4 apr 2012
Barhoum: ICC's Decision is a New License to Kill More Palestinians
Hague Court's rejection to criminalize the Zionist occupation's crimes in Gaza, claiming that Palestine is not a state, is a green light for the occupation to commit more crimes and a new license to kill more Palestinians, Fawzi Barhoum, Hamas’s spokesman, stated.
All the UN and international investigation reports confirmed that occupation committed war crimes in Gaza through mass murder, killing children, bombing mosques and houses over their inhabitants, and the murder and maiming of civilians; men, women and children, Barhoum said in a statement on Wednesday on his page on "Facebook".
He considered the court's claim that Palestine is not classified as a state in the United Nations organizations unacceptable "because that UNESCO, the United Nations organization, accepted Palestine as a state in October 2011. So under the United Nations regulations and practices, Palestine must be treated as a state even in the International Criminal Court.
Barhoum asked the ICC to reconsider its decision and not yield to American and Zionist pressure. He also asked the PA to deal with all the concerned parties and the international forums to prosecute the Zionist occupation crimes and to protect and recover the Palestinians rights and to de-legitimize the occupation ending all forms of negotiations with it.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) rejected, on Tuesday, the Palestinian Authority's call filed against the Zionist occupation for committing war crimes in the Gaza Strip in late 2008 and early 2009, claiming that Palestine Authority is only an observer in the UN and not a state.
For its part, the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights expressed, in a statement on Wednesday, its disappointment at the ICC's decision saying that it is a "black day for international justice" adding that the ICC Prosecutor failed in dealing with this issue.
The center stressed that the Prosecutor's decision, without referring the matter to the Pre-Trial Chamber, raised doubts about the ICC Prosecutor who was not acting in the interest of justice, but on political considerations.
The center also called the UN organizations especially the General Assembly to work consistently for justice interests and to complete the so-called "Goldstone process" by referring the matter to the Security Council to refer the situation in "Israel" and Palestine to the International Criminal Court.
http://fwd4.me/0xwA
3 apr 2012
ICC Prosecutor statement: "Fears Over Justice for Gaza Victims"
A “dangerous” statement by the office of International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor that it cannot consider allegations of crimes committed during the 2008-9 Gaza conflict means Palestinian and Israeli victims seem likely to be denied justice, Amnesty International said.
The Office of the Prosecutor today said [PDF] that it cannot consider allegations of crimes committed during the conflict unless the relevant UN bodies or ICC states parties determine that the Palestinian Authority is a state.
"This dangerous decision opens the ICC to accusations of political bias and is inconsistent with the independence of the ICC. It also breaches the Rome Statute which clearly states that such matters should be considered by the institution’s judges,” said Marek Marczyński, Head of Amnesty International’s International Justice campaign.
"For the past three years, the prosecutor has been considering the question of whether the Palestinian Authority is a "state" that comes under the jurisdiction of the ICC and whether the ICC can investigate crimes committed during the 2008-9 conflict in Gaza and southern Israel.”
“Now, despite Amnesty International’s calls and a very clear requirement in the ICC’s statute that the judges should decide on such matters, the Prosecutor has erroneously dodged the question, passing it to other political bodies.”
“Amnesty International once again calls on the Prosecutor to follow the procedures established by the Rome Statute by passing the matter to the judges, rather than frustrating efforts to bring justice to Palestinian and Israeli victims of the Gaza conflict.”
http://fwd4.me/0xlv
European Parliamentarians: Israel Should be Held Accountable for its Actions
A five-member European Parliament delegation on a visit to the occupied territories expressed shock at Israeli settlers’ violence against Palestinian civilians, a statement by the delegation said Wednesday.
“The delegation witnessed the impact of the Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and Area C in the West Bank and was shocked by evidence of the Israeli settler violence against peaceful inhabitants as reported by UN and international humanitarian organisations,” said the statement.
“The delegation condemns the Israeli policy of the special planning and zoning controls in the occupied Palestinian territories, which has led to the demolition of habitable houses and destruction of valuable infrastructure projects many of which have been funded through the European Union and its Member States taxpayers,” it added.
The primary purpose of the visit is to focus on the internal reconciliation, the situation in Area C, the Israeli settlements, water issue, political prisoners and the attacks on the media.
The delegation, led by Irish European Parliament member Emer Costello, met with the elected representatives of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) and saw firsthand the conditions on the ground of the Palestinian people living in the territories.
The conclusion for the delegation is that the Oslo agreements with the division into Areas A, B and C, which was intended to be an interim arrangement, have turned out to be a burden for the Palestinians and are used by Israel as a legitimation for a de facto annexation.
