14 apr 2011
Statement by members of UN mission on Gaza war
In recent days some articles and comments appearing in the press with respect to the report of the United Nations (UN) fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict of 2008-2009 have misrepresented facts in an attempt to delegitimise the findings of this report and to cast doubts on its credibility.
The mission that comprised four members, including Justice Richard Goldstone as its chair, came to an end when it presented its report to the UN human rights council in September 2009. The report of the mission is now an official UN document and all actions taken pursuant to its findings and recommendations fall solely within the purview of the United Nations general assembly which, along with the human rights council, reviewed and endorsed it at the end of 2009.
Aspersions cast on the findings of the report, nevertheless, cannot be left unchallenged. Members of the mission, signatories to this statement, find it necessary to dispel any impression that subsequent developments have rendered any part of the mission's report unsubstantiated, erroneous or inaccurate.
We concur in our view that there is no justification for any demand or expectation for reconsideration of the report as nothing of substance has appeared that would in any way change the context, findings or conclusions of that report with respect to any of the parties to the Gaza conflict. Indeed, there is no UN procedure or precedent to that effect.
The report of the fact-finding mission contains the conclusions made after diligent, independent and objective consideration of the information related to the events within our mandate, and careful assessment of its reliability and credibility. We firmly stand by these conclusions.
Also, it is the prerogative of the UN to take cognisance of any evidence subsequently gathered under domestic procedures that it finds credible and in accordance with international standards. Over 18 months after publication of the report, however, we are very far from reaching that point.
The mandate of the mission did not require it to conduct a judicial or even a quasi-judicial investigation. The mission and the report are part of a truth-seeking process that could lead to effective judicial processes. Like all reports of similar missions of the UN, it provided the basis for parties to conduct investigations for gathering of evidence, as required by international law, and, if so warranted, prosecution of individuals who ordered, planned or carried out international crimes.
In the case of the Gaza conflict, we believe that both parties held responsible in this respect, have yet to establish a convincing basis for any claims that contradict the findings of the mission's report.
The report recommended that proper investigations and judicial processes should ideally be carried out first of all at the domestic level, with monitoring by the UN. If these proved inadequate, it laid down a roadmap for the continuation of such processes at the international level. In line with these recommendations, the UN human rights council appointed a committee of independent experts to monitor the independence, effectiveness and genuineness of any domestic proceedings carried out to investigate crimes and violations of international law pointed out in the mission's report.
Many of those calling for the nullification of our report imply that the final report by the follow-up committee's two members, Judge Mary McGowan Davis and Judge Lennart Aspergren, presented to the human rights council in March 2011, somehow contradicts the fact-finding mission's report or invalidates it.
In the light of the observations of this committee such claims are completely misplaced, and a clear distortion of their findings. The committee's report states that, according to available information, Israel has conducted some 400 command investigations into allegations by the fact-finding mission and other organisations. Command investigations are operational, not legal, inquiries and are conducted by personnel from the same command structure as those under investigation. Out of these, the committee reports that 52 criminal investigations into allegations of wrongdoings have been opened. Of these, three have been submitted for prosecution, with two of them resulting in convictions (one for theft of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months' imprisonment, and another for using a Palestinian child as a human shield, which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months). The third case, related to allegations of deliberate targeting of an individual waving a white flag, is still ongoing.
The committee has expressed serious concerns about the late start and slow pace of the proceedings, their insufficient transparency and the participation of victims and witnesses. Out of the 36 incidents relating to Gaza described in the fact-finding mission report, more than one third remain unresolved or without a clear status over two years after the conflict. The committee concluded that the slow progress could seriously impair the effectiveness of the investigations and prospects of achieving justice and accountability. Therefore, the mechanisms that are being used by the Israeli authorities to investigate the incidents are proving inadequate to genuinely ascertain the facts and any ensuing legal responsibility.
In addition, with regard to the issue of the policies guiding Operation Cast Lead, the committee states that there is "no indication that Israel has opened investigations into the actions of those who designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead". In other words, one of the most serious allegations about the conduct of Israel's military operations remains completely unaddressed.
We regret that no domestic investigations at all have been started into any of the allegations of international crimes committed by members of Palestinian armed groups in Gaza which have fired thousands of rockets into southern Israel. The committee observes the same in its report.
We consider that calls to reconsider or even retract the report, as well as attempts at misrepresenting its nature and purpose, disregard the right of victims, Palestinian and Israeli, to truth and justice. They also ignore the responsibility of the relevant parties under international law to conduct prompt, thorough, effective and independent investigations. We regret the personal attacks and the extraordinary pressure placed on members of the fact-finding mission since we began our work in May 2009. This campaign has been clearly aimed at undermining the integrity of the report and its authors. Had we given in to pressures from any quarter to sanitise our conclusions, we would be doing a serious injustice to the hundreds of innocent civilians killed during the Gaza conflict, the thousands injured, and the hundreds of thousands whose lives continue to be deeply affected by the conflict and the blockade.
The report has triggered a process that is still under way and should continue until justice is done and respect for international human rights and humanitarian law by everyone is ensured.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=378829
UN Gaza report co-authors round on Goldstone
Exclusive: Three mission members say calls to recant UN report disregard the rights of Palestinian and Israeli victims.
Read the full statement by Jilani, Chinkin and Travers
Three members of the UN fact-finding mission on the Gaza war of 2008-09 have turned on the fourth member and chair of the group, Richard Goldstone, accusing him in all but name of misrepresenting facts in order to cast doubt on the credibility of their joint report.
In a statement to the Guardian, the three experts in international law are strongly critical of Goldstone's dramatic change of heart expressed in a Washington Post commentary earlier this month. Goldstone wrote that he regretted aspects of the report that bears his name, especially the suggestion that Israel had potentially committed war crimes by targeting civilian Palestinians in the three-week conflict.
