3 nov 2009
Israeli army chief: We will return to Gaza
Israel's next battle will be in Gaza, the country's military Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi told a cadre of graduating military officers at a graduation ceremony broadcast over Israel Radio on Tuesday.
“The army will return to face the places where they [Gaza militants] launch rockets which is in the most densely populated areas, [soldiers will return] to fight in the villages, cities, mosques, hospitals, kindergartens and schools because the enemies want to impose this method of fighting against Israel,” Ashkenazi said.
The official's statements came during the graduation ceremony of new ground force officers of the ground forces, and elicited harsh criticism from Hamas officials in Gaza.
Responding to what he described as an inflammatory speech, Hamas spokesperson Fawzi Barhoum said Ashkenazi's rhetoric only reflected the depth of the Israeli "crisis of occupation."
Earlier in the day Israeli military intelligence chief Amos Yadlin had accused Hamas of using the "calm" following Israel's war on Gaza as an opportunity to smuggle more weapons into the Strip. He said Hamas has an Iranian missile that can reach the 60 kilometers to Tel Aviv.
Barhoum responded by accusing Israel of having tested weapons in Gaza that it planned to use in the subsequent attack, and said such an offensive would only be designed to sideline the Goldstone report.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=237161
Goldstone asks US House to amend resolution on report
"False" and "inaccurate" were the words used by South African Justice Richard Goldtstone when he described the allegations of the resolution in front of the US House of Representatives calling for the condemnation of his UN-mandated report.
The House is set to discuss the resolution on Tuesday. A condemnation would almost guarantee a US veto of the report once it gets to the UN Security Council, a move the UN General Assembly is expected to push forward in a meeting earlier the same day.
The document in front of the House set forth a series of clauses it said resulted in the report being illegal, and not something the US should support.
Justice Richard Goldstone himself responded to 15 of the clauses in an open letter, calling them misleading, misunderstood or completely false.
According to a letter from Goldstone, the resolution before the House says his report “pre-judged the outcome of its investigation,” “makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks,” “repeatedly made sweeping and unsubstantiated determinations,” etc.
He asked US representatives to “take the time to consider my comments about the resolution and, as a result of that consideration, make the necessary corrections” to the inaccuracies.
Early speculation on the resolution was that it would be passed since it echoes the sentiments of the State Department in its allegations that the report is “unbalanced.” The State Department, however, also called for serious investigations into the allegations of the Goldstone report, which is also what a resolution set to go before the UN General Assembly later Wednesday, calls for.
Goldstone's response to the House resolution is in keeping with his stance on much of the international condemnation of his report, which he says fails to take the substance of the report into account.
One of his responses to the US resolution was:
Whereas clause #3 (Of the US resolution): “Whereas the mandate of the `fact-finding mission’ makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks, which numbered in the thousands and spanned a period of eight years, by Hamas and other violent militant groups in Gaza against civilian targets in Israel, that necessitated Israel’s defensive measures;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. As noted above, the expanded mandate clearly included the rocket and mortar attacks. Moreover, Chapter XXIV of the Report considers in detail the relentless rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel and the terror they caused to the people living within their range. The resulting finding made in the report is that these attacks constituted serious war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity.
The 14 other point-by-point refutations are in a similar vein, and draw out misconceptions often cited by American and Israeli officials.
The full text of the letter follows:
The Honorable Howard Berman
Chairman, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Ranking Member, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
October 29, 2009
Dear Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen,
It has come to my attention that a resolution has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives regarding the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which I led earlier this year.
I fully respect the right of the US Congress to examine and judge my mission and the resulting report, as well as to make its recommendations to the US Executive branch of government. However, I have strong reservations about the text of the resolution in question – text that includes serious factual inaccuracies and instances where information and statements are taken grossly out of context.
I undertook this fact-finding mission in good faith, just as I undertook my responsibilities vis à vis the South African Standing Commission of Inquiry Regarding Public Violence and Intimidation, the International War Crimes Tribunal on the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the International Panel of the Commission of Enquiry into the Activities of Nazism in Argentina, the Independent International Commission on Kosovo, and the Volker Committee investigation into the UN’s Iraq oil-for-food program in 2004/5.
I hope that you, in similar good faith, will take the time to consider my comments about the resolution and, as a result of that consideration, make the necessary corrections.
Whereas clause #1: “Whereas, on January 12, 2009, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed Resolution A/HRC/S-9/L.1, which authorized a `fact-finding mission’ regarding Israel’s conduct of Operation Cast Lead against violent militants in the Gaza Strip between December 27, 2008, and January 18, 2009;”
This whereas clause ignores the fact that I and others refused this original mandate, precisely because it only called for an investigation into violations committed by Israel. The mandate given to and accepted by me and under which we worked and reported reads as follows:
“. . .to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza during the period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009, whether before, during or after”.
Whereas clause #2: “Whereas the resolution pre-judged the outcome of its investigation, by one-sidedly mandating the `fact-finding mission’ to `investigate all violations of international human rights law and International Humanitarian Law by . . . Israel, against the Palestinian people . . . particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression’”
This whereas clause ignores the fact that the expanded mandate that I demanded and received clearly included rocket and mortar attacks on Israel and as the report makes clear was so interpreted and implemented. It was the report carried out under this broadened mandate – not the original, rejected mandate – that was adopted by the Human Rights Council and that included the serious findings made against Hamas and other militant Palestinian groups.
Whereas clause #3: “Whereas the mandate of the `fact-finding mission’ makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks, which numbered in the thousands and spanned a period of eight years, by Hamas and other violent militant groups in Gaza against civilian targets in Israel, that necessitated Israel’s defensive measures;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. As noted above, the expanded mandate clearly included the rocket and mortar attacks. Moreover, Chapter XXIV of the Report considers in detail the relentless rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel and the terror they caused to the people living within their range. The resulting finding made in the report is that these attacks constituted serious war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity.
Whereas clause #4: “Whereas the `fact-finding mission’ included a member who, before joining the mission, had already declared Israel guilty of committing atrocities in Operation Cast Lead by signing a public letter on January 11, 2009, published in the Sunday Times, that called Israel’s actions `war crimes’;”
This whereas clause is misleading. It overlooks, or neglects to mention, that the member concerned, Professor Christine Chinkin of the London School of Economics, in the same letter, together with other leading international lawyers, also condemned as war crimes the Hamas rockets fired into Israel.
