This workshop tried to deal with questions frequently raised in regard with UN resolutions on the Palestinian refugee question, especially UN General Assembly (GA) resolution 194 (11-12-1948): is this resolution binding on UN member states?  Are there measures which can be taken so as to enforece its binding character?  Is this Resolution at all a term of reference in negotiations in the Oslo framework?  Which are the main obstacles for its implementation and what can be done to protect this resolution from the Israeli attacks which have been supported by the US?  

Dr. Hanna 'Issa (teacher of interantional law, PA Ministry of Justice) argued that the national rights of the Palestinian people are natural rights which are unseparable from the existence and the history of the Arab Palestinian people.  This was in fact recognized by the international community (League of Nations) and expressed in principles of the British Mandate in Palestine, which was to lead the Palestinian people toward independence.  

Then Dr. 'Issa presented some of the more recent UN resolutions which underline the necessity of implementing the basic resolutions (GA Resolution 194 pertaining to 1948 refugees; Security Council Resolution 237/14-6-1967 calling upon Israel to facilitate the return of persons exiled by the 1967 war).  The most prominent among the more recent resolutions confirming the Palestinian refugees' right of return is GA Resolution 3089 issued on 7-12-1073.  This Resolution reaffirms the inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes; its states that the right of return is a precondition for a just solution of the refugee issue and for the exercise of the right of self-determination.  Resolution 3089 is important for several reasons:  

1. It was issued to explain Security Council Resolution 242 which had called for "achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem": without defining the basis for such a settlement.  
2. The right of return was applicable to all of the land of Palestine.  
3. Resolution 3089 considers the right of return as a precondition for the practice of self-determination.  

Between 1949 and 1981, the UN General Assembly issued 32 resolutions affirming the right of return, the latest being resolution 36/146 of 16-12-1981, calling Israel to take practical steps towards the implementation of Resolution 194, based on the fact that Israel's membership in the UN was conditioned by its approval of Resolutions 181 (1947 UN Partition Plan) and 194.  

Dr. Kamal Kuba'a (Legal Advisor to the Presidential Office) approached the issue of the right of return from the angle of basic human rights.  Thus the right to leave one's country and to return to it has been recognized as a basic right even in circumstances of war and occupation by numerous international agreements, and the forcible transfer of civilians outside an occupied territory has been banned (e.g. international military court agreement of Nurenberg, 1945: 1949 Geneva Convention and its 1977 extensions).  Moreover, the right of return is rooted in all major international human rights declarations (e.g. 1948 International Declaration of Human Rights/Paragraph 13: "any person has a right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to it"), as well as in regional agreements (e.g. the 1951 European agreement on the protection of human rights, 1964 American agreement on human rights, 1986 African doucment on human rights and people) which all affirm that citizens must not be expelled from their country, nor be prevented from leaving or coming back to it.  

Then Dr. Kuba'a proceeded to pointing out the unique character of the right of return of the Palestinian people which differs from other refugee cases due to the fact that the Palestinian claim for this right has been upheld for half a century, giving evidence of the vitality of the Palestinian cause.  He confirmed - as did Dr. 'Issa before him - that the right or return was part of the natural rights of the Palestinian people and linked organically to its right to self-determinatiaon.  He argued further, that the fact that Israel signed both Resolutions 181 and 194 as a condition for its admission to the United Nations and then disregarded and violated both, puts the legitimacy of Israel's existence and membership in the UN into question.  According to Dr. Kuba'a, UN Resolution 194, although issued by the General Assembly, must be seen as having binding character, due to the fact that it served as the basis for numerous other resolutions and for the establishment of the UN Relief Work Agency in Palestine (UNRWA), and due to its direct link with the right to self-determination.  

This workship was attended by approximately 70 refugee activists, social workers, politicians, lawyers and researchers from the Bethlehem area.  It was covered by three local TV stations and by the local Palestinian press.  Although the debate was lively and interesting, the public failed to challenge the speakers.  Thus the question whether Resolution 194 is at all a terms of reference in the political negotiations in the framework of the Oslo Accords was not raised explicitly.  Thus the Palestinian official experts presenting their positions in this workshop did not really have to deal with this hairy question. 

Workshop 4> 

| refugee workshops |