http://freehichamyezza.wordpress.com/
Hicham Yezza, a popular, respected and valued former PhD student and current employee of the University of Nottingham faces deportation to Algeria on Sunday 1st June. This follows his unjust arrest under the Terrorism Act 2000 on Wednesday 14th May alongside Rizwaan Sabir and their release without charge six days later.
It has subsequently become clear that these arrests, which the police had claimed related to so-called “radical materials” involved an Al Qaeda manual downloaded by Sabir as part of his research into political Islam and emailed to Yezza for printing because Sabir couldn’t afford to get it printed himself. There has been a vocal response from lecturers and students. A petition is being circulated, letters have been sent by academics across the world and a demo is being planned for Wednesday the 28th May. This has clearly been deeply embarrassing to a government currently advocating an expansion of anti-terror powers.
On his release Hicham was re-arrested under immigration legislation and, due to confusion over his visa documentation, charged with offences relating to his immigration status. He sought legal advice and representation over these matters whilst in custody. On Friday 23rd May, he was suddenly served with a deportation notice and moved to an immigration detention centre. The deportation is being urgently appealed.
Hicham has been resident in the U.K for 13 years, during which time he has studied for both undergraduate and postgraduate degrees in Nottingham.
He is an active member of debating societies, a prominent member of an arts and theatre group, and has written for, and edited, Ceasefire, the Nottingham Student Peace Movement magazine for the last five years.
He is well known and popular on campus amongst the university community and has established himself as a voracious reader and an authority on literature and music. An application for British citizenship was underway, and he had been planning to make his yearly trip to Wales for the Hay Festival when he was suddenly arrested.
The authorities are clearly trying to circumvent the criminal justice system and force Hicham out of the country. Normally they would have to wait for criminal proceedings to finish, but here they have managed to convince the prosecution to drop the charges in an attempt to remove him a quick, covert manner. The desire for justice is clearly not the driving force behind this, as Hicham was happy to stand trial and prove his innocence.
Hicham had a large social network and many of his friends are mobilising to prevent his deportation. Matthew Butcher, 20, a student at the University of Nottingham and member of the 2008-9 Students Union Executive, said, “This is an abhorrent abuse of due process, pursued by a government currently seeking to expand anti-terror powers. Following the debacle of the initial ‘terror’ arrests they now want to brush the whole affair under the carpet by deporting Hicham.”
Supporters have been able to talk with Hicham and he said, “The Home Office operates with a Gestapo mentality. They have no respect for human dignity and human life. They treat foreign nationals as disposable goods – the recklessness and the cavalier approach they have belongs to a totalitarian state. I thank everyone for their support – it’s been extremely heartening and humbling. I’m grateful to everyone who has come to my aid and stood with me in solidarity, from students to Members of Parliament. I think this really reflects the spirit of the generous, inclusive Britain we know – and not the faceless, brutal, draconian tactics of the Home Office.”
[ENDS]
Contact: Sam Walton, 07948590262, staffandstudents@googlemail.com
Often when “Israeli Apartheid” is talked about the argument that you always hear is: “There are no Jews-only park benches in Israel” which is a strange argument. There are many Jews-only things in Israel and furthermore apartheid is, according to international law, not defined according to unequal access to park benches.
In its most specific meaning, the word Apartheid (Afrikaans for separation) refers to the system of laws, policies and practices implemented by the white minority in South Africa to repress and exploit the indigenous African majority. In Israel, the word Hafrada (Hebrew for separation) is used to refer to the general policy of separation the Israeli government has adopted and implemented over the Palestinians in the West Bank (WB) and Gaza Strip (GS).
In 1976, the world witnessed the signing of the International Convention for the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. According to this convention, Apartheid is a Crime against Humanity, and applies to all cases where policies are implemented “for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them”. The convention gave examples of policies that are often used to establish and maintain this domination, all of which are used by the Israeli authorities against non-Jews and particularly against Arabs.
In 1967, Israel occupied the WB and GS, ethnically cleansing a further 250,000 Palestinians from their homes after 720,000 were ethnically cleansed in 1948. Both the WB and GS are populated by large number of Palestinians and this has placed Israel in a dilemma. This is because it wants to control the land but escape responsibility for the Palestinians, so in response it created fenced-in Bantustans in GS and the WB.
Israel has built 24 foot high and 720km long (double the length of the Green Line) concrete Wall. It is clear that the wall does not run along the Green Line, which separates Israel from the WB, but rather runs through the WB. This means the annexing Palestinian land and divides the WB into small Bantustans. Furthermore it hugely restricts the movement of Palestinians within the WB.
As well as the Wall over 300 Israeli checkpoints and roadblocks divide the WB into 420 different enclaves with no freedom of movement for Palestinians between them. Settler -only highways are off limits for Palestinians who are forced to drive with different colour number plates to distinguish them from Israeli settlers.