Whereas clause #5: “Whereas the mission’s flawed and biased mandate gave serious concern to many United Nations Human Rights Council Member States which refused to support it, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. The mandate that was given to the Mission was certainly not opposed by all or even a majority of the States to which reference is made. I am happy to provide further details if necessary.
Whereas clause #6: “Whereas the mission’s flawed and biased mandate troubled many distinguished individuals who refused invitations to head the mission;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. The initial mandate that was rejected by others who were invited to head the mission was the same one that I rejected. The mandate I accepted was expanded by the President of the Human Rights Council as a result of conditions I made.
Whereas clause #8: “Whereas the report repeatedly made sweeping and unsubstantiated determinations that the Israeli military had deliberately attacked civilians during Operation Cast Lead;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. The findings included in the report are neither “sweeping” nor “unsubstantiated” and in effect reflect 188 individual interviews, review of more than 300 reports, 30 videos and 1200 photographs. Additionally, the body of the report contains a plethora of references to the information upon which the Commission relied for our findings.
Whereas clause #9: “Whereas the authors of the report, in the body of the report itself, admit that `we did not deal with the issues . . . regarding the problems of conducting military operations in civilian areas and second-guessing decisions made by soldiers and their commanding officers `in the fog of war.’;”
This whereas clause is misleading. The words quoted relate to the decision we made that it would have been unfair to investigate and make finding on situations where decisions had been made by Israeli soldiers “in the fog of battle”. This was a decision made in favor of, and not against, the interests of Israel.
Whereas clause #10: “Whereas in the October 16th edition of the Jewish Daily Forward, Richard Goldstone, the head of the `United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’, is quoted as saying, with respect to the mission’s evidence-collection methods, `If this was a court of law, there would have been nothing proven.’”
The remark as quoted is both inaccurate and taken completely out of context. What I had explained to The Forward was that the Report itself would not constitute evidence admissible in court of law. It is my view, as jurist, that investigators would have to investigate which allegations they considered relevant. That, too, was why we recommended domestic investigations into the allegations.
Whereas clause #11: “Whereas the report, in effect, denied the State of Israel the right to self- defense, and never noted the fact that Israel had the right to defend its citizens from the repeated violent attacks committed against civilian targets in southern Israel by Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations operating from Gaza;”
It is factually incorrect to state that the Report denied Israel the right of self-defense. The report examined how that right was implemented by the standards of international law. What is commonly called ius ad bellum, the right to use military force was not considered to fall within our mandate. Israel’s right to use military force was not questioned.
Whereas clause #12: “Whereas the report largely ignored the culpability of the Government of Iran and the Government of Syria, both of whom sponsor Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations;”
This whereas clause is misleading. Nowhere that I know of has it ever been suggested that the Mission should have investigated the provenance of the rockets. Such an investigation was never on the agenda, and in any event, we would not have had the facilities or capability of investigating these allegations. If the Government of Israel has requested us to investigate that issue I have no doubt that we have done our best to do so.
Whereas clause #14: “Whereas, notwithstanding a great body of evidence that Hamas and other violent Islamist groups committed war crimes by using civilians and civilian institutions, such as mosques, schools, and hospitals, as shields, the report repeatedly downplayed or cast doubt upon that claim;”
This is a sweeping and unfair characterization of the Report. I hope that the Report will be read by those tasked with considering the resolution. I note that the House resolution fails to mention that notwithstanding my repeated personal pleas to the Government of Israel, Israel refused all cooperation with the Mission. Among other things, I requested the views of Israel with regard to the implementation of the mandate and details of any issues that the Government of Israel might wish us to investigate.
This refusal meant that Israel did not offer any information or evidence it may have collected regarding actions by Hamas or other Palestinian groups in Gaza. Any omission of such information and evidence in the report is regrettable, but is the result of Israel’s decision not to cooperate with the Fact-Finding mission, not a decision by the mission to downplay or cast doubt on such information and evidence.
Whereas clause #15: “Whereas in one notable instance, the report stated that it did not consider the admission of a Hamas official that Hamas often `created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the mujahideen, against [the Israeli military]’ specifically to `constitute evidence that Hamas forced Palestinian civilians to shield military objectives against attack.’;”
This whereas clause is misleading, since the quotation is taken out of context. The quotation is part of a section of the report dealing with the very narrow allegation that Hamas compelled civilians, against their will, to act as human shields. The statement by the Hamas official is repugnant and demonstrates an apparent disregard for the safety of civilians, but it is not evidence that Hamas forced civilians to remain in their homes in order to act as human shields. Indeed, while the Government of Israel has alleged publicly that Hamas used Palestinian civilians as human shields, it has not identified any cases where it claims that civilians were doing so under threat of force by Hamas or any other party.
Whereas clause #16: “Whereas Hamas was able to significantly shape the findings of the investigation mission’s report by selecting and prescreening some of the witnesses and intimidating others, as the report acknowledges when it notes that `those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence of or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian armed groups . . . from a fear of reprisals’;”
The allegation that Hamas was able to shape the findings of my report or that it pre-screened the witnesses is devoid of truth. I challenge anyone to produce evidence in support of it.
Sincerely,
Justice Richard J. Goldstone
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236876
UN General Assembly set for Gaza debate
The UN General Assembly is scheduled to vote on Wednesday on a resolution that would send a UN report alleging war crimes in Gaza to the more powerful Security Council.
A draft resolution circulated by the Arab Group, published by Reuters, says the assembly "requests the Secretary-General to transmit the report ... to the Security Council." It also urges Israel and the Palestinians to comply with the report's recommendations for investigations into war crimes charges.
The UN Human Rights Council voted in October to refer the report to the UN bodies in New York. The draft resolution for the General Assembly does not explicitly endorse the language of that prior resolution.
The report, which accuses Israel and Palestinian fighters of committing war crimes during Israel’s war on Gaza last winter, is the result of an independent international fact-finding mission led by South African judge Richard Goldstone. The 22-day war left more than 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis dead.
The draft resolution would require UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to bring the 575-page document to the Security Council.
Most of the General Assembly’s 192 members are expected to support the resolution, while Western states will likely join Israel and the US in opposing it. The five permanent members of the Security Council -- the US, Britain, France, Russia and China – are also reported to oppose bringing the report to the higher body.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports that Britain and France are supporting an alternative initiative that would keep the Goldstone report out of the Security Council and send it back to the Human Rights Council in Geneva.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236910
EU: Israel and PA must probe Goldstone claims
A French-British initiative is to call on Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) to undertake independent investigations into allegations of war crimes in Gaza, an effort to relegate the Goldstone report to Geneva, out of the reach of the Security Council or the International Criminal Court.