The three members – the Pakistani human rights lawyer Hina Jilani; Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics; and former Irish peace-keeper Desmond Travers – have until this moment kept their silence over Goldstone's bombshell remarks. But their response now is devastating.
Though they do not mention Goldstone by name, they shoot down several of the main contentions in his article and imply that he has bowed to intense political pressure.
They write that they cannot leave "aspersions cast on the findings of the [Goldstone] report unchallenged", adding that those aspersions have "misrepresented facts in an attempt to delegitimise the findings and to cast doubts on its credibility".
In their most stinging criticism, the three joint authors say that "calls to reconsider or even retract the report, as well as attempts at misrepresenting its nature and purpose, disregard the rights of victims, Palestinians and Israeli, to truth and justice". They point to the "personal attacks and the extraordinary pressure placed on members of the fact-finding mission", adding that "had we given in to pressures from any quarter to sanitise our conclusions, we would be doing a serious injustice to the hundreds of innocent civilians killed during the Gaza conflict, the thousands injured, and the hundreds of thousands whose lives continue to be deeply affected by the conflict and the blockade".
The four-person fact-finding mission was set up to look into allegations of war crimes committed by both Israel and Hamas during the war in which 1,400 Palestinians – at least half of whom were civilians – and 13 Israelis died. The Goldstone report concluded that some Israelis could be held individually criminally responsible for potential war crimes.
In his Washington Post article, Goldstone said evidence had since come to light as a result of subsequent Israeli military investigations into the conflict that showed that Israel had not targeted civilians as a matter of policy. Had he known that then, "the Goldstone report would have been a different document," he wrote.
Goldstone's apparent retraction of key elements of the fact-finding mission he led was seized upon with delight by the Israeli government which called for the report to be set aside in the light of his comments. An Israeli minister claimed that Goldstone had himself promised to work to have his own report "nullified".
But his three fellow members of the mission state that they "firmly stand by" the conclusions of the report.[PDF] They say that neither Israel nor Hamas has come up with any convincing evidence contradicting the findings.
The three authors cite the final UN report into the Gaza war, written by a follow-up committee led by Judge Mary McGowan Davies, that criticised Israel for the slow pace with which it conducted its investigations and for its refusal to address some of the most serious allegations about its conduct. "The mechanisms that are being used by the Israeli authorities to investigate the incidents are proving inadequate to genuinely ascertain the facts and any ensuing legal responsibility."
The statement of Jilani, Chinkin and Travers will set back any attempt by Israel to have the Goldstone report revoked. The UN human rights council, which commissioned the fact-finding mission, has already made clear that the report could only be withdrawn if all four of its authors unanimously made a formal written complaint or if the UN general assembly or human rights council voted to drop it.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) welcomed the statement from the three members of the mission. "[It is] as an important reminder of what matters – that the truth must be established and justice done. It is very disturbing that members of the committee say they have been put under pressure to sanitise their conclusions," said PA spokesman Ghassan Khatib.
"Israel must not be allowed to influence the outcome of what needs to be an objective process. Nor must Israel be allowed to investigate its own actions and find itself not guilty. We pay tribute to those members of the committee who have the courage to resist Israeli pressure and insist that justice must be done."
The Israeli government responded to the latest developments by restating its view that the Goldstone report was flawed from the outset.
"Israel's position on the Goldstone report and the whole process that established the committee has not changed. The establishment of the committee was based on fundamental flaws of the United Nations human rights council. The report was handled in a highly politicised manner by a council lacking in moral authority," said Yigal Palmor, spokesman for the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs.
"We believed that the methodology, workings and findings of the committee were mind-bogglingly distorted. All this is still valid as is Israel's commitment to investigate itself regardless of resolutions by any foreign body. We believe that our investigations and our transparency in carrying those out are the best reproach to any criticisms of Operation Cast Lead."
http://fwd4.me/EMb
Goldstone report: Statement issued by members of UN mission on Gaza war
In recent days some articles and comments appearing in the press with respect to the report of the United Nations (UN) fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict of 2008-2009 have misrepresented facts in an attempt to delegitimise the findings of this report and to cast doubts on its credibility.
The mission that comprised four members, including Justice Richard Goldstone as its chair, came to an end when it presented its report to the UN human rights council in September 2009. The report of the mission is now an official UN document and all actions taken pursuant to its findings and recommendations fall solely within the purview of the United Nations general assembly which, along with the human rights council, reviewed and endorsed it at the end of 2009.
Aspersions cast on the findings of the report, nevertheless, cannot be left unchallenged. Members of the mission, signatories to this statement, find it necessary to dispel any impression that subsequent developments have rendered any part of the mission's report unsubstantiated, erroneous or inaccurate.
We concur in our view that there is no justification for any demand or expectation for reconsideration of the report as nothing of substance has appeared that would in any way change the context, findings or conclusions of that report with respect to any of the parties to the Gaza conflict. Indeed, there is no UN procedure or precedent to that effect.
The report of the fact-finding mission contains the conclusions made after diligent, independent and objective consideration of the information related to the events within our mandate, and careful assessment of its reliability and credibility. We firmly stand by these conclusions.
Also, it is the prerogative of the UN to take cognisance of any evidence subsequently gathered under domestic procedures that it finds credible and in accordance with international standards. Over 18 months after publication of the report, however, we are very far from reaching that point.
The mandate of the mission did not require it to conduct a judicial or even a quasi-judicial investigation. Like all reports of similar missions of the UN, it provided the basis for parties to conduct investigations for gathering of evidence, as required by international law, and, if so warranted, prosecution of individuals who ordered, planned or carried out international crimes.
In the case of the Gaza conflict, we believe that both parties held responsible in this respect, have yet to establish a convincing basis for any claims that contradict the findings of the mission's report.
