Adalah: We will Seek the Establishment of an Independent, Impartial Investigatory Committee with the Participation of International Experts in Response to AG Mazuz’s Decision to Close the October 2000 Killings Cases
None of the police officers or commanders involved in the fatal shootings of Palestinian citizens of Israel in October 2000 will face criminal indictment, the Attorney General of Israel, Menachem Mazuz, announced yesterday, Sunday, 27 January 2008. His announcement officially closes the case against police over the deaths and injuries of Palestinian Arab citizens who demonstrated in towns and villages across Israel in October 2000 against the government’s oppressive policies towards Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The police used snipers, live ammunition and rubber-coated steel bullets to disperse the unarmed demonstrators, which led to the thirteen deaths and to thousands of injuries.
Mazuz argued in his decision that there was a lack of sufficient evidence to issue criminal indictments against the police officers and commanders. He further found that the police who shot the victims faced direct threats to their lives. This situation, he claimed, necessitated the use of operational judgment and negates criminal responsibility. Thus, even if it could be proven that police officers fired the fatal bullets, it nevertheless could be argued that the shootings were justified.
Mazuz’s perception, as revealed in his decision, is that Arab citizens of Israel are enemies of the state, and as a result the police possess wide discretion to open fire on them. Further, according to the Mazuz, the police officers were facing a real and immediate threat to their lives. These perceptions were sharply criticized by the Official Commission of Inquiry (Or Commission) into the October 2000 events, which issued in its final report in September 2003. In the report, the Or Commission recommended that the Israeli police stop relating to the Arab citizens as enemies. In addition, the Or Commission’s clearly concluded that the use of snipers and the use of live ammunition by other police officers was illegal and that the demonstrators posed no immediate and real threat to the lives of police officers. In Adalah’s view, trust cannot be placed in the Attorney General, who continues to relate to Arab citizens as enemies.
In response to the decision, Adalah stated its intention to seek international justice in these cases. “We will not approach the Supreme Court in these cases. We have now exhausted all legal proceedings in Israel. We will seek the involvement of the United Nations and other international foraâ€, stated Attorney Hassan Jabareen, the General Director of Adalah, at a press conference held yesterday, the 27 January 2008, following the Attorney General’s decision. The press conference was held jointly by the High-Follow up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel, the Committee of the Victims’ Families and Adalah.
At the press conference, Mr. Shawqi Khatib, the Chairman of the High-Follow up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel stated, “This is a black day for justice and human rights and for the hopes of equality and respect between the peoples. Mazuz, with his deafness, has legitimized the killing and the result is that Arab blood flows freely.â€
Hassan Asleh, the father of Asel Asleh who was killed by police in October 2000 and the head of the Committee of the Victims’ Families, also spoke at the press conference. He read out the names of the thirteen Palestinian youths killed in October 2000 and those police officers and commanders responsible for each of their deaths. He promised that the family members would continue in their struggle for justice.
Mazuz’s decision endorsed the report on police conduct during the events of October 2000 released by Ministry of Justice’s Police Investigations Department (“Mahashâ€) in September 2005. In the report, Mahash announced its decision to close all the investigation files against police officers and commanders implicated in the October 2000 deaths on the pretext of lack of evidence.
Following the release of Mahash’s report, and as a result of public pressure, the Attorney General decided to conduct a review of the decision, and to this end appointed a special investigatory committee within the State Attorney’s Office to review the files. At the time and today, Adalah argues that the decision to review Mahash’s report within the State Attorney’s Office lacked all integrity because the office is headed by current State Attorney Eran Shendar. Shendar was the Director of Mahash during October 2000 and bears direct responsibility for the failure to open an immediate investigation into the police officers and commanders responsible for the deaths.
In October 2006, Adalah submitted a comprehensive report entitled “The Accused†to the Attorney General, in which it addressed the shortcomings and failures of the law enforcement authorities – first and foremost Mahash – in investigating the October 2000 killings. The report primarily exposes Mahash’s negligent work and its failure to fulfill its duty to investigate the criminal offenses committed by police in October 2000. In addition, the report discloses how Mahash concealed significant facts from the public and issued a falsified report regarding the events. Mazuz’s decision included specific responses to “The Accused†report.
For more information, see a special web-report on the October 2000 Killings
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9134.shtml
Statement, Various undersigned, 29 November 2007
Editor’s Note: The following statement was issued by participants in the July 2007 Madrid meeting on a one-state solution and the November 2007 London Conference.
For decades, efforts to bring about a two-state solution in historic Palestine have failed to provide justice and peace for the Palestinian and Israeli Jewish peoples, or to offer a genuine process leading towards them.
The two-state solution ignores the physical and political realities on the ground, and presumes a false parity in power and moral claims between a colonized and occupied people on the one hand and a colonizing state and military occupier on the other. It is predicated on the unjust premise that peace can be achieved by granting limited national rights to Palestinians living in the areas occupied in 1967, while denying the rights of Palestinians inside the 1948 borders and in the Diaspora. Thus, the two-state solution condemns Palestinian citizens of Israel to permanent second-class status within their homeland, in a racist state that denies their rights by enacting laws that privilege Jews constitutionally, legally, politically, socially and culturally. Moreover, the two-state solution denies Palestinian refugees their internationally recognized right of return.
The two-state solution entrenches and formalizes a policy of unequal separation on a land that has become ever more integrated territorially and economically. All the international efforts to implement a two-state solution cannot conceal the fact that a Palestinian state is not viable, and that Palestinian and Israeli Jewish independence in separate states cannot resolve fundamental injustices, the acknowledgment and redress of which are at the core of any just solution.
