NOVEMBER 2005
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
(1)Public Statement
AI Index: MDE 15/051/2005 (Public) News Service No: 269
7 October 2005
Israel/Occupied Territories:
Prolonged closure of the Gaza-Egypt border and arbitrary restrictions to freedom of movement should be lifted Amnesty International is concerned at the continued closure of the Rafah crossing between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, as a result of which some one and a half million Palestinians who live in the Gaza Strip are denied the possibility to travel.
The closure restricts the access to health and education of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and constitutes an arbitrary restriction of the right to freedom of movement and of the right to leave and return to one's own country.
Since the Israeli army redeployed its troops from inside the Gaza Strip on 12 September 2005, Israel has imposed a closure on the Rafah crossing. The only exceptions since then have been a one and a half day period on 23-24 September, when the border was opened to allow Palestinians both to leave and return to the Gaza Strip, and a period of a few hours on 3 October, when the border was partially opened to allow Palestinians stranded on the Egyptian side of the border to return to Gaza on the eve of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.
Some Palestinians in need of urgent medical care not available in the Gaza Strip may be granted permission by Israel to cross the border into Egypt, but such permits are difficult to obtain. In the five days immediately following the redeployment of Israeli troops from the Gaza Strip many Palestinians defied the restrictions and crossed into Egypt through openings in the border fence, which were subsequently re-sealed by Palestinian and Egyptian security forces. On 12 September, the final day of its redeployment from the Gaza Strip, the Israeli army issued a military order announcing the end of Israeli military rule in the Gaza Strip (http://www1.idf.il/DOVER/site/mainpage.asp?sl=EN&id=7&clr=1&docid=45427.EN).
The Israeli authorities contend that the redeployment of their troops from the Gaza Strip constitutes the end of Israel's occupation of the Gaza Strip and that consequently Israel is no longer bound by its obligations as an occupying power under international law. However, Israel continues to control all the entry/exits points into the Gaza Strip, including its border crossing with Egypt, its territorial waters and its airspace. The movement of every Palestinian, as well as the movement of any visitors, in and out of the Gaza Strip remains subject to permission being granted by the Israeli authorities.
At present, Israel refuses to allow the Rafah crossing to reopen and is seeking to impose a new arrangement whereby Palestinians leaving or returning to the Gaza Strip must pass through the Israeli Kerem Shalom Israeli army base inside Israel, near the south-eastern tip of the Gaza Strip. This would require Palestinians to go to the Gaza side of the Rafah crossing and then travel from there by special bus eastward along the Gaza-Egypt border into Israel to the Kerem Shalom Israeli army base. After being checked there by Israeli soldiers, they would be returned by special bus to the Rafah crossing, where those who had received Israeli permission could then cross through the border point from the Gaza Strip into Egypt.
Both the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the Egyptian government are opposed to this Israeli requirement. While the deadlock continues Israel refuses to allow the Rafah crossing to reopen and the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip are thereby prevented from leaving and/or returning to the Gaza Strip. As a result many Palestinians are denied adequate medical care, education and employment opportunities, and contacts with their families. Amnesty International is concerned that such an arrangement will effectively impose further arbitrary restrictions and delays on Palestinians seeking to leave or to return to the Gaza Strip. Prior to the redeployment of Israeli troops from the Gaza Strip, and especially in the past five years, most of the Palestinian inhabitants of the Gaza Strip were not able to leave the Gaza Strip, due to the frequent closures by the Israeli army of the Rafah crossing, or because Israel refused them permission to travel, or simply because they could not afford to spend days at the Rafah crossing waiting to pass.
Amnesty International calls on the Israeli authorities to ensure that whatever arrangement is made for the reopening of the Rafah crossing, it should be one that respects the human rights of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The organization also calls on the Israeli authorities to allow freedom of movement for Palestinians between the Gaza Strip and the rest of the Occupied Territories in the West Bank. For the past decade Israel has continued to bar the movement of Palestinians between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, except for very rare special cases; during the past five years, the restrictions imposed by Israel have been further tightened, even for such special cases.
(2)Public Statement
AI Index: MDE 15/050/2005 (Public) News Service No: 269
7 October 2005
Israel/Occupied Territories:
High court ban on army's use of "human shields" is a welcome development Amnesty International welcomes the banning, by Israel's High Court, of the use of Palestinians as "human shields" by the Israeli army. The long-awaited High Court ruling of 6 October 2005 came in response to a petition filed in May 2002 by several Israeli and Palestinian human rights organizations seeking a ban of the practice, which endangered the lives of the Palestinians who were used as "human shields" and violated international law, notably Article 51 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
In recent years, Amnesty International investigated tens of cases where the Israeli army used Palestinians, children as well as adults, as "human shields" during military operations in towns and refugee camps throughout the Occupied Territories. Palestinian civilians were forced to walk in front of Israeli soldiers who, at times, fired their weapons while shielding themselves behind the civilians. As well, Palestinian civilians were made to enter houses ahead of Israeli soldiers to check for explosives or gunmen hiding inside, to inspect suspicious objects, to stay in their houses when Israeli soldiers took them over to use as sniper positions, or to enter the houses of wanted, possibly armed, Palestinians to tell them to surrender to Israeli forces. The High Court failed to rule on the issue for three and a half years after receiving the petition calling for the practice to be outlawed. During this time, the Israeli army continued to use Palestinians as "human shields" and, in response to the petition, claimed that Palestinians were used only to perform tasks to which they agreed and which the military commander deemed safe. The army initially referred to the practice as "neighbourhood procedure" and subsequently as "prior warning procedure".
In August 2002, the High Court issued a temporary injunction banning the use of Palestinians as "human shields" after a 19-year-old Palestinian was killed while being used in this way by Israeli soldiers, but several months later, in January 2003, the court reduced the scope of the injunction to enable the army to use its so-called “prior warning procedure”. In practice, however, as Amnesty International and other human rights organizations made clear, Palestinians in the Occupied Territories who Israeli soldiers ordered or asked to carry out certain tasks in support of their military operations were not in a position where they could freely give their informed consent for fear that any refusal would result in punishment or other reprisals. In the meantime, the Israeli army continued to use Palestinian as "human shields", putting their lives in danger, under the cover of the "prior warning procedure".
The ban on the use of Palestinians as "human shields" issued by the High Court includes a ban on the use of the so-called "prior warning procedure", recognizing that the use of civilians in military operations against their will violates international law. Amnesty International considers the ban a positive development and urges the High Court to now also consider other petitions concerning fundamental human rights, that have been pending for years. These include petitions asking the High Court to outlaw the extrajudicial executions of wanted Palestinians by Israeli forces and a discriminatory law that bars family unification for Israeli citizens who marry Palestinians from the Occupied Territories.