The report recommended that proper investigations and judicial processes should ideally be carried out first of all at the domestic level, with monitoring by the UN. If these proved inadequate, it laid down a roadmap for the continuation of such processes at the international level. In line with these recommendations, the UN human rights council appointed a committee of independent experts to monitor the independence, effectiveness and genuineness of any domestic proceedings carried out to investigate crimes and violations of international law pointed out in the mission's report.
Many of those calling for the nullification of our report imply that the final report by the follow-up committee's two members, Judge Mary McGowan Davies and Judge Lennart Aspergren, presented to the human rights council in March 2011, somehow contradicts the fact-finding mission's report or invalidates it.
In the light of the observations of this committee such claims are completely misplaced, and a clear distortion of their findings. The committee's report states that, according to available information, Israel has conducted some 400 command investigations into allegations by the fact-finding mission and other organisations. Command investigations are operational, not legal, inquiries and are conducted by personnel from the same command structure as those under investigation. Out of these, the committee reports that 52 criminal investigations into allegations of wrongdoings have been opened. Of these, three have been submitted for prosecution, with two of them resulting in convictions (one for theft of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months' imprisonment, and another for using a Palestinian child as a human shield, which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months). The third case, related to allegations of deliberate targeting of an individual waving a white flag, is still ongoing.
The committee has expressed serious concerns about the late start and slow pace of the proceedings, their insufficient transparency and the participation of victims and witnesses. Out of the 36 incidents relating to Gaza described in the fact-finding mission report, more than one third remain unresolved or without a clear status over two years after the conflict. The committee concluded that the slow progress could seriously impair the effectiveness of the investigations and prospects of achieving justice and accountability. Therefore, the mechanisms that are being used by the Israeli authorities to investigate the incidents are proving inadequate to genuinely ascertain the facts and any ensuing legal responsibility.
In addition, with regard to the issue of the policies guiding Operation Cast Lead, the committee states that there is "no indication that Israel has opened investigations into the actions of those who designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead". In other words, one of the most serious allegations about the conduct of Israel's military operations remains completely unaddressed.
We regret that no domestic investigations at all have been started into any of the allegations of international crimes committed by members of Palestinian armed groups in Gaza which have fired thousands of rockets into southern Israel. The committee observes the same in its report.
We consider that calls to reconsider or even retract the report, as well as attempts at misrepresenting its nature and purpose, disregard the right of victims, Palestinian and Israeli, to truth and justice. They also ignore the responsibility of the relevant parties under international law to conduct prompt, thorough, effective and independent investigations. We regret the personal attacks and the extraordinary pressure placed on members of the fact-finding mission since we began our work in May 2009. This campaign has been clearly aimed at undermining the integrity of the report and its authors. Had we given in to pressures from any quarter to sanitise our conclusions, we would be doing a serious injustice to the hundreds of innocent civilians killed during the Gaza conflict, the thousands injured, and the hundreds of thousands whose lives continue to be deeply affected by the conflict and the blockade.
The report has triggered a process that is still under way and should continue until justice is done and respect for international human rights and humanitarian law by everyone is ensured.
Comments on this article are set to remain open for 24 hours from the time of publication but may be closed overnight
http://fwd4.me/ELK
Statement by members of UN mission on Gaza war
In recent days some articles and comments appearing in the press with respect to the report of the United Nations (UN) fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict of 2008-2009 have misrepresented facts in an attempt to delegitimise the findings of this report and to cast doubts on its credibility.
The mission that comprised four members, including Justice Richard Goldstone as its chair, came to an end when it presented its report to the UN human rights council in September 2009. The report of the mission is now an official UN document and all actions taken pursuant to its findings and recommendations fall solely within the purview of the United Nations general assembly which, along with the human rights council, reviewed and endorsed it at the end of 2009.
Aspersions cast on the findings of the report, nevertheless, cannot be left unchallenged. Members of the mission, signatories to this statement, find it necessary to dispel any impression that subsequent developments have rendered any part of the mission's report unsubstantiated, erroneous or inaccurate.
We concur in our view that there is no justification for any demand or expectation for reconsideration of the report as nothing of substance has appeared that would in any way change the context, findings or conclusions of that report with respect to any of the parties to the Gaza conflict. Indeed, there is no UN procedure or precedent to that effect.
The report of the fact-finding mission contains the conclusions made after diligent, independent and objective consideration of the information related to the events within our mandate, and careful assessment of its reliability and credibility. We firmly stand by these conclusions.
Also, it is the prerogative of the UN to take cognisance of any evidence subsequently gathered under domestic procedures that it finds credible and in accordance with international standards. Over 18 months after publication of the report, however, we are very far from reaching that point.
The mandate of the mission did not require it to conduct a judicial or even a quasi-judicial investigation. The mission and the report are part of a truth-seeking process that could lead to effective judicial processes. Like all reports of similar missions of the UN, it provided the basis for parties to conduct investigations for gathering of evidence, as required by international law, and, if so warranted, prosecution of individuals who ordered, planned or carried out international crimes.
In the case of the Gaza conflict, we believe that both parties held responsible in this respect, have yet to establish a convincing basis for any claims that contradict the findings of the mission's report.
The report recommended that proper investigations and judicial processes should ideally be carried out first of all at the domestic level, with monitoring by the UN. If these proved inadequate, it laid down a roadmap for the continuation of such processes at the international level. In line with these recommendations, the UN human rights council appointed a committee of independent experts to monitor the independence, effectiveness and genuineness of any domestic proceedings carried out to investigate crimes and violations of international law pointed out in the mission's report.
Many of those calling for the nullification of our report imply that the final report by the follow-up committee's two members, Judge Mary McGowan Davis and Judge Lennart Aspergren, presented to the human rights council in March 2011, somehow contradicts the fact-finding mission's report or invalidates it.