Israel’s obligations as an occupying power are not being met and Israel is violating International Law by denying the Palestinian citizens their basic human rights (freedom of movement, access to water, evictions from their homes etc).
The delegation called on the EU High Representative (HR) and the Member States to demand Israel adhere to international law in the occupied territories and refrain from any upgrading in the relationship with Israel.
“Measures must to be taken to ensure that products made in the settlements do not receive any preferential treatment in the EU market,” said the statement. “Moreover, the HR and the Member States should seek appropriate compensation from the Israeli authorities for any European project or service provided for the Palestinian people which are destroyed by Israel.”
The Delegation is composed of the Chair Emer Costello (S&D, Ir), Vice-Chair Margrete Auken (Greens, Dk) and Members Nicolo Rinaldi (ALDE, It), Roza Thun (EPP, Pl) and Norbert Neuser (S&D, De).
http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=19462
Barhoum: ICC's Decision is a New License to Kill More Palestinians
Hague Court's rejection to criminalize the Zionist occupation's crimes in Gaza, claiming that Palestine is not a state, is a green light for the occupation to commit more crimes and a new license to kill more Palestinians, Fawzi Barhoum, Hamas’s spokesman, stated.
All the UN and international investigation reports confirmed that occupation committed war crimes in Gaza through mass murder, killing children, bombing mosques and houses over their inhabitants, and the murder and maiming of civilians; men, women and children, Barhoum said in a statement on Wednesday on his page on "Facebook".
He considered the court's claim that Palestine is not classified as a state in the United Nations organizations unacceptable "because that UNESCO, the United Nations organization, accepted Palestine as a state in October 2011. So under the United Nations regulations and practices, Palestine must be treated as a state even in the International Criminal Court.
Barhoum asked the ICC to reconsider its decision and not yield to American and Zionist pressure. He also asked the PA to deal with all the concerned parties and the international forums to prosecute the Zionist occupation crimes and to protect and recover the Palestinians rights and to de-legitimize the occupation ending all forms of negotiations with it.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) rejected, on Tuesday, the Palestinian Authority's call filed against the Zionist occupation for committing war crimes in the Gaza Strip in late 2008 and early 2009, claiming that Palestine Authority is only an observer in the UN and not a state.
For its part, the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights expressed, in a statement on Wednesday, its disappointment at the ICC's decision saying that it is a "black day for international justice" adding that the ICC Prosecutor failed in dealing with this issue.
The center stressed that the Prosecutor's decision, without referring the matter to the Pre-Trial Chamber, raised doubts about the ICC Prosecutor who was not acting in the interest of justice, but on political considerations.
The center also called the UN organizations especially the General Assembly to work consistently for justice interests and to complete the so-called "Goldstone process" by referring the matter to the Security Council to refer the situation in "Israel" and Palestine to the International Criminal Court.
http://fwd4.me/0xwA
3 apr 2012
ICC Prosecutor statement: "Fears Over Justice for Gaza Victims"
A “dangerous” statement by the office of International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor that it cannot consider allegations of crimes committed during the 2008-9 Gaza conflict means Palestinian and Israeli victims seem likely to be denied justice, Amnesty International said.
The Office of the Prosecutor today said [PDF] that it cannot consider allegations of crimes committed during the conflict unless the relevant UN bodies or ICC states parties determine that the Palestinian Authority is a state.
"This dangerous decision opens the ICC to accusations of political bias and is inconsistent with the independence of the ICC. It also breaches the Rome Statute which clearly states that such matters should be considered by the institution’s judges,” said Marek Marczyński, Head of Amnesty International’s International Justice campaign.
"For the past three years, the prosecutor has been considering the question of whether the Palestinian Authority is a "state" that comes under the jurisdiction of the ICC and whether the ICC can investigate crimes committed during the 2008-9 conflict in Gaza and southern Israel.”
“Now, despite Amnesty International’s calls and a very clear requirement in the ICC’s statute that the judges should decide on such matters, the Prosecutor has erroneously dodged the question, passing it to other political bodies.”
“Amnesty International once again calls on the Prosecutor to follow the procedures established by the Rome Statute by passing the matter to the judges, rather than frustrating efforts to bring justice to Palestinian and Israeli victims of the Gaza conflict.”
http://fwd4.me/0xlv
European Parliamentarians: Israel Should be Held Accountable for its Actions
A five-member European Parliament delegation on a visit to the occupied territories expressed shock at Israeli settlers’ violence against Palestinian civilians, a statement by the delegation said Wednesday.