According to the Israeli daily Haaretz, the new initiative is a list of “red lines” backed by 27 members of the EU and includes the assurance that the Goldstone report will not reach the Security Council or the International Criminal Court.
The initiative also calls for an independent investigation into Operation Cast Led to be undertaken by Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA), and setting a deadline for the new independent investigations. The initiative also included referring the Goldstone Report back to the Human Rights Council.
The newspaper noted that the proposal was discussed during a phone conversation between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The new EU-French initiative comes as the UN General Assembly prepares to discuss the Goldstone report on Wednesday.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236903
Israel's next battle will be in Gaza, the country's military Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi told a cadre of graduating military officers at a graduation ceremony broadcast over Israel Radio on Tuesday.
“The army will return to face the places where they [Gaza militants] launch rockets which is in the most densely populated areas, [soldiers will return] to fight in the villages, cities, mosques, hospitals, kindergartens and schools because the enemies want to impose this method of fighting against Israel,” Ashkenazi said.
The official's statements came during the graduation ceremony of new ground force officers of the ground forces, and elicited harsh criticism from Hamas officials in Gaza.
Responding to what he described as an inflammatory speech, Hamas spokesperson Fawzi Barhoum said Ashkenazi's rhetoric only reflected the depth of the Israeli "crisis of occupation."
Earlier in the day Israeli military intelligence chief Amos Yadlin had accused Hamas of using the "calm" following Israel's war on Gaza as an opportunity to smuggle more weapons into the Strip. He said Hamas has an Iranian missile that can reach the 60 kilometers to Tel Aviv.
Barhoum responded by accusing Israel of having tested weapons in Gaza that it planned to use in the subsequent attack, and said such an offensive would only be designed to sideline the Goldstone report.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=237161
Goldstone asks US House to amend resolution on report
"False" and "inaccurate" were the words used by South African Justice Richard Goldtstone when he described the allegations of the resolution in front of the US House of Representatives calling for the condemnation of his UN-mandated report.
The House is set to discuss the resolution on Tuesday. A condemnation would almost guarantee a US veto of the report once it gets to the UN Security Council, a move the UN General Assembly is expected to push forward in a meeting earlier the same day.
The document in front of the House set forth a series of clauses it said resulted in the report being illegal, and not something the US should support.
Justice Richard Goldstone himself responded to 15 of the clauses in an open letter, calling them misleading, misunderstood or completely false.
According to a letter from Goldstone, the resolution before the House says his report “pre-judged the outcome of its investigation,” “makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks,” “repeatedly made sweeping and unsubstantiated determinations,” etc.
He asked US representatives to “take the time to consider my comments about the resolution and, as a result of that consideration, make the necessary corrections” to the inaccuracies.
Early speculation on the resolution was that it would be passed since it echoes the sentiments of the State Department in its allegations that the report is “unbalanced.” The State Department, however, also called for serious investigations into the allegations of the Goldstone report, which is also what a resolution set to go before the UN General Assembly later Wednesday, calls for.
Goldstone's response to the House resolution is in keeping with his stance on much of the international condemnation of his report, which he says fails to take the substance of the report into account.
One of his responses to the US resolution was:
Whereas clause #3 (Of the US resolution): “Whereas the mandate of the `fact-finding mission’ makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks, which numbered in the thousands and spanned a period of eight years, by Hamas and other violent militant groups in Gaza against civilian targets in Israel, that necessitated Israel’s defensive measures;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. As noted above, the expanded mandate clearly included the rocket and mortar attacks. Moreover, Chapter XXIV of the Report considers in detail the relentless rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel and the terror they caused to the people living within their range. The resulting finding made in the report is that these attacks constituted serious war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity.
The 14 other point-by-point refutations are in a similar vein, and draw out misconceptions often cited by American and Israeli officials.
The full text of the letter follows:
The Honorable Howard Berman
Chairman, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Ranking Member, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
October 29, 2009
Dear Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen,
It has come to my attention that a resolution has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives regarding the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, which I led earlier this year.
I fully respect the right of the US Congress to examine and judge my mission and the resulting report, as well as to make its recommendations to the US Executive branch of government. However, I have strong reservations about the text of the resolution in question – text that includes serious factual inaccuracies and instances where information and statements are taken grossly out of context.
I undertook this fact-finding mission in good faith, just as I undertook my responsibilities vis à vis the South African Standing Commission of Inquiry Regarding Public Violence and Intimidation, the International War Crimes Tribunal on the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the International Panel of the Commission of Enquiry into the Activities of Nazism in Argentina, the Independent International Commission on Kosovo, and the Volker Committee investigation into the UN’s Iraq oil-for-food program in 2004/5.
I hope that you, in similar good faith, will take the time to consider my comments about the resolution and, as a result of that consideration, make the necessary corrections.
Whereas clause #1: “Whereas, on January 12, 2009, the United Nations Human Rights Council passed Resolution A/HRC/S-9/L.1, which authorized a `fact-finding mission’ regarding Israel’s conduct of Operation Cast Lead against violent militants in the Gaza Strip between December 27, 2008, and January 18, 2009;”
This whereas clause ignores the fact that I and others refused this original mandate, precisely because it only called for an investigation into violations committed by Israel. The mandate given to and accepted by me and under which we worked and reported reads as follows:
“. . .to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza during the period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009, whether before, during or after”.
Whereas clause #2: “Whereas the resolution pre-judged the outcome of its investigation, by one-sidedly mandating the `fact-finding mission’ to `investigate all violations of international human rights law and International Humanitarian Law by . . . Israel, against the Palestinian people . . . particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, due to the current aggression’”
This whereas clause ignores the fact that the expanded mandate that I demanded and received clearly included rocket and mortar attacks on Israel and as the report makes clear was so interpreted and implemented. It was the report carried out under this broadened mandate – not the original, rejected mandate – that was adopted by the Human Rights Council and that included the serious findings made against Hamas and other militant Palestinian groups.