In the light of the observations of this committee such claims are completely misplaced, and a clear distortion of their findings. The committee's report states that, according to available information, Israel has conducted some 400 command investigations into allegations by the fact-finding mission and other organisations. Command investigations are operational, not legal, inquiries and are conducted by personnel from the same command structure as those under investigation. Out of these, the committee reports that 52 criminal investigations into allegations of wrongdoings have been opened. Of these, three have been submitted for prosecution, with two of them resulting in convictions (one for theft of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months' imprisonment, and another for using a Palestinian child as a human shield, which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months). The third case, related to allegations of deliberate targeting of an individual waving a white flag, is still ongoing.
The committee has expressed serious concerns about the late start and slow pace of the proceedings, their insufficient transparency and the participation of victims and witnesses. Out of the 36 incidents relating to Gaza described in the fact-finding mission report, more than one third remain unresolved or without a clear status over two years after the conflict. The committee concluded that the slow progress could seriously impair the effectiveness of the investigations and prospects of achieving justice and accountability. Therefore, the mechanisms that are being used by the Israeli authorities to investigate the incidents are proving inadequate to genuinely ascertain the facts and any ensuing legal responsibility.
In addition, with regard to the issue of the policies guiding Operation Cast Lead, the committee states that there is "no indication that Israel has opened investigations into the actions of those who designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead". In other words, one of the most serious allegations about the conduct of Israel's military operations remains completely unaddressed.
We regret that no domestic investigations at all have been started into any of the allegations of international crimes committed by members of Palestinian armed groups in Gaza which have fired thousands of rockets into southern Israel. The committee observes the same in its report.
We consider that calls to reconsider or even retract the report, as well as attempts at misrepresenting its nature and purpose, disregard the right of victims, Palestinian and Israeli, to truth and justice. They also ignore the responsibility of the relevant parties under international law to conduct prompt, thorough, effective and independent investigations. We regret the personal attacks and the extraordinary pressure placed on members of the fact-finding mission since we began our work in May 2009. This campaign has been clearly aimed at undermining the integrity of the report and its authors. Had we given in to pressures from any quarter to sanitise our conclusions, we would be doing a serious injustice to the hundreds of innocent civilians killed during the Gaza conflict, the thousands injured, and the hundreds of thousands whose lives continue to be deeply affected by the conflict and the blockade.
The report has triggered a process that is still under way and should continue until justice is done and respect for international human rights and humanitarian law by everyone is ensured.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=378829
UN Gaza report co-authors round on Goldstone
Exclusive: Three mission members say calls to recant UN report disregard the rights of Palestinian and Israeli victims.
Read the full statement by Jilani, Chinkin and Travers
Three members of the UN fact-finding mission on the Gaza war of 2008-09 have turned on the fourth member and chair of the group, Richard Goldstone, accusing him in all but name of misrepresenting facts in order to cast doubt on the credibility of their joint report.
In a statement to the Guardian, the three experts in international law are strongly critical of Goldstone's dramatic change of heart expressed in a Washington Post commentary earlier this month. Goldstone wrote that he regretted aspects of the report that bears his name, especially the suggestion that Israel had potentially committed war crimes by targeting civilian Palestinians in the three-week conflict.
The three members – the Pakistani human rights lawyer Hina Jilani; Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics; and former Irish peace-keeper Desmond Travers – have until this moment kept their silence over Goldstone's bombshell remarks. But their response now is devastating.
Though they do not mention Goldstone by name, they shoot down several of the main contentions in his article and imply that he has bowed to intense political pressure.
They write that they cannot leave "aspersions cast on the findings of the [Goldstone] report unchallenged", adding that those aspersions have "misrepresented facts in an attempt to delegitimise the findings and to cast doubts on its credibility".
In their most stinging criticism, the three joint authors say that "calls to reconsider or even retract the report, as well as attempts at misrepresenting its nature and purpose, disregard the rights of victims, Palestinians and Israeli, to truth and justice". They point to the "personal attacks and the extraordinary pressure placed on members of the fact-finding mission", adding that "had we given in to pressures from any quarter to sanitise our conclusions, we would be doing a serious injustice to the hundreds of innocent civilians killed during the Gaza conflict, the thousands injured, and the hundreds of thousands whose lives continue to be deeply affected by the conflict and the blockade".
The four-person fact-finding mission was set up to look into allegations of war crimes committed by both Israel and Hamas during the war in which 1,400 Palestinians – at least half of whom were civilians – and 13 Israelis died. The Goldstone report concluded that some Israelis could be held individually criminally responsible for potential war crimes.
In his Washington Post article, Goldstone said evidence had since come to light as a result of subsequent Israeli military investigations into the conflict that showed that Israel had not targeted civilians as a matter of policy. Had he known that then, "the Goldstone report would have been a different document," he wrote.
Goldstone's apparent retraction of key elements of the fact-finding mission he led was seized upon with delight by the Israeli government which called for the report to be set aside in the light of his comments. An Israeli minister claimed that Goldstone had himself promised to work to have his own report "nullified".
But his three fellow members of the mission state that they "firmly stand by" the conclusions of the report.[PDF] They say that neither Israel nor Hamas has come up with any convincing evidence contradicting the findings.
The three authors cite the final UN report into the Gaza war, written by a follow-up committee led by Judge Mary McGowan Davies, that criticised Israel for the slow pace with which it conducted its investigations and for its refusal to address some of the most serious allegations about its conduct. "The mechanisms that are being used by the Israeli authorities to investigate the incidents are proving inadequate to genuinely ascertain the facts and any ensuing legal responsibility."