Palestinians in the WB are subject to a different set of laws to Israeli settlers living in the same area. The military laws that apply to Palestinians in the WB regulate every aspect of life.
Curfews are regularly placed on Palestinian areas that place all residents under de-facto house arrest. The city of Nablus, for example, was under 24-hour curfew for 5 consecutive months in 2002.
In the WB/GS, Israeli soldiers and police have killed over 4,850 Palestinians since September 2000.
Since 1967, more than 650,000 Palestinians have been detained. Currently over 10,000 Palestinians from the WB/GS are being held as political prisoners, more than 2,000 without ever being charged or facing trial. The Israeli military will regularly drive through Palestinian areas and call for all Palestinian males between 15 and 50 to leave their houses and gather in a central area where they will be detained.
Torture is used against virtually every Palestinian arrested by the Israeli military or police. Regular beatings, being tied in contorted positions, denial of food and prevention of the use of the bathroom are common experiences in Israeli prisons.
Around 18,000 Palestinian homes have been demolished since 1967. These demolitions often occur without warning where residents are forced to flee their homes with whatever belongings they can carry.
But the apartheid label should not be restricted to the post-1967 occupation. There is a more fundamental form of apartheid of which the occupation is nothing more than a manifestation.
Apartheid in historic Palestine originated, and has persisted, in the ideology of creating a state in which Jews would be separated from non-Jews in their stake in the political community. It was an apartheid mentality that nourished the desire of establishing and maintaining a state with a Jewish demographic majority and character. It is apartheid law that creates a wall of discrimination between Jewish and Arab citizens of the Israeli state. It is an Apartheid mentality that prompts some Israeli Jews to view their Arabs living under Israel as a “demographic threat”.
Section 7A of the Israeli Basic Law prevents anyone running for the Israeli Knesset (parliament) if they do not recognize Israel as a Jewish state and thus bars anyone who wants to change the apartheid character of the state by parliamentary participation.
The Jewish National Fund (JNF) owns around 14% of the land in Israel, and is prohibited by its constitution from selling or leasing this land to Palestinians, around 2/3 of this land was taken from Palestinian refugees. Through its 50% representation on the council of the Israel Lands Administration (ILA), the JNF has a substantial influence over more than 93% of the land in Israel.
Some Israeli towns set criteria that prevent Arab citizens from purchasing homes or living in the town. The Israeli state regularly passes legislations that prevent Arab from reaching their lands or redefines areas as nature reserves or forests that can then be confiscated.
There are over 100,000 (9% of Palestinian citizens of Israel) Palestinian citizens of Israel living in villages that the Israeli government does not officially recognise. These villages existed prior to the establishment of Israel but were simply declared as non-existent with the adoption of the Israeli Planning and Construction Law in 1965 and do not appear on any map. Although the residents of these villages are officially Israeli citizens, they are denied basic services such as housing, water, electricity, education and health care. Furthermore the Israeli authorities regularly demolish some of these villages.
Up to 420,000 of Arabs living under Israel are internal refugees “internally displaced persons” in Israel, between 46,000 and 48,000 Arabs became displaced in 1949 within what became Israel. Over fifty years later, this group (including the children of the displaced) represents about 150,000 to 200,000 persons. If you also include the Bedouins who were ordered in 1949 to move into a close area under military rule in the Negev and now for the most part live in “unrecognized villages”, the estimate the number of displaced is 250,000-420,000.
The well-planned ethnic cleansing, in 1948, of 720,000 indigenous people was apartheid practice par excellence. It is apartheid which prevents the expelled and their descendants from returning: this apartheid denies residence to expellees from the Galilee, but grants it, not just to Israeli-born Jews, but to Jews all over the world.
Since 1948, the Israeli military and police have continually carried out massacres of Palestinians who are living under Israel, in the WB and the GS and those in neighbouring countries. For example, in 1956, Israeli police in Kufr Qassem killed 49 Palestinian citizens of Israel after a curfew was placed on the village without warning.
Another argument I often hear is “if Israel was an apartheid, Arabs in Israel would not be able to vote” which completely ignores the fact that Arabs living under Israel today are the remains of the Arab population who still live there despite all the efforts by Israel to expel them. They are merely allowed the to vote in Israeli elections because they are a minority in the Israeli political system that has their voices sidelined. The fact that Palestinians within Israel have the right to vote is nothing more than a way to hide the reality of apartheid and does not undermine the apartheid nature of the state of Israel.
The past few years have seen a significant increase of literature and analysis which has argued that Israel is apartheid state. Also figures in the anti apartheid struggle in South Africa, including figures such as Nelson Mandela, and archbishop Desmond Tutu who has repeatedly made the statement that the Israeli occupation of Palestine is analogous if not worse than South African apartheid. Even the current Israeli PM tactfully acknowledged apartheid when he said in an interview with an Israeli newspaper: “If the two-state solution collapsed we (Israel) would face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights”.