Whereas clause #3: “Whereas the mandate of the `fact-finding mission’ makes no mention of the relentless rocket and mortar attacks, which numbered in the thousands and spanned a period of eight years, by Hamas and other violent militant groups in Gaza against civilian targets in Israel, that necessitated Israel’s defensive measures;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. As noted above, the expanded mandate clearly included the rocket and mortar attacks. Moreover, Chapter XXIV of the Report considers in detail the relentless rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel and the terror they caused to the people living within their range. The resulting finding made in the report is that these attacks constituted serious war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity.
Whereas clause #4: “Whereas the `fact-finding mission’ included a member who, before joining the mission, had already declared Israel guilty of committing atrocities in Operation Cast Lead by signing a public letter on January 11, 2009, published in the Sunday Times, that called Israel’s actions `war crimes’;”
This whereas clause is misleading. It overlooks, or neglects to mention, that the member concerned, Professor Christine Chinkin of the London School of Economics, in the same letter, together with other leading international lawyers, also condemned as war crimes the Hamas rockets fired into Israel.
Whereas clause #5: “Whereas the mission’s flawed and biased mandate gave serious concern to many United Nations Human Rights Council Member States which refused to support it, including Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. The mandate that was given to the Mission was certainly not opposed by all or even a majority of the States to which reference is made. I am happy to provide further details if necessary.
Whereas clause #6: “Whereas the mission’s flawed and biased mandate troubled many distinguished individuals who refused invitations to head the mission;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. The initial mandate that was rejected by others who were invited to head the mission was the same one that I rejected. The mandate I accepted was expanded by the President of the Human Rights Council as a result of conditions I made.
Whereas clause #8: “Whereas the report repeatedly made sweeping and unsubstantiated determinations that the Israeli military had deliberately attacked civilians during Operation Cast Lead;”
This whereas clause is factually incorrect. The findings included in the report are neither “sweeping” nor “unsubstantiated” and in effect reflect 188 individual interviews, review of more than 300 reports, 30 videos and 1200 photographs. Additionally, the body of the report contains a plethora of references to the information upon which the Commission relied for our findings.
Whereas clause #9: “Whereas the authors of the report, in the body of the report itself, admit that `we did not deal with the issues . . . regarding the problems of conducting military operations in civilian areas and second-guessing decisions made by soldiers and their commanding officers `in the fog of war.’;”
This whereas clause is misleading. The words quoted relate to the decision we made that it would have been unfair to investigate and make finding on situations where decisions had been made by Israeli soldiers “in the fog of battle”. This was a decision made in favor of, and not against, the interests of Israel.
Whereas clause #10: “Whereas in the October 16th edition of the Jewish Daily Forward, Richard Goldstone, the head of the `United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’, is quoted as saying, with respect to the mission’s evidence-collection methods, `If this was a court of law, there would have been nothing proven.’”
The remark as quoted is both inaccurate and taken completely out of context. What I had explained to The Forward was that the Report itself would not constitute evidence admissible in court of law. It is my view, as jurist, that investigators would have to investigate which allegations they considered relevant. That, too, was why we recommended domestic investigations into the allegations.
Whereas clause #11: “Whereas the report, in effect, denied the State of Israel the right to self- defense, and never noted the fact that Israel had the right to defend its citizens from the repeated violent attacks committed against civilian targets in southern Israel by Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations operating from Gaza;”
It is factually incorrect to state that the Report denied Israel the right of self-defense. The report examined how that right was implemented by the standards of international law. What is commonly called ius ad bellum, the right to use military force was not considered to fall within our mandate. Israel’s right to use military force was not questioned.
Whereas clause #12: “Whereas the report largely ignored the culpability of the Government of Iran and the Government of Syria, both of whom sponsor Hamas and other Foreign Terrorist Organizations;”
This whereas clause is misleading. Nowhere that I know of has it ever been suggested that the Mission should have investigated the provenance of the rockets. Such an investigation was never on the agenda, and in any event, we would not have had the facilities or capability of investigating these allegations. If the Government of Israel has requested us to investigate that issue I have no doubt that we have done our best to do so.
Whereas clause #14: “Whereas, notwithstanding a great body of evidence that Hamas and other violent Islamist groups committed war crimes by using civilians and civilian institutions, such as mosques, schools, and hospitals, as shields, the report repeatedly downplayed or cast doubt upon that claim;”
This is a sweeping and unfair characterization of the Report. I hope that the Report will be read by those tasked with considering the resolution. I note that the House resolution fails to mention that notwithstanding my repeated personal pleas to the Government of Israel, Israel refused all cooperation with the Mission. Among other things, I requested the views of Israel with regard to the implementation of the mandate and details of any issues that the Government of Israel might wish us to investigate.
This refusal meant that Israel did not offer any information or evidence it may have collected regarding actions by Hamas or other Palestinian groups in Gaza. Any omission of such information and evidence in the report is regrettable, but is the result of Israel’s decision not to cooperate with the Fact-Finding mission, not a decision by the mission to downplay or cast doubt on such information and evidence.
Whereas clause #15: “Whereas in one notable instance, the report stated that it did not consider the admission of a Hamas official that Hamas often `created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the mujahideen, against [the Israeli military]’ specifically to `constitute evidence that Hamas forced Palestinian civilians to shield military objectives against attack.’;”
This whereas clause is misleading, since the quotation is taken out of context. The quotation is part of a section of the report dealing with the very narrow allegation that Hamas compelled civilians, against their will, to act as human shields. The statement by the Hamas official is repugnant and demonstrates an apparent disregard for the safety of civilians, but it is not evidence that Hamas forced civilians to remain in their homes in order to act as human shields. Indeed, while the Government of Israel has alleged publicly that Hamas used Palestinian civilians as human shields, it has not identified any cases where it claims that civilians were doing so under threat of force by Hamas or any other party.
Whereas clause #16: “Whereas Hamas was able to significantly shape the findings of the investigation mission’s report by selecting and prescreening some of the witnesses and intimidating others, as the report acknowledges when it notes that `those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence of or conduct of hostilities by the Palestinian armed groups . . . from a fear of reprisals’;”
The allegation that Hamas was able to shape the findings of my report or that it pre-screened the witnesses is devoid of truth. I challenge anyone to produce evidence in support of it.
Sincerely,
Justice Richard J. Goldstone
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236876
UN General Assembly set for Gaza debate
The UN General Assembly is scheduled to vote on Wednesday on a resolution that would send a UN report alleging war crimes in Gaza to the more powerful Security Council.