The statement of Jilani, Chinkin and Travers will set back any attempt by Israel to have the Goldstone report revoked. The UN human rights council, which commissioned the fact-finding mission, has already made clear that the report could only be withdrawn if all four of its authors unanimously made a formal written complaint or if the UN general assembly or human rights council voted to drop it.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) welcomed the statement from the three members of the mission. "[It is] as an important reminder of what matters – that the truth must be established and justice done. It is very disturbing that members of the committee say they have been put under pressure to sanitise their conclusions," said PA spokesman Ghassan Khatib.
"Israel must not be allowed to influence the outcome of what needs to be an objective process. Nor must Israel be allowed to investigate its own actions and find itself not guilty. We pay tribute to those members of the committee who have the courage to resist Israeli pressure and insist that justice must be done."
The Israeli government responded to the latest developments by restating its view that the Goldstone report was flawed from the outset.
"Israel's position on the Goldstone report and the whole process that established the committee has not changed. The establishment of the committee was based on fundamental flaws of the United Nations human rights council. The report was handled in a highly politicised manner by a council lacking in moral authority," said Yigal Palmor, spokesman for the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs.
"We believed that the methodology, workings and findings of the committee were mind-bogglingly distorted. All this is still valid as is Israel's commitment to investigate itself regardless of resolutions by any foreign body. We believe that our investigations and our transparency in carrying those out are the best reproach to any criticisms of Operation Cast Lead."
http://fwd4.me/EMb
Goldstone report: Statement issued by members of UN mission on Gaza war
In recent days some articles and comments appearing in the press with respect to the report of the United Nations (UN) fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict of 2008-2009 have misrepresented facts in an attempt to delegitimise the findings of this report and to cast doubts on its credibility.
The mission that comprised four members, including Justice Richard Goldstone as its chair, came to an end when it presented its report to the UN human rights council in September 2009. The report of the mission is now an official UN document and all actions taken pursuant to its findings and recommendations fall solely within the purview of the United Nations general assembly which, along with the human rights council, reviewed and endorsed it at the end of 2009.
Aspersions cast on the findings of the report, nevertheless, cannot be left unchallenged. Members of the mission, signatories to this statement, find it necessary to dispel any impression that subsequent developments have rendered any part of the mission's report unsubstantiated, erroneous or inaccurate.
We concur in our view that there is no justification for any demand or expectation for reconsideration of the report as nothing of substance has appeared that would in any way change the context, findings or conclusions of that report with respect to any of the parties to the Gaza conflict. Indeed, there is no UN procedure or precedent to that effect.
The report of the fact-finding mission contains the conclusions made after diligent, independent and objective consideration of the information related to the events within our mandate, and careful assessment of its reliability and credibility. We firmly stand by these conclusions.
Also, it is the prerogative of the UN to take cognisance of any evidence subsequently gathered under domestic procedures that it finds credible and in accordance with international standards. Over 18 months after publication of the report, however, we are very far from reaching that point.
The mandate of the mission did not require it to conduct a judicial or even a quasi-judicial investigation. Like all reports of similar missions of the UN, it provided the basis for parties to conduct investigations for gathering of evidence, as required by international law, and, if so warranted, prosecution of individuals who ordered, planned or carried out international crimes.
In the case of the Gaza conflict, we believe that both parties held responsible in this respect, have yet to establish a convincing basis for any claims that contradict the findings of the mission's report.
The report recommended that proper investigations and judicial processes should ideally be carried out first of all at the domestic level, with monitoring by the UN. If these proved inadequate, it laid down a roadmap for the continuation of such processes at the international level. In line with these recommendations, the UN human rights council appointed a committee of independent experts to monitor the independence, effectiveness and genuineness of any domestic proceedings carried out to investigate crimes and violations of international law pointed out in the mission's report.
Many of those calling for the nullification of our report imply that the final report by the follow-up committee's two members, Judge Mary McGowan Davies and Judge Lennart Aspergren, presented to the human rights council in March 2011, somehow contradicts the fact-finding mission's report or invalidates it.
In the light of the observations of this committee such claims are completely misplaced, and a clear distortion of their findings. The committee's report states that, according to available information, Israel has conducted some 400 command investigations into allegations by the fact-finding mission and other organisations. Command investigations are operational, not legal, inquiries and are conducted by personnel from the same command structure as those under investigation. Out of these, the committee reports that 52 criminal investigations into allegations of wrongdoings have been opened. Of these, three have been submitted for prosecution, with two of them resulting in convictions (one for theft of a credit card, resulting in a sentence of seven months' imprisonment, and another for using a Palestinian child as a human shield, which resulted in a suspended sentence of three months). The third case, related to allegations of deliberate targeting of an individual waving a white flag, is still ongoing.
The committee has expressed serious concerns about the late start and slow pace of the proceedings, their insufficient transparency and the participation of victims and witnesses. Out of the 36 incidents relating to Gaza described in the fact-finding mission report, more than one third remain unresolved or without a clear status over two years after the conflict. The committee concluded that the slow progress could seriously impair the effectiveness of the investigations and prospects of achieving justice and accountability. Therefore, the mechanisms that are being used by the Israeli authorities to investigate the incidents are proving inadequate to genuinely ascertain the facts and any ensuing legal responsibility.
In addition, with regard to the issue of the policies guiding Operation Cast Lead, the committee states that there is "no indication that Israel has opened investigations into the actions of those who designed, planned, ordered and oversaw Operation Cast Lead". In other words, one of the most serious allegations about the conduct of Israel's military operations remains completely unaddressed.
We regret that no domestic investigations at all have been started into any of the allegations of international crimes committed by members of Palestinian armed groups in Gaza which have fired thousands of rockets into southern Israel. The committee observes the same in its report.