Naji Mohamed
najimohamed@actionpalestine.org
A peaceful event to spread awareness about the wall in Palestine took place in Nottingham University (see video). The university security clamped down very heavily without good reason; violating the rights of students to be politically active. Also the police was called by the university and 2 arrests were made and the protesters were made to take the wall down!
Below is an article covering the incidents in the a local news paper this is Nottingham:
UNI ARREST SPARKS FREE SPEECH ROW
From www.thisisnottingham.co.uk
Footage showing the arrest of a University of Nottingham student during a campus protest has sparked a freedom of speech campaign on the internet.
A video of the arrest is currently posted on the YouTube website, while a Facebook group called Bring Back Freedom of Speech to University has attracted 900 members.
The 22-year-old student, who has asked not to be named, did not organise the event, meant to raise awareness of the Israel-Palestine conflict, and was initially a bystander.
Second-year law student Glen Wright started filming the protest when police were called. The video shows a police officer arguing with the unnamed student before arresting him for alleged breach of the peace.
The student told the Evening Post: “They shouldn’t have arrested me. As the video shows I was being slightly cocky, but that is no grounds for arrest.”
Students blocked a path near the university’s library with a wooden board, to represent the West Bank Wall. Security officers asked them to remove the board, and called police when the students refused.
The protest was organised by Nidal Hajaj, a second-year sociology student who is president of the university’s Palestinian Society. The group was given permission to have a protest stall on the university campus, but not to use the wooden board.
Mr Hajaj said: “I put the wall up and immediately a member of security came over. We said to them there was nothing illegal about it. It was blocking a path, but there was another path going around it.”
Glen Wright became involved after witnessing the argument between students and security staff.
He said: “I’m familiar with the law [being a law student] and realised what was happening was out of order.
“I couldn’t believe what was happening, all over this little ‘wall’.”
A spokesperson for Notts Police confirmed a 22-year-old student was arrested.
A spokesperson for the University of Nottingham said: “The protesters were asked repeatedly by university security staff to take the wall down so that the students could continue with the protest in the manner in which they had agreed.”
The students refused.
The video shows a police officer telling the student now at the centre of the campaign: “You are inflaming the situation.”
The police officer and student are then heard arguing.
Introduction: Each year, hundreds of Palestinian children from the Occupied Palestinian Territories are arrested, interrogated, and imprisoned by the Israeli military authorities. Since 1992, Defence for Children International/Palestine Section (DCI/PS) has represented many of these children in Israeli military courts, monitoring the conditions of their detention, and intervening with relevant institutions and government bodies in order to improve their situation.
What DCI/PS has witnessed repeatedly through their work with Palestinian child prisoners, and what has been confirmed by other human rights organizations working within the areas under Israeli occupation, are widespread and systematic violations of international law designed to safeguard the rights of children deprived of their liberty.
While international law states that child imprisonment should be used as a measure of last resort, the Israeli occupation forces view it as a matter of routine, arresting around 750 minors in 2002. Over the course of 2002, draconian laws were used with greater frequency against children, including Administrative Detention orders which allow for detention without published evidence and military order 1500, which means that children can be detained for up to 12 days (previously 18) without a court appearance or legal consultation. In 2003, these military orders continue to be invoked against children, with around 400 arrests to end-September. At the end of 2003, military order 1500 was altered so that children can be detained for up to eight days without a court appearance or legal consultation.
When children are arrested they are usually taken to adult military detention centres and interrogation centres. There are no specialist juvenile facilities, courts or personnel within the Israeli system apart from Telmond prison which houses around 70 of 350 child prisoners. Frequently, we hear of cases where children are forced to sign confessions, where they are beaten and handcuffed, or subjected to positional abuse, or shabeh (see factsheets for more). Meanwhile, children deprived of their liberty are often denied access to healthcare and education, adequate nutrition, hygiene and recreation time. Family visits are a rare privilege due to travel restrictions on the Palestinian population and frequent detention within Israeli military bases or settlements. Not surprisingly, psycho-social studies indicate that the impact of imprisonment and the horrific experiences suffered by child prisoners has a significant impact on their future development as individuals.
However, the statistics suggest that the situation continues to deteriorate unrelentingly, with an increased number of arrests, an increase in cases against younger children (14 and under) and a marked trend towards longer sentencing. For instance, the longest sentences of over 3 years were not used at all in 2001, but in 2002, 17 children were sentenced to detention of between 5-10 years.
The information provided on this website is based on DCI/PS’s experience in working with Palestinian child prisoners. It is designed both to raise awareness of the issue as well as to mobilize people to engage in advocacy efforts to bring about Israel’s compliance with international law.