In light of these stark realities, we affirm our commitment to a democratic solution that will offer a just, and thus enduring, peace in a single state based on the following principles:
* The historic land of Palestine belongs to all who live in it and to those who were expelled or exiled from it since 1948, regardless of religion, ethnicity, national origin or current citizenship status;
* Any system of government must be founded on the principle of equality in civil, political, social and cultural rights for all citizens. Power must be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all people in the diversity of their identities;
* There must be just redress for the devastating effects of decades of Zionist colonization in the pre- and post-state period, including the abrogation of all laws, and ending all policies, practices and systems of military and civil control that oppress and discriminate on the basis of ethnicity, religion or national origin;
* The recognition of the diverse character of the society, encompassing distinct religious, linguistic and cultural traditions, and national experiences;
* The creation of a non-sectarian state that does not privilege the rights of one ethnic or religious group over another and that respects the separation of state from all organized religion;
* The implementation of the Right of Return for Palestinian refugees in accordance with UN Resolution 194 is a fundamental requirement for justice, and a benchmark of the respect for equality;
* The creation of a transparent and nondiscriminatory immigration policy;
* The recognition of the historic connections between the diverse communities inside the new, democratic state and their respective fellow communities outside;
* In articulating the specific contours of such a solution, those who have been historically excluded from decision-making — especially the Palestinian Diaspora and its refugees, and Palestinians inside Israel — must play a central role;
* The establishment of legal and institutional frameworks for justice and reconciliation.
The struggle for justice and liberation must be accompanied by a clear, compelling and moral vision of the destination — a solution in which all people who share a belief in equality can see a future for themselves and others. We call for the widest possible discussion, research and action to advance a unitary, democratic solution and bring it to fruition.
Madrid and London, 2007
Signed:
Ali Abunimah
Naseer Aruri
Omar Barghouti
Oren Ben-Dor
George Bisharat
Haim Bresheeth
Jonathan Cook
Ghazi Falah
Leila Farsakh
Islah Jad
Joseph Massad
Ilan Pappe
Carlos Prieto del Campo
Nadim Rouhana
The London One State Group
On Tuesday evening, over 20 LSE students silently occupied a meeting of LSE’s governing body for over 30 minutes in protest at LSE Director Howard Davies’ implicit support for the Israeli occupation of Palestine.
Holding up banners stating “Academic Freedom for All” and “Equal Rights for Palestinians”, the students peacefully entered an LSE Council meeting, the monthly meeting of LSE’s 25 directors, bringing it to a halt, and reissued a request for a meeting with Davies to discuss the issue, as well as that a statement be displayed on the LSE website recognising the right to education for Palestinians. After lengthy deliberation, and threatening to ask security to forcibly remove the students, Davies and Council Chair, Lord Grabiner, reluctantly agreed to attend a meeting and that a statement would be issued that acknowledged Palestinians’ right to education.
LSE staff and students had twice written to Davies to protest his stance against any debate of a boycott of Israeli academic institutions, as proposed by the UCU (University and College Union) in May 2007. In two subsequent responses (22 June 2007 and 5 September 2007) Davies had refused outright to meet with student representatives. He also declined to address or recognise the desperate condition of Palestinian academic institutions, stating that the School “has no corporate position” on this matter.
Widespread student outcry emerged after Davies posted a controversial statement on the LSE website condemning the UCU resolution and any debate on the issue, ignoring entirely the plight of Palestinians.
LSE students, staff and alumni wrote a joint letter to Davies in response. The letter, signed by most of the LSE Students Union Executive and more than 100 students, staff, alumni and heads of student societies, expressed concern at Davies’ apparent opposition to the free expression of opinion and debate on campus. The letter also questioned the school’s continued silence on “the massive Israeli assault on Palestinian academic institutions and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Palestinians, including freedom of expression, association and movement and the right to education.”
The letter went on to note that “the speed with which the School appeared to oppose any sanctions on Israeli academic institutions, while remaining silent on the desperate conditions facing Palestinian academic institutions, is bound to have created the impression of bias.”
Seph Brown, spokesperson for the LSE Students’ Union Palestinian Society, stated:
“As a Director of a world-class academic institution, Howard Davies should represent a balanced and fair perspective, especially on the issue of the colonization of Palestine. To condemn the discussion of an academic boycott of Israel, but to then ignore their blatant disruption and devastation of Palestinian academic freedom is entirely hypocritical. Davies is ignoring the existence of the hardships and suffering of Palestinian students all together.”
“We hope now that Davies will keep his promise and attend a meeting with the students who pay his wages and that the subsequent statement on the LSE website will finally recognise the right to education for Palestinians.”
Gaza – Ma’an – A Palestinian man suffering from a heart attack died Tuesday after Israeli forces twice refused to allow his ambulance to enter Israel where he was to be treated.
A Palestinian human rights group is saying Israeli soldiers fired on the ambulance.
According to the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), Seventy-seven-year-old Nemer Mohammed Salim Shuhaiber from Gaza City was admitted to the intensive care unit at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City on Sunday suffering an acute heart attack. The Palestinian Ministry of Health ordered Shuhaiber to be transferred to an Israeli hospital for further treatment.
By Monday, the Health Ministry had secured Israeli approval for the transfer. When the ambulance carrying Shuhaiber and his two sons arrived at Erez border crossing, PHCR said, Israeli soldiers fired on the vehicle, forcing it to return Gaza City.
Medical officials made a second attempt to transfer the patient on Tuesday. This time, PHCR said, the ambulance was delayed for five hours at the border while Israeli soldiers inspected the ambulance. Shuhaiber, still in serious condition, was laid on the ground in direct sunlight for over an hour. At the end of the inspection, the border guards order the ambulance back to Gaza, where Shuhaiber died.
Shuhaiber also reportedly suffered from diabetes and hypertension.
According to PHCR, this is the fifth death in six months resulting from the obstruction of ambulances at Erez crossing.