“The delegation witnessed the impact of the Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and Area C in the West Bank and was shocked by evidence of the Israeli settler violence against peaceful inhabitants as reported by UN and international humanitarian organisations,” said the statement.
“The delegation condemns the Israeli policy of the special planning and zoning controls in the occupied Palestinian territories, which has led to the demolition of habitable houses and destruction of valuable infrastructure projects many of which have been funded through the European Union and its Member States taxpayers,” it added.
The primary purpose of the visit is to focus on the internal reconciliation, the situation in Area C, the Israeli settlements, water issue, political prisoners and the attacks on the media.
The delegation, led by Irish European Parliament member Emer Costello, met with the elected representatives of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) and saw firsthand the conditions on the ground of the Palestinian people living in the territories.
The conclusion for the delegation is that the Oslo agreements with the division into Areas A, B and C, which was intended to be an interim arrangement, have turned out to be a burden for the Palestinians and are used by Israel as a legitimation for a de facto annexation.
Israel’s obligations as an occupying power are not being met and Israel is violating International Law by denying the Palestinian citizens their basic human rights (freedom of movement, access to water, evictions from their homes etc).
The delegation called on the EU High Representative (HR) and the Member States to demand Israel adhere to international law in the occupied territories and refrain from any upgrading in the relationship with Israel.
“Measures must to be taken to ensure that products made in the settlements do not receive any preferential treatment in the EU market,” said the statement. “Moreover, the HR and the Member States should seek appropriate compensation from the Israeli authorities for any European project or service provided for the Palestinian people which are destroyed by Israel.”
The Delegation is composed of the Chair Emer Costello (S&D, Ir), Vice-Chair Margrete Auken (Greens, Dk) and Members Nicolo Rinaldi (ALDE, It), Roza Thun (EPP, Pl) and Norbert Neuser (S&D, De).
http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=19462
12 jan 2012
Human Rights Center: Israeli Courts Deprive Palestinian Victims of Access to Justice
The Israeli judicial system is partial and biased against Palestinian. It often imposes procedural barriers, and other times, impose more financial burdens, Thursday said a press release published on the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) website.
It said the policies of the Israeli government further imposes physical barriers on effective access of Palestinian victims to the Israeli courts, thus depriving Palestinian victims in general, and victims of the Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip (27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009), codenamed “Operation Cast Lead,” in particular of remedy and redress according to international human rights instruments.
In spite of all such barriers, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights PCHR will continue its serious efforts to ensure remedy for victims, as it is the legal representative in 100 cases on behalf of 626 Palestinian victims affected by Operation Cast Lead.
Strongly believing in the universality of human rights, PCHR will continue it work to face injustice, assist the victims and confront the barriers imposed by the Israeli occupation authorities.
In the context of their effort to deny the victims their right to justice and remedy, Israeli courts of various degrees considering cases filed on behalf of victims of Operation Cast Lead issued a series of decisions limiting access of Palestinian victims to justice.
The most significant decision in this regard was the one compelling each claimant in a civil case to pay a court insurance fee or bank guaranty of 20,000 NIS before the court will allow the case to proceed. If the money is not paid within 60-120 days, the claim will be dismissed.
The insurance fee means that the claimant or his/her representative must pay it to the court’s fund directly, while the bank guaranty is a financial guaranty signed by the claimant or his/her representative to a bank, and the bank deposits such signed guaranty in the court’s fund.
This decision has been issued in regard to 14 of the cases followed up by PCHR before Israeli courts. PCHR filed a number of petitions at the Israeli High Court in Jerusalem, demanding canceling these decisions or decreasing the amount of the guaranty. PCHR established its claim on a number of points, including, inter alia:
1. Determining the Ministry of Defense’s responsibilities for the incidents and the resulting damage.
2. Depositing a guaranty aims at blocking the way for claimants to file compensation claims for the damage incurred to them, as they have the right to know the reasons of killing their family members and it is not a form of fraud on the state.
3. Article 8 of the Basic Law relating to respect for the individuals and their freedom, which is applicable in the Israeli courts, establishes that the rule is that a guaranty must not be obligatory, and the exception is compelling payment of such guaranty.
4. The request to deposit guaranties followed the deposition of the prosecution’s response and before the prosecution explained its narrative of the incidents individually.
5. The amounts of guaranties are too high, especially as the economic conditions of the Gaza Strip’s population is extremely deteriorated.
6. The expenses for the prosecution, when opening an investigation in each case, are less than the amounts required to be deposited.
In its response to PCHR’s petition, the Israeli prosecution claimed that the filed cases relate to incidents that occurred in the context of a clear military operation (Operation Cast Lead), which the Israeli military was forced