We consider that calls to reconsider or even retract the report, as well as attempts at misrepresenting its nature and purpose, disregard the right of victims, Palestinian and Israeli, to truth and justice. They also ignore the responsibility of the relevant parties under international law to conduct prompt, thorough, effective and independent investigations. We regret the personal attacks and the extraordinary pressure placed on members of the fact-finding mission since we began our work in May 2009. This campaign has been clearly aimed at undermining the integrity of the report and its authors. Had we given in to pressures from any quarter to sanitise our conclusions, we would be doing a serious injustice to the hundreds of innocent civilians killed during the Gaza conflict, the thousands injured, and the hundreds of thousands whose lives continue to be deeply affected by the conflict and the blockade.
The report has triggered a process that is still under way and should continue until justice is done and respect for international human rights and humanitarian law by everyone is ensured.
Comments on this article are set to remain open for 24 hours from the time of publication but may be closed overnight
http://fwd4.me/ELK
13 apr 2011
Israel says 'lack of evidence' in Gaza death probe
Israel's military advocate general is to close an investigation into the shooting deaths of four Palestinian civilians who were carrying a white flag, a military spokeswoman told AFP on Tuesday.
"Due to lack of evidence, the army advocate general Avishai Mendelblit is to close the inquiry into the death of four Palestinians on January 5, 2009, in the Zaytoun area of Gaza City," the spokeswoman said.
According to Israeli human rights group B'Tselem, four members of the Haji family, including their three-year-old daughter, were killed and another nine people were injured when an Israeli tank opened fire on them, despite the fact that they were holding a white flag.
The incident was among those mentioned in a report authored by jurist Richard Goldstone into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during Israel's December 2008-January 2009 Operation Cast Lead.
The 22-day war claimed the lives of some 1,400 Palestinians -- more than half civilians -- and 13 Israelis, including 10 soldiers.
The Goldstone report criticized both Israel and militant group Hamas for their conduct during the conflict and called on both sides to carry out investigations into the actions of their fighters.
The Israeli military says it has carried out internal investigations into 400 allegations of lapses in military discipline by its troops during the conflict.
B'Tselem said it had no immediate comment on the closure of the investigation.
http://fwd4.me/zYx
Israeli prosecutor to close Gaza massacre probe
The Israeli military prosecutor is expected to close an investigation into the murder of four Palestinian civilians, including a three-year-old girl, who were waving a white flag during the 2008-9 Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip.
The prosecution claimed there was not enough evidence to support that the shooting contravened the law. Israel's Chief Military Advocate General Avichai Mendelblit had testified before the Turkel committee, the same board that investigated the Freedom Flotilla massacre, on what happened in the Al-Zaytoun suburb in Gaza city on January 5, 2009, when four were killed and nine others injured, including a baby less than seven months old.
The Goldstone report had also mentioned the incident after it was highlighted by the Israeli B'Tselem rights group. According to that report, the Huja family tried to flee their home after the war began on land in their area. The head of household Mohammed Huja was then killed after a rocket hit the home. Then Israeli soldiers entered and ordered the family to move to a nearby house where around 30 people were being detained in a room, with the men cuffed and blindfolded. Then, after noon, the soldiers forced the people to leave the house, and the Arafat family joined them waving a white flag.
The report says that the soldiers proceeded to open fire against them, killing Alla Arafat, 27, and injuring seven others. As the Red Cross did not manage to reach the area, Mahmoud Huja, 15, and baby Shahd Huja also died later. Military police decided to investigate the massacre in the wake of those Goldstone and B'Tselem reports.
Two years later, the military prosecutor said the soldiers did not fire in contradiction to procedure and that the case is expected to be closed without an indictment.
http://fwd4.me/zWv
Israel says 'lack of evidence' in Gaza death probe
Israel's military advocate general is to close an investigation into the shooting deaths of four Palestinian civilians who were carrying a white flag, a military spokeswoman told AFP on Tuesday.
"Due to lack of evidence, the army advocate general Avishai Mendelblit is to close the inquiry into the death of four Palestinians on January 5, 2009, in the Zaytoun area of Gaza City," the spokeswoman said.
According to Israeli human rights group B'Tselem, four members of the Haji family, including their three-year-old daughter, were killed and another nine people were injured when an Israeli tank opened fire on them, despite the fact that they were holding a white flag.
The incident was among those mentioned in a report authored by jurist Richard Goldstone into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during Israel's December 2008-January 2009 Operation Cast Lead.
The 22-day war claimed the lives of some 1,400 Palestinians -- more than half civilians -- and 13 Israelis, including 10 soldiers.
The Goldstone report criticized both Israel and militant group Hamas for their conduct during the conflict and called on both sides to carry out investigations into the actions of their fighters.
The Israeli military says it has carried out internal investigations into 400 allegations of lapses in military discipline by its troops during the conflict.
B'Tselem said it had no immediate comment on the closure of the investigation.
http://fwd4.me/zYx
Israeli prosecutor to close Gaza massacre probe
The Israeli military prosecutor is expected to close an investigation into the murder of four Palestinian civilians, including a three-year-old girl, who were waving a white flag during the 2008-9 Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip.
The prosecution claimed there was not enough evidence to support that the shooting contravened the law. Israel's Chief Military Advocate General Avichai Mendelblit had testified before the Turkel committee, the same board that investigated the Freedom Flotilla massacre, on what happened in the Al-Zaytoun suburb in Gaza city on January 5, 2009, when four were killed and nine others injured, including a baby less than seven months old.
The Goldstone report had also mentioned the incident after it was highlighted by the Israeli B'Tselem rights group. According to that report, the Huja family tried to flee their home after the war began on land in their area. The head of household Mohammed Huja was then killed after a rocket hit the home. Then Israeli soldiers entered and ordered the family to move to a nearby house where around 30 people were being detained in a room, with the men cuffed and blindfolded. Then, after noon, the soldiers forced the people to leave the house, and the Arafat family joined them waving a white flag.