A draft resolution circulated by the Arab Group, published by Reuters, says the assembly "requests the Secretary-General to transmit the report ... to the Security Council." It also urges Israel and the Palestinians to comply with the report's recommendations for investigations into war crimes charges.
The UN Human Rights Council voted in October to refer the report to the UN bodies in New York. The draft resolution for the General Assembly does not explicitly endorse the language of that prior resolution.
The report, which accuses Israel and Palestinian fighters of committing war crimes during Israel’s war on Gaza last winter, is the result of an independent international fact-finding mission led by South African judge Richard Goldstone. The 22-day war left more than 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis dead.
The draft resolution would require UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to bring the 575-page document to the Security Council.
Most of the General Assembly’s 192 members are expected to support the resolution, while Western states will likely join Israel and the US in opposing it. The five permanent members of the Security Council -- the US, Britain, France, Russia and China – are also reported to oppose bringing the report to the higher body.
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports that Britain and France are supporting an alternative initiative that would keep the Goldstone report out of the Security Council and send it back to the Human Rights Council in Geneva.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236910
EU: Israel and PA must probe Goldstone claims
A French-British initiative is to call on Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) to undertake independent investigations into allegations of war crimes in Gaza, an effort to relegate the Goldstone report to Geneva, out of the reach of the Security Council or the International Criminal Court.
According to the Israeli daily Haaretz, the new initiative is a list of “red lines” backed by 27 members of the EU and includes the assurance that the Goldstone report will not reach the Security Council or the International Criminal Court.
The initiative also calls for an independent investigation into Operation Cast Led to be undertaken by Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA), and setting a deadline for the new independent investigations. The initiative also included referring the Goldstone Report back to the Human Rights Council.
The newspaper noted that the proposal was discussed during a phone conversation between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The new EU-French initiative comes as the UN General Assembly prepares to discuss the Goldstone report on Wednesday.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236903
31 oct 2009
House of Representatives to discuss resolution condemning Goldstone
The US House of Representatives is expected to approve a non-binding resolution on Tuesday condemning the UN-backed Golstone report which accused Israel of war crimes during last winter’s military offensive “Cast Lead” against the Gaza Strip, the Washington Post reported Saturday.
The American paper said the report, which calls for investigations into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity, is proving to be a "major complication in Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's diplomacy in the Middle East this weekend." Hours after the 575-page report was released, the US, along with the Israeli administration condemned its findings.
The draft resolution, expected to condemn the document was proposed by two representatives from House Foreign Affairs Committee representatives Howard L Berman (D-Calif.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), and it accuses the Goldstone report of being "irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy," because of Hamas influence on the Goldstone commission, and therefore illegal.
The de facto government in Gaza agreed to cooperate with the Goldstone commission, whereas Israel not only refused to provide information, documents or cooberation for accusations it had launched at Hamas during their war on the Strip, but Israeli authorities actually refused entry of the commission into Israel. The commission was forced to enter Gaza via the Egyptian Rafah crossing, was unable to enter the West Bank and was forced to fly Israeli citizens from Gaza border towns to Geneva to give testimony on possible war crimes committed by Gaza factions during the war.
The White House has not announced its position on the proposal, but the Washington Post said lawmakers "expect it to win easy approval under a fast-track procedure that allows for no amendments."
The resolution is resolutely supported by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236167
House of Representatives to discuss resolution condemning Goldstone
The US House of Representatives is expected to approve a non-binding resolution on Tuesday condemning the UN-backed Golstone report which accused Israel of war crimes during last winter’s military offensive “Cast Lead” against the Gaza Strip, the Washington Post reported Saturday.
The American paper said the report, which calls for investigations into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity, is proving to be a "major complication in Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's diplomacy in the Middle East this weekend." Hours after the 575-page report was released, the US, along with the Israeli administration condemned its findings.
The draft resolution, expected to condemn the document was proposed by two representatives from House Foreign Affairs Committee representatives Howard L Berman (D-Calif.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), and it accuses the Goldstone report of being "irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy," because of Hamas influence on the Goldstone commission, and therefore illegal.
The de facto government in Gaza agreed to cooperate with the Goldstone commission, whereas Israel not only refused to provide information, documents or cooberation for accusations it had launched at Hamas during their war on the Strip, but Israeli authorities actually refused entry of the commission into Israel. The commission was forced to enter Gaza via the Egyptian Rafah crossing, was unable to enter the West Bank and was forced to fly Israeli citizens from Gaza border towns to Geneva to give testimony on possible war crimes committed by Gaza factions during the war.
The White House has not announced its position on the proposal, but the Washington Post said lawmakers "expect it to win easy approval under a fast-track procedure that allows for no amendments."
The resolution is resolutely supported by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=236167
29 oct 2009
UN General Assembly to debate Gaza report next week
The United Nations General Assembly will debate next week a report that accuses Israel and Palestinian fighters of committing war crimes during Israel’s offensive against Gaza last winter.
According to The Associated Press , a UNGA spokesperson announced that the debate on the Goldstone report will take place during a plenary meeting on 4 November.
The report was endorsed last week by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva and transmitted to the president of the UNGA, Ali Treki, in a letter. Arab states and the 118-member Nonaligned Group also submitted requests for the report to be considered in early November.
The report is the result of an independent, international fact-finding mission led by South African judge Richard Goldstone, a former war crimes prosecutor in tribunals on Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.
The report accuses the Israeli military of deliberately targeting civilians and using Palestinians as human shields, among other violations. More than 1,400 Palestinians were killed in the three-week war.
Thirteen Israelis also died, and the report states that Palestinian fighters targeted Israeli civilian areas with homemade rockets.
The report recommended that the UN Security Council require both sides to carry out credible investigations within three months into alleged abuses during the war.
If either side refuses, the fact-finding mission recommended that the UN’s most powerful body, the Security Council, refer the evidence for prosecution by the International Criminal Court within six months.
Even if the report eventually makes it to the Security Council, it is likely that Israel’s closest ally, the US, will veto any resolution endorsing it.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told a news conference he looks forward to the General Assembly's debate and decision. He called on both sides to carry out “full, independent and credible investigations.”
He said he was aware both Israel and Palestinian authorities were now going to have their own investigations. “I have not received any further details, but that is positive, I would say,” he added. “I have been repeatedly urging the Israeli government to institute a credible domestic investigation process.”
