Bet and judicial system, and the relationship between the two. It has also highlighted the deference offered to that system by Israel’s Western allies, and the inability to see – or call out – a politicised stitch-up dressed up as “counter-terrorism”.
In 2016, Israeli rights groups slammed authorities for using Halabi’s indictment to attack “humanitarian operations in the Gaza Strip as a whole”. For NGOs in Gaza, Halabi’s case prompts the question – could we be next? As Israel seeks to shrink the humanitarian space, intimidation works.
Whatever the result of an utterly discredited legal process, Halabi’s case is now a litmus test for Western governments, and their willingness to push back against Israel’s assault on civil society.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Ben White
Ben White is the author of ‘Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner’s Guide’ and ‘Palestinians in Israel: Segregation, Discrimination and Democracy’. He is a writer for Middle East Monitor, and his articles have been published by Al Jazeera, al-Araby, Huffington Post, The Electronic Intifada, The Guardian, and more.
In August 2016, “Western diplomats” told Haaretz that they had not received any intelligence or evidence about Halabi. The following year, an Australian government investigation “found no evidence taxpayer money was misused by the World Vision NGO in the Gaza Strip”.
World Vision, which initiated two separate inquiries – carried out by Deloitte for World Vision International, and Ernst and Young for World Vision Australia – reiterated as recently as May that it had still not seen “any evidence” to support the Israeli authorities’ allegations.
Comments by multiple sources – including World Vision, Israeli media, and Halabi’s family – suggest a key role might have been played by an ex-World Vision employee who “bore a grudge” after being fired by Halabi. Having left Gaza, the individual is allegedly “now acting as a witness in the Israeli case”.
Confession under torture
In the immediate aftermath of the indictments being announced, a senior Israeli official declared that “the evidence is the confession of the detainee”. This “confession” was obtained from Halabi when he had no legal representation and was subject to torture – and one that he subsequently retracted.
So, what is going on here?
The 2016 indictments were headline news internationally, and Israeli officials went to great efforts to publicise the allegations among journalists and diplomats.
Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan claimed the indictments proved substantial links between aid groups and “terrorist” organisations, adding for good measure: “I imagine that in the World Vision organisation, which is very anti-Israeli, they turned a blind eye.”
Israel’s Foreign Ministry focused on “spread[ing] the news …among liberal and religious groups who support World Vision”, and the ministry’s then-director, Dore Gold, wrote to foreign ministries around the world, baldly asserting that Halabi “is actually a major figure in the Hamas terrorist organisation”.
Even as the court case drags on, Israel and its supporters have repeated the accusations against Halabi as fact, as part of a broader agenda. A recent publication [pdf] by Israel’s Strategic Affairs Ministry, for example, cites the unproven allegations as proof of “international relief organisations” having ties with Hamas. NGO Monitor, a serial harasser of civil society groups, states on its website that Halabi was “revealed … to be a Hamas terrorist”.
Disturbing silenceIncreasing attention is being paid to the deteriorating atmosphere for human rights groups at the hands of Israeli authorities; even a UK minister recently acknowledged reports of “pressure exerted against NGOs, particularly those critical of Israel’s conduct in the occupied Palestinian territories”.
But while examples such as the ongoing efforts to deport Human Rights Watch official Omar Shakir – and to a lesser extent, legislative and financial steps targeting NGOs – have elicited international criticism, there is a disturbing silence over the Halabi case.
The nightmare experienced by Halabi and his family exposes the routine violence and corruption of Israel’s Shin Bet and judicial system, and the relationship between the two. It has also highlighted the deference offered to that system by Israel’s Western allies, and the inability to see – or call out – a politicised stitch-up dressed up as “counter-terrorism”.
In 2016, Israeli rights groups slammed authorities for using Halabi’s indictment to attack “humanitarian operations in the Gaza Strip as a whole”. For NGOs in Gaza, Halabi’s case prompts the question – could we be next? As Israel seeks to shrink the humanitarian space, intimidation works.
Whatever the result of an utterly discredited legal process, Halabi’s case is now a litmus test for Western governments, and their willingness to push back against Israel’s assault on civil society.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Ben White
Ben White is the author of ‘Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner’s Guide’ and ‘Palestinians in Israel: Segregation, Discrimination and Democracy’. He is a writer for Middle East Monitor, and his articles have been published by Al Jazeera, al-Araby, Huffington Post, The Electronic Intifada, The Guardian, and more.
25 july 2019
In response to today’s decision by Israel’s Supreme Court to postpone the July 25, 2019 hearing challenging the government’s decision to deport Human Rights Watch’s country director, Omar Shakir, Human Rights Watch has canceled a news conference scheduled for July 25.
The following statement may be attributed to Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch.
“The Israeli government should recognize that the world views its effort to deport Human Rights Watch’s researcher as an attempt to shut down human rights advocacy.
The Israeli government may not like people pointing out the human rights violations inherent in its settlement enterprise, but that is legitimate speech that the government has no business punishing. The real problem here is Israeli legislation that empowers the government to throw people out for peaceful advocacy.
Human Rights Watch is grateful for the outpouring of local and international support for our efforts to challenge the deportation of our country director.
This support reflects an understanding that this effort is an attack on the broader human rights movement. We will continue to fight not only to allow Omar to continue doing his job from Jerusalem, but to expose human rights abuses by all parties.”
The following statement may be attributed to Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch.
“The Israeli government should recognize that the world views its effort to deport Human Rights Watch’s researcher as an attempt to shut down human rights advocacy.
The Israeli government may not like people pointing out the human rights violations inherent in its settlement enterprise, but that is legitimate speech that the government has no business punishing. The real problem here is Israeli legislation that empowers the government to throw people out for peaceful advocacy.
Human Rights Watch is grateful for the outpouring of local and international support for our efforts to challenge the deportation of our country director.
This support reflects an understanding that this effort is an attack on the broader human rights movement. We will continue to fight not only to allow Omar to continue doing his job from Jerusalem, but to expose human rights abuses by all parties.”