The report says that the soldiers proceeded to open fire against them, killing Alla Arafat, 27, and injuring seven others. As the Red Cross did not manage to reach the area, Mahmoud Huja, 15, and baby Shahd Huja also died later. Military police decided to investigate the massacre in the wake of those Goldstone and B'Tselem reports.
Two years later, the military prosecutor said the soldiers did not fire in contradiction to procedure and that the case is expected to be closed without an indictment.
http://fwd4.me/zWv
8 apr 2011
Peres asks Ban to retract Goldstone report
Peres asks Ban to retract Goldstone report
|
President tells UN chief his organization is employing double standards towards Israel, Hamas.
WASHINGTON President Shimon Peres met with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon Friday and asked him to publically retract the Goldstone report, which accuses Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, after Judge Richard Goldstone himself expressed regret over it in an editorial with the Washington Post. Peres and Ban also discussed Mideast issues such as the growing violence from Hamas in the Gaza Strip and methods in which to promote peace between Israel and the Palestinians. At the beginning of the meeting, held at UN Headquarters in New York, |
Peres mentioned the ongoing rocket fire from terror groups in Gaza, which began Thursday with an anti-tank missile attack on a school bus. A 16-year old boy was critically wounded, Peres told Ban, and Israel would not hesitate to defend itself before such attacks.
"The UN cannot be neutral in the face of projectile fire from Gaza to Israel," Peres said, mentioning also the terror attack in the settlement of Itamar in which five family members were stabbed to death.
Ban replied that he had condemned the fire from Gaza, but that he was also opposed to retaliatory IDF strikes, "which also lead to deaths on the other side". He urged both sides to resume calm and work out differences peacefully.
Ban also told Peres that Goldstone had not retracted his report, and that the judge regretted that Israel had not cooperated with his probe of Operation Cast Lead, as the report's conclusions would have been different in this case. He added that he himself had promoted the report in order to try to get both sides to investigate their actions.
But Peres argued that Hamas had not launched a single inquiry. "Why doesn't the UN pressure Hamas to investigate Cast Lead?" the president asked, while Israel investigated all of the report's conclusions and even tried a number of cases in court. He said the UN was employing double standards.
Peres also asked Ban to publically condemn the Goldstone report, calling it "an outrage". Goldstone himself said he had not realized Hamas had started firing first, the president said.
"Is this a joke? The situation was crystal clear," he said. Israel restrained itself despite eight years of rocket fire while Hamas fired at will, and only when Israel reacted did the world have anything to say, the president charged. "Doesn't he read the papers?"
Peres added that the "fairy tales" Goldstone had woven in his report "have a life of their own", and that they were harming Israel unjustifiably. The UN must retract the report, he said, adding that Goldstone could not "regret regretting" the report.
The president also remarked on a possible unilateral declaration of statehood by Palestinians, saying that it would not solve the conflict at hand. "The UN and international community should not deceive the Palestinians to believe that they can achieve statehood with a unilateral declaration at the UN," he said.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4054164,00.html
Why Goldstone wrote that Op-Ed? Interview Jadaliyya Co-Editor
"The UN cannot be neutral in the face of projectile fire from Gaza to Israel," Peres said, mentioning also the terror attack in the settlement of Itamar in which five family members were stabbed to death.
Ban replied that he had condemned the fire from Gaza, but that he was also opposed to retaliatory IDF strikes, "which also lead to deaths on the other side". He urged both sides to resume calm and work out differences peacefully.
Ban also told Peres that Goldstone had not retracted his report, and that the judge regretted that Israel had not cooperated with his probe of Operation Cast Lead, as the report's conclusions would have been different in this case. He added that he himself had promoted the report in order to try to get both sides to investigate their actions.
But Peres argued that Hamas had not launched a single inquiry. "Why doesn't the UN pressure Hamas to investigate Cast Lead?" the president asked, while Israel investigated all of the report's conclusions and even tried a number of cases in court. He said the UN was employing double standards.
Peres also asked Ban to publically condemn the Goldstone report, calling it "an outrage". Goldstone himself said he had not realized Hamas had started firing first, the president said.
"Is this a joke? The situation was crystal clear," he said. Israel restrained itself despite eight years of rocket fire while Hamas fired at will, and only when Israel reacted did the world have anything to say, the president charged. "Doesn't he read the papers?"
Peres added that the "fairy tales" Goldstone had woven in his report "have a life of their own", and that they were harming Israel unjustifiably. The UN must retract the report, he said, adding that Goldstone could not "regret regretting" the report.
The president also remarked on a possible unilateral declaration of statehood by Palestinians, saying that it would not solve the conflict at hand. "The UN and international community should not deceive the Palestinians to believe that they can achieve statehood with a unilateral declaration at the UN," he said.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4054164,00.html
Why Goldstone wrote that Op-Ed? Interview Jadaliyya Co-Editor
|
On Friday April 1st, justice Richard Goldstone wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post that seemingly retracts his report investigating the Gaza war known as Cast Led. No one really knows what exactly led the justice to do this. In the video interview below, Jadaliyya Co-Editor Noura Erakat explores some possible answers.
Noura participated in a debate a week prior over the very same Goldstone report (watch the debate here). The debate was tweeted live here at Jadaliyya. Erakat published this op-ed in relation to Goldstone’s. http://fwd4.me/zC9 |
Israel's conduct under the spotlight
Your leader on Richard Goldstone's revised and more sympathetic take on Israel's "guilt" in its conduct of the Gaza war is uncharitable and a typical piece of liberal-left special pleading, always seeking to stress the negative and failing to put any proper context. During the war in Gaza in 2009, around 700 Palestinian non-combatants were killed. To take only one other example, the ethnic strife in Sri Lanka, at the same time, resulted in up to 20 times the number of civilian deaths, but this civil war never seemed to concern the UN human rights council or your paper to the same or a proportionate degree.