Ban also urged Israel to reopen the Gaza Strip’s borders to allow UN-backed reconstruction efforts to proceed. Ban noted that 10 months after the end of the war there has been no progress on rebuilding homes, buildings and infrastructure, even though an international donors’ conference in Egypt raised 4.5 billion US dollars for reconstruction.
“Little if any of that money has been delivered,” he said, according to the UN News Service. “Families have not been able to rebuild their homes. Clinics and schools are still in ruins. I urge Israel to accept the UN reconstruction proposals as set forth, recognizing that the only true guarantee of peace is people’s well-being and security.”
Israel bans the entry of all construction materials to Gaza as a part of a blockade it has imposed since June 2007.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=235795
Former Israeli MK won't travel abroad for fear of war crimes charges
Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya'alon, wanted for war crimes in Europe, declared in the Israeli press Wednesday that he is "willing to forgo visits to European capitals and to allow the Israel Defense Forces the freedom to act."
Ya'alon, the former Israeli chief of staff for the army, is wanted on charges of war crimes for the assassination of Hamas leader Salah Shehadeh, who was killed alongside 14 civilians in July 2002. He is one of several Israeli officials and former officials with warrants outstanding in various world capitals.
The official's announcement comes as increasing support for an International Criminal Court inquiry into war crimes that may have been committed by Israeli troops, and their commanders echoes in Europe and North America. Several speaking engagements of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert were interrupted by protesters last week, during one, protesters called on police to make a citizens arrest of the leader for the alleged crimes.
Ya'alon told Israel's Army Radio that he did not see travel cancellations as a "big loss" if it meant the Israeli military can act with a free hand.
Last month, British officials refused a petition calling for the arrest of Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak on suspicion of war crimes. Separately, Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon said he would not shorten his trip to the UK out of fear over a possible arrest. Israel's army radio reported, however, that the Israeli embassy in London planed to increase the official's security detail.
Israel has also recently considered cutting off diplomatic relations with Sweden and Turkey over media and television shows that angered Israeli politicians. A Swedish journalist uncovered evidence of organ harvesting targeting Palestinian prisoners by Israeli troops, and Turkey's government-sponsored television channel is currently airing a series that deals with Israeli atrocities alleged to have taken place during the most recent Israeli war on Gaza.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced this week there would be no independent Israeli inquiry into the allegations of the UN-mandated Goldstone report, adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on 16 October. The report calls for independent or International Criminal Court investigations into the allegations, both which have been rejected by Israeli authorities.
In order to move forward for implementation, the Goldstone report must first be discussed by the UN General Assembly. The UN Security Council, where the United States, China and Russia all hold a veto, may also request a discussion of the document.
In the interim, as Palestinian rights organizations work to push forward the total adoption of the report by the UN, Israel okayed the creation of a task force charged with developing ways to avoid prosecution, as well as a public relations strategy to quash public dissent.
Israeli envoy to the UN: war crimes investigations may go ahead
"We shouldn't be deluding ourselves that the [Goldstone] report will disappear if we launch a probe," Israel's UN Ambassador Gabriela Shalev told a panel at the Israel Democracy Institute Wednesday.
She said she believed there was a "murky wave against the State of Israel the likes of which has not been seen in many years," behind the international community's increasing demand that the report and its allegations be investigated by an independent body, which Israel has refused to submit to.
"We are doing a poor job of explaining our position," Shalev added. "What we have here is an indictment against Israel, against freedom of expression, against the legal establishment, and against the army."
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=235707
UN General Assembly to debate Gaza report next week
The United Nations General Assembly will debate next week a report that accuses Israel and Palestinian fighters of committing war crimes during Israel’s offensive against Gaza last winter.
According to The Associated Press , a UNGA spokesperson announced that the debate on the Goldstone report will take place during a plenary meeting on 4 November.
The report was endorsed last week by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva and transmitted to the president of the UNGA, Ali Treki, in a letter. Arab states and the 118-member Nonaligned Group also submitted requests for the report to be considered in early November.
The report is the result of an independent, international fact-finding mission led by South African judge Richard Goldstone, a former war crimes prosecutor in tribunals on Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.
The report accuses the Israeli military of deliberately targeting civilians and using Palestinians as human shields, among other violations. More than 1,400 Palestinians were killed in the three-week war.
Thirteen Israelis also died, and the report states that Palestinian fighters targeted Israeli civilian areas with homemade rockets.
The report recommended that the UN Security Council require both sides to carry out credible investigations within three months into alleged abuses during the war.
If either side refuses, the fact-finding mission recommended that the UN’s most powerful body, the Security Council, refer the evidence for prosecution by the International Criminal Court within six months.
Even if the report eventually makes it to the Security Council, it is likely that Israel’s closest ally, the US, will veto any resolution endorsing it.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told a news conference he looks forward to the General Assembly's debate and decision. He called on both sides to carry out “full, independent and credible investigations.”
He said he was aware both Israel and Palestinian authorities were now going to have their own investigations. “I have not received any further details, but that is positive, I would say,” he added. “I have been repeatedly urging the Israeli government to institute a credible domestic investigation process.”
Ban also urged Israel to reopen the Gaza Strip’s borders to allow UN-backed reconstruction efforts to proceed. Ban noted that 10 months after the end of the war there has been no progress on rebuilding homes, buildings and infrastructure, even though an international donors’ conference in Egypt raised 4.5 billion US dollars for reconstruction.
“Little if any of that money has been delivered,” he said, according to the UN News Service. “Families have not been able to rebuild their homes. Clinics and schools are still in ruins. I urge Israel to accept the UN reconstruction proposals as set forth, recognizing that the only true guarantee of peace is people’s well-being and security.”
Israel bans the entry of all construction materials to Gaza as a part of a blockade it has imposed since June 2007.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=235795
Former Israeli MK won't travel abroad for fear of war crimes charges
Vice Prime Minister Moshe Ya'alon, wanted for war crimes in Europe, declared in the Israeli press Wednesday that he is "willing to forgo visits to European capitals and to allow the Israel Defense Forces the freedom to act."
Ya'alon, the former Israeli chief of staff for the army, is wanted on charges of war crimes for the assassination of Hamas leader Salah Shehadeh, who was killed alongside 14 civilians in July 2002. He is one of several Israeli officials and former officials with warrants outstanding in various world capitals.
The official's announcement comes as increasing support for an International Criminal Court inquiry into war crimes that may have been committed by Israeli troops, and their commanders echoes in Europe and North America. Several speaking engagements of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert were interrupted by protesters last week, during one, protesters called on police to make a citizens arrest of the leader for the alleged crimes.
