Here is what Richard Falk writes, mentioning the International Law Conference that was held at the Institute of Law, Birzeit University (his full report to the Human Rights Council is attached). "5. The Special Rapporteur was invited to give the opening address at an international conference devoted to the theme of “Expanding the Legal Paradigm for Palestine” on 8-9 May 2013 at Birzeit University involving distinguished experts from several countries. Due to the impossibility of attending the event in person, the Special Rapporteur addressed the audience via Skype. The presentation emphasized the limits of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) in the context of prolonged occupation, a concern that has been expressed in previous reports. Three overlapping legal regimes were distinguished: (a) IHL, as contained in the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and Additional Protocol I: useful for identifying violations associated with behaviour of the Occupying Power toward the civilian population of the Occupied Territory: including construction of settlements, collective punishments, targeted assassinations, diversion of water, excessive force, conditions of detention and imprisonment. There is an additional deficiency here arising from the failure of Parties to the Geneva Conventions to uphold the duty set forth in common Article 1 “to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.” If a pattern of persistent violation is present and sustained for a period of years, as with Israel‟s occupation of Palestine, then steps should be taken to encourage compliance. Such a collective responsibility by all Contracting Parties to “repress grave breaches” is made clearer in Protocol I, Articles 86 and 91, a treaty that has the status of customary international law. (b) Oslo Framework: allocation of administrative and governmental responsibilities to Areas A (Palestinian), B (joint Palestinian-Israeli), and C (Israeli) that creates a different legal regime, given the different standards of protection and access to law accorded to Israeli settlers and Palestinians living in the West Bank. The Oslo process, with its five-year timeline for the resolution of final status issues, constituted a humane acknowledgement that a belligerent occupation of a society must be ended. United Nations and European Union reports indicate that the Palestinian presence in Area C (which covers 61 per cent of the land but only 4 per cent of the Palestinian population), is under constant pressure and under threat of elimination. It is estimated that 350,000 Jewish settlers in about 200 settlements and outposts are living in Area C, having appropriated the preferred land, situated mainly on high ground, making use of disproportionate amounts of water exploited from local aquifers at the expense of the Palestinian population. In other words, the Oslo formula has facilitated additional encroachments on Palestinian territory that violate the Fourth Geneva Convention‟s obligation on the Occupier to refrain from altering the nature of the occupied country or appropriating its resources. (c) Prolonged Occupation: there is no presently applicable international legal framework that captures the extent to which the interests and wellbeing of the civilian population are jeopardized, perhaps irreversibly, if the occupation lasts longer than five years. Israel‟s occupation of Palestine has lasted 46 years, a period that causes serious mental disorders associated with living for decades without the protection of laws and rights and with stifling restrictions on mobility and travel. Israel‟s occupation shows no signs of ending. The prolonged state of exception has facilitated what the Human Rights Council‟s fact-finding mission on Israeli settlements aptly described as “creeping annexation”. The unlawful Israeli annexation and demographic manipulations in East Jerusalem have created fundamental threats to the Palestinian right of self-determination. It is the judgment of this Special Rapporteur that such issues bear directly on upholding the right of self-determination, and represent a flaw or insufficiency in the conventional conceptions of IHL and international human rights law. This flaw or insufficiency should be addressed by either the International Committee of the Red Cross by convening an international conference to draft a convention for Occupations that surpass five years, or the manifold issues related to prolonged occupation be examined by a commission of inquiry composed of relevant international law experts." unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/e4965c3a265268f885257b800065dd55?OpenDocument
Posted on: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:22:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015