The UNHRC, which commissioned the Goldstone report, is a tainted political body. Only a few years ago it was chaired by Libya, whose membership has just been suspended. Other members include Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, presently slaughtering their own people protesting for democracy. The council is currently chaired by a Thai representative, whose government was criticised earlier this year for failure to fulfil its pledges to hold human rights abusers accountable in 2010. At least 90 people died and 2,000 were injured in street battles in Bangkok.
As Jonathan Freedland points out in his article (Where's the Goldstone report into Sri Lanka, Congo, Darfur or Britain? It is Israel that is singled out at every UNHRC meeting, while the much greater need to control human rights abuses in some of its member states or their associates is ignored. Freedland also makes the point that much current Arab unrest is due to their own governmental problems, not the failure to settle the Israel-Palestine dispute, customarily blamed for all the ills of the Middle East.
Jonathan Freedland is right to highlight the disparity in the treatment of Israel and other states in the Middle East, not to say the rest of the world. What his article lacks, however, is an acknowledgment that this emphasis on Israel is due in no small part to western foreign policy which has kept the despots and dictators in place in "Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain", while giving Israel free rein to oppress the Palestinians and colonise their land.
Hosni Mubarak was kept in power by the US because he played the game and put Israel's interests above those of his own people. Israel's abysmal human rights record continues thanks to US political, military and financial support. In reality Israel couldn't care less about "bias" in the "academic, cultural and, yes, the media sphere" as long as US backing is there for the ongoing expansion of the territory it controls.
Sure, let us have "Goldstone reports" on other countries and bring them up to speed on human rights and international laws, but Freedland appears to be saying that if we can't have them all then Israel should be let off the hook. If that happens, it will prove the point that Israel deserves a greater "volume of attention" precisely because it is allowed by its western sponsors to act with impunity.
While Arab regimes are oppressive to maintain the governments in power, Israel's oppression goes to the heart of its existence as a state to which Jews from around the world have more right to live than the native non-Jewish population. This involves the ethnic cleansing of the native Arab population in order to secure and maintain a Jewish majority.
Other states have carried out ethnic cleansing in the past. But Israel owes its ethno-religious majority to a recent, current and ongoing campaign of displacement of the indigenous population. That was true of the US, it was true of Australia. It has been true of many states. But Israel's crimes are more recent and, therefore, its continued existence is predicated on its human rights.
Western hypocrisy is the reason that so many people focus on the particular conduct of Israel. When a single Chinese dissident disappears the US, Britain and others instantly respond (Report, 4 April). When the Israeli government was killing 700 civilians in Gaza, the US, British and other western governments said nothing.
http://fwd4.me/zBu
Your leader on Richard Goldstone's revised and more sympathetic take on Israel's "guilt" in its conduct of the Gaza war is uncharitable and a typical piece of liberal-left special pleading, always seeking to stress the negative and failing to put any proper context. During the war in Gaza in 2009, around 700 Palestinian non-combatants were killed. To take only one other example, the ethnic strife in Sri Lanka, at the same time, resulted in up to 20 times the number of civilian deaths, but this civil war never seemed to concern the UN human rights council or your paper to the same or a proportionate degree.
The UNHRC, which commissioned the Goldstone report, is a tainted political body. Only a few years ago it was chaired by Libya, whose membership has just been suspended. Other members include Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, presently slaughtering their own people protesting for democracy. The council is currently chaired by a Thai representative, whose government was criticised earlier this year for failure to fulfil its pledges to hold human rights abusers accountable in 2010. At least 90 people died and 2,000 were injured in street battles in Bangkok.
As Jonathan Freedland points out in his article (Where's the Goldstone report into Sri Lanka, Congo, Darfur or Britain? It is Israel that is singled out at every UNHRC meeting, while the much greater need to control human rights abuses in some of its member states or their associates is ignored. Freedland also makes the point that much current Arab unrest is due to their own governmental problems, not the failure to settle the Israel-Palestine dispute, customarily blamed for all the ills of the Middle East.
Jonathan Freedland is right to highlight the disparity in the treatment of Israel and other states in the Middle East, not to say the rest of the world. What his article lacks, however, is an acknowledgment that this emphasis on Israel is due in no small part to western foreign policy which has kept the despots and dictators in place in "Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain", while giving Israel free rein to oppress the Palestinians and colonise their land.
Hosni Mubarak was kept in power by the US because he played the game and put Israel's interests above those of his own people. Israel's abysmal human rights record continues thanks to US political, military and financial support. In reality Israel couldn't care less about "bias" in the "academic, cultural and, yes, the media sphere" as long as US backing is there for the ongoing expansion of the territory it controls.
Sure, let us have "Goldstone reports" on other countries and bring them up to speed on human rights and international laws, but Freedland appears to be saying that if we can't have them all then Israel should be let off the hook. If that happens, it will prove the point that Israel deserves a greater "volume of attention" precisely because it is allowed by its western sponsors to act with impunity.
While Arab regimes are oppressive to maintain the governments in power, Israel's oppression goes to the heart of its existence as a state to which Jews from around the world have more right to live than the native non-Jewish population. This involves the ethnic cleansing of the native Arab population in order to secure and maintain a Jewish majority.
Other states have carried out ethnic cleansing in the past. But Israel owes its ethno-religious majority to a recent, current and ongoing campaign of displacement of the indigenous population. That was true of the US, it was true of Australia. It has been true of many states. But Israel's crimes are more recent and, therefore, its continued existence is predicated on its human rights.
Western hypocrisy is the reason that so many people focus on the particular conduct of Israel. When a single Chinese dissident disappears the US, Britain and others instantly respond (Report, 4 April). When the Israeli government was killing 700 civilians in Gaza, the US, British and other western governments said nothing.
http://fwd4.me/zBu