International Protection
For more than two months Palestinian and international organizations have been calling for international protection of the Palestinian people, with particular attention to especially vulnerable sectors like the refugees, the Palestinian community in eastern Jerusalem, and Palestinians in remote areas of the West Bank living in areas near Israeli settlements. As of press time, discussions regarding the deployment of a UN force were continuing in the Security Council with draft resolutions submitted by the Non- Aligned movement and by France.
Critical concerns regarding the mandate of a potential UN protection force have been raised in the context of statements made the United States and the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. Both have stated that an international protection force cannot be deployed in the occupied territories without the consent of the government of Israel. This view requires immediate clarification in light of the international framework delineated in international humanitarian law and reaffirmed by the United Nations (Security Council, General Assembly, Commission on Human Rights, Economic and Social Council, a.o.) which recognizes Israel as an occupying power in the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.
According to international humanitarian law, a military occupier can never attain de jure sovereignty over occupied territory. Consequently, the de jure sovereignty over the occupied Palestinian territories which vested in the Palestinian people with the 1919 League of Nations Covenant - which is the fundamental legal basis of the Palestinian people's collectively- International Protection al majdal 19 held right of self-determination in those areas - can never be overridden by the lesser order of military control exercised by Israel.
Israeli consent for the deployment of UN forces in the occupied Palestinian territories incorrectly implies recognition of the legitimacy of the Israeli occupation as well as the American position that the territories are disputed rather than occupied. Regardless of the issue of Israeli consent, UN forces can be deployed under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, a measure previously recommended by the UN Commission on Human Rights.
Functions of the Office UN High Commissioner for
Human Rights
(a) Promotes universal enjoyment of all human rights by giving
practical effect to the will and resolve of the world community as
expressed by the United Nations;
(b) Plays the leading role on human rights issues and emphasizes
the importance of human rights at the international and national
levels;
(c) Promotes international cooperation for human rights;
(d) Stimulates and coordinates action for human rights throughout
the United Nations system;
(e) Promotes universal ratification and implementation of
international standards;
(f) Assists in the development of new norms;
(g) Supports human rights organs and treaty monitoring bodies;
(h) Responds to serious violations of human rights;
(i) Undertakes preventive human rights action;
(j) Promotes the establishment of national human rights
infrastructures;
(k) Undertakes human rights field activities and operations;
(l) Provides education, information advisory services and technical
assistance in the field of human rights.
In April 1996, the UNHCHR signed a technical cooperation agreement
with the PA (PAL/95/AH/24, Support for the Rule of Law in
Palestine) to provide the authority with technical assistance and
advisory services. This includes, (a) establishing a legal
framework consistent with human rights standards, through the
provision of advisory services on legislation drafting and support
to Palestinian institutions and organizations to conduct legal
analysis work; (b) development an official human rights policy
through assistance for the elaboration of a national plan of action
on human rights; (c) and, strengthening of national structures
whose role is crucial in protecting and promoting human rights,with
special focus on the administration of justice (through advisory
services and training for police, prisons officials, judges,
prosecutors and lawyers), on the Palestinian Independent Commission
on Citizen's Rights and on local non-governmental
organizations.
Contact:
Mr. Amin Mekki Medani, Chief
Technical Advisor
Halabi Street - Remal, Gaza
c/o UNDP/PAPP
PO Box 51359
Jerusalem 95912
tel. 972-7-282-7321
fax. 972-7-282-7021
email: [email protected]
Secondly, and related to the status of the occupied territories, is the intervention mandate of any UN protection force. The mandate must clearly reflect and allow for what the United Nations has already recognized as the legitimacy of struggle against occupation, foreign domination, and colonialism. The source of the current unrest in the West Bank, eastern Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, is not the Palestinian street. The source of the problem has always been, and continues to be the illegal Israeli occupation.
Finally, a UN protection force must have a mandate to move throughout the occupied Palestinian territories, investigate and publicly disseminate violations of Palestinian rights, and have the authorization, backed up by appropriate resources, to intervene to protect the Palestinian people under occupation, especially vulnerable groups such as children, refugees, the Palestinian community in occupied Jerusalem, and Palestinians living in remote rural areas facing ongoing attacks by the Israeli military and settlers.
"Impartiality for UN operations must […] mean adherence to
the principles of the [UN] Charter: where one party to a peace
agreement clearly and incontrovertibly is violating its terms,
continued equal treatment of all parties by the UN can in the |
Canada Camp: The Last Refugees Return to Gaza
Two decades after they were strand ed in Egypt after the signing of
the Camp David accords in the early 1980s, the last 92 of some
6,000 Palestinian refugees returned to Gaza at the beginning of
December under a program facilitated by UNRWA. Under the program,
each household was supplied with a grant of some $12,000 for
relocation and reconstruction costs, initially covered by the
Egyptian government and later by the Canadian International
Development Agency and the Kuwaiti Fund for Arab Economic
Development. Palestinian Bedouins stranded on the Egyptian side of
the border after the Camp David accords remain without a
solution.
Internally Displaced Palestinians
In late September, Israeli Prime Minister Barak asked for yet
another deferral from the High Court regarding the return of
internally displaced Palestinians who are citizens of Israel to
their villages of Iqrit and Bir'im. A deferral had previously been
granted by the High Court in May in consideration of Israel's
withdrawal from south Lebanon. The new request is based on claims
that the government was soon to deal with issues in the "Arab
sector" pertaining to the resident's petition and that a decision
at the current time would have ramifications on negotiations with
the PLO concerning the issue of Palestinian refugees.
With another Israeli election scheduled for the first part of 2001 it is unlikely that the fate of the internally displaced Palestinian citizens of Israel from these two villages will be dealt with any time soon despite a legal process that has dragged on for 50 years. "We are now convinced that the present Government continues the policy of postponement initiated by its predecessors," stated Ihsan Ta'amem member of the Committee of the Iqrit's Uprooted. "[A]s to its declared intention to solve our case, it turned out to be a crossed check."
The Palestinian residents of the two villages were ordered by the Israeli military in 1948 to temporarily evacuate their homes until fighting in the northern border area resided. Thevillagers were later prevented from returning and their homes were demolished despite a 1951 High Court ruling in favor of the return of the villagers.
A classified document entitled "very secret - personal", written by Emanuel Mor, commander of the military government, following the High Court decision in favor of Iqrit residents and before their homes were exploded, shows how he looked at the issue: "The results of the high court decision are liable to bring about great damage to state security and IDF concerns." Mor raised four arguments: a) there will be an additional Arab village next to the border; b) following this precedent, additional legal cases of the same type will be submitted; c) the issue will lead to Arab settlement in places which are not wanted; d) it will cause serious damage to the plan of security settlement.