Ya'alon told Israel's Army Radio that he did not see travel cancellations as a "big loss" if it meant the Israeli military can act with a free hand.
Last month, British officials refused a petition calling for the arrest of Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak on suspicion of war crimes. Separately, Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Daniel Ayalon said he would not shorten his trip to the UK out of fear over a possible arrest. Israel's army radio reported, however, that the Israeli embassy in London planed to increase the official's security detail.
Israel has also recently considered cutting off diplomatic relations with Sweden and Turkey over media and television shows that angered Israeli politicians. A Swedish journalist uncovered evidence of organ harvesting targeting Palestinian prisoners by Israeli troops, and Turkey's government-sponsored television channel is currently airing a series that deals with Israeli atrocities alleged to have taken place during the most recent Israeli war on Gaza.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced this week there would be no independent Israeli inquiry into the allegations of the UN-mandated Goldstone report, adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on 16 October. The report calls for independent or International Criminal Court investigations into the allegations, both which have been rejected by Israeli authorities.
In order to move forward for implementation, the Goldstone report must first be discussed by the UN General Assembly. The UN Security Council, where the United States, China and Russia all hold a veto, may also request a discussion of the document.
In the interim, as Palestinian rights organizations work to push forward the total adoption of the report by the UN, Israel okayed the creation of a task force charged with developing ways to avoid prosecution, as well as a public relations strategy to quash public dissent.
Israeli envoy to the UN: war crimes investigations may go ahead
"We shouldn't be deluding ourselves that the [Goldstone] report will disappear if we launch a probe," Israel's UN Ambassador Gabriela Shalev told a panel at the Israel Democracy Institute Wednesday.
She said she believed there was a "murky wave against the State of Israel the likes of which has not been seen in many years," behind the international community's increasing demand that the report and its allegations be investigated by an independent body, which Israel has refused to submit to.
"We are doing a poor job of explaining our position," Shalev added. "What we have here is an indictment against Israel, against freedom of expression, against the legal establishment, and against the army."
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=235707
19 oct 2009
United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict
On 3 April 2009, the president of the mainstay UN rights body, the Human Rights Council, established the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.
Its mandate was "to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza during the period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009, whether before, during or after."
The HRC president appointed South African jurist Richard Goldstone, former judge of the Constitutional Court of South Africa and former prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, to head the mission.
The other three appointed members were:
1- Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics and Political Science, who was a member of the high-level fact-finding mission to Beit Hanoun in 2008.
2- Hina Jilani, advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and former special representative of the UN secretary-general on the situation of human rights defenders, who was a member of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur in 2004.
3- Colonel Desmond Travers, a former officer in Ireland's military and member of the Board of Directors of the Institute for International Criminal Investigations.
Once convened, the four members interpreted the mission's mandate as requiring the civilian population of the region to be placed at the center of investigations regarding the violations of international law.
Concurrently, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) established a secretariat to support the mission. Several staff of the mission's secretariat were deployed in Gaza from 22 May to 4 July 2009 to conduct field investigations.
The mission convened for the first time in Geneva between 4 and 8 May 2009. Additionally, it met in Geneva on 20 May, on 4 and 5 July, and between 1 and 4 August 2009. It conducted three field visits: two to the Gaza Strip between 30 May and 6 June, and between 25 June and 1 July 2009; and one visit to Amman on 2 and 3 July 2009.
Notes verbales were sent to all member states of the United Nations and UN organs and bodies on 7 May 2009. On 8 June 2009, the mission issued a call for submissions inviting all interested persons and organizations to submit relevant information and documentation to assist in the implementation of its mandate.
Public hearings were held in Gaza on 28 and 29 June and in Geneva on 6 and 7 July 2009. Hearings were not conducted in Israel because the mission was denied permission to work in the country.
The mission repeatedly sought to obtain Israel's cooperation on the matter, particularly since Israel controls access to the West Bank and Gaza Strip where interviews were scheduled. After numerous attempts failed, the mission sought and obtained Egypt's assistance to enable investigators to enter the Gaza Strip through the Rafah crossing. They were never given permission to enter Israeli borders, prohibiting direct contact with Israeli victims, as well as West Bank resources.
The four-person team enjoyed the support and cooperation of the Palestinian Authority and of the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the UN. Due to the lack of cooperation from Israel, it was unable to meet members of the PA in the West Bank. The mission did, however, meet officials of the PA, including a cabinet minister, in Amman.
During their visits to the Gaza Strip, the investigators were permitted to hold meetings with senior members of the de facto government, which extended its full cooperation and support, according to the mission.
Evidence of war crimes, possibly crimes against humanity
On 29 September, following its three-month investigation, the mission concluded that serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel in the context of its military operations in Gaza, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.
In the lead-up to the military assault, the mission also found that Israel had imposed a blockade amounting to collective punishment and carried out a systematic policy of progressive isolation and deprivation of the Gaza Strip.
During the military operation code-named "Cast Lead," more than 1,400 people were killed, including women and more than 340 children, and houses, factories, wells, schools, hospitals, police stations and other public buildings were destroyed, according to the mission.
The final report concluded that the operation was directed at the people of Gaza as a whole, "in furtherance of an overall and continuing policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population, and in a deliberate policy of disproportionate force aimed at the civilian population."
The report stated that Israel deprives Palestinians in the Gaza Strip of their means of subsistence, employment, housing and water, denies their freedom of movement and their right to leave and enter their own country, limits their rights to access a court of law and an effective remedy, and could lead a competent court to find that the crime of persecution, a crime against humanity, has been committed.
The mission also found that Palestinian armed groups had committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity.
"The repeated acts of firing rockets and mortars into southern Israel by Palestinian armed groups from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip constituted war crimes that may amount to crimes against humanity," the mission found.
Conclusions and recommendations
As well as calling for justice, all four members of the mission urged the Human Rights Council to take action that would ensure the protection of victims, prevent further violence and improve the living conditions of the affected people.
As he presented the report to the Human Rights Council, mission head Richard Goldstone urged the international community to put an end to impunity for violations of international law in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.
"Now is the time for action," he said. "A culture of impunity in the region has existed for too long. The lack of accountability for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity has reached a crisis point; the ongoing lack of justice is undermining any hope for a successful peace process and reinforcing an environment that fosters violence. Time and again, experience has taught us that overlooking justice only leads to increased conflict and violence."
"Israel has a duty to protect its citizens," Goldstone noted. "That in no way justifies a policy of collective punishment of a people under effective occupation, destroying their means to live a dignified life and the trauma caused by the kind of military intervention the Israeli government called Operation Cast Lead. This contributes to a situation where young people grow up in a culture of hatred and violence, with little hope for change in the future."
As neither Israel nor the responsible Palestinian authorities had then carried out any credible investigations into alleged violations, Goldstone urged the 47 member states of the council to implement a number of measures, including referral of the mission's report to the UN Security Council. The mission recommended that the Security Council require Israel and the de facto government to report to it, within six months, on investigations and prosecutions it should carry out with regard to violations identified by the mission.
The mission recommended that the Security Council set up a body of independent experts to report to it on the progress of Israeli and Palestinian investigations and prosecutions. If the experts' reports did not indicate within six months that good faith, independent proceedings were taking place, the council was urged to refer the situation in Gaza to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=232513
United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict
On 3 April 2009, the president of the mainstay UN rights body, the Human Rights Council, established the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.
Its mandate was "to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza during the period from 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009, whether before, during or after."
The HRC president appointed South African jurist Richard Goldstone, former judge of the Constitutional Court of South Africa and former prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, to head the mission.
The other three appointed members were:
1- Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics and Political Science, who was a member of the high-level fact-finding mission to Beit Hanoun in 2008.
2- Hina Jilani, advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and former special representative of the UN secretary-general on the situation of human rights defenders, who was a member of the International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur in 2004.
3- Colonel Desmond Travers, a former officer in Ireland's military and member of the Board of Directors of the Institute for International Criminal Investigations.
Once convened, the four members interpreted the mission's mandate as requiring the civilian population of the region to be placed at the center of investigations regarding the violations of international law.
Concurrently, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) established a secretariat to support the mission. Several staff of the mission's secretariat were deployed in Gaza from 22 May to 4 July 2009 to conduct field investigations.
The mission convened for the first time in Geneva between 4 and 8 May 2009. Additionally, it met in Geneva on 20 May, on 4 and 5 July, and between 1 and 4 August 2009. It conducted three field visits: two to the Gaza Strip between 30 May and 6 June, and between 25 June and 1 July 2009; and one visit to Amman on 2 and 3 July 2009.
Notes verbales were sent to all member states of the United Nations and UN organs and bodies on 7 May 2009. On 8 June 2009, the mission issued a call for submissions inviting all interested persons and organizations to submit relevant information and documentation to assist in the implementation of its mandate.
Public hearings were held in Gaza on 28 and 29 June and in Geneva on 6 and 7 July 2009. Hearings were not conducted in Israel because the mission was denied permission to work in the country.
The mission repeatedly sought to obtain Israel's cooperation on the matter, particularly since Israel controls access to the West Bank and Gaza Strip where interviews were scheduled. After numerous attempts failed, the mission sought and obtained Egypt's assistance to enable investigators to enter the Gaza Strip through the Rafah crossing. They were never given permission to enter Israeli borders, prohibiting direct contact with Israeli victims, as well as West Bank resources.
The four-person team enjoyed the support and cooperation of the Palestinian Authority and of the Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the UN. Due to the lack of cooperation from Israel, it was unable to meet members of the PA in the West Bank. The mission did, however, meet officials of the PA, including a cabinet minister, in Amman.
During their visits to the Gaza Strip, the investigators were permitted to hold meetings with senior members of the de facto government, which extended its full cooperation and support, according to the mission.
Evidence of war crimes, possibly crimes against humanity
On 29 September, following its three-month investigation, the mission concluded that serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel in the context of its military operations in Gaza, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.
In the lead-up to the military assault, the mission also found that Israel had imposed a blockade amounting to collective punishment and carried out a systematic policy of progressive isolation and deprivation of the Gaza Strip.
During the military operation code-named "Cast Lead," more than 1,400 people were killed, including women and more than 340 children, and houses, factories, wells, schools, hospitals, police stations and other public buildings were destroyed, according to the mission.
The final report concluded that the operation was directed at the people of Gaza as a whole, "in furtherance of an overall and continuing policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population, and in a deliberate policy of disproportionate force aimed at the civilian population."
The report stated that Israel deprives Palestinians in the Gaza Strip of their means of subsistence, employment, housing and water, denies their freedom of movement and their right to leave and enter their own country, limits their rights to access a court of law and an effective remedy, and could lead a competent court to find that the crime of persecution, a crime against humanity, has been committed.
The mission also found that Palestinian armed groups had committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity.
"The repeated acts of firing rockets and mortars into southern Israel by Palestinian armed groups from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip constituted war crimes that may amount to crimes against humanity," the mission found.
Conclusions and recommendations
As well as calling for justice, all four members of the mission urged the Human Rights Council to take action that would ensure the protection of victims, prevent further violence and improve the living conditions of the affected people.
As he presented the report to the Human Rights Council, mission head Richard Goldstone urged the international community to put an end to impunity for violations of international law in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories.
"Now is the time for action," he said. "A culture of impunity in the region has existed for too long. The lack of accountability for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity has reached a crisis point; the ongoing lack of justice is undermining any hope for a successful peace process and reinforcing an environment that fosters violence. Time and again, experience has taught us that overlooking justice only leads to increased conflict and violence."
"Israel has a duty to protect its citizens," Goldstone noted. "That in no way justifies a policy of collective punishment of a people under effective occupation, destroying their means to live a dignified life and the trauma caused by the kind of military intervention the Israeli government called Operation Cast Lead. This contributes to a situation where young people grow up in a culture of hatred and violence, with little hope for change in the future."
As neither Israel nor the responsible Palestinian authorities had then carried out any credible investigations into alleged violations, Goldstone urged the 47 member states of the council to implement a number of measures, including referral of the mission's report to the UN Security Council. The mission recommended that the Security Council require Israel and the de facto government to report to it, within six months, on investigations and prosecutions it should carry out with regard to violations identified by the mission.
The mission recommended that the Security Council set up a body of independent experts to report to it on the progress of Israeli and Palestinian investigations and prosecutions. If the experts' reports did not indicate within six months that good faith, independent proceedings were taking place, the council was urged to refer the situation in Gaza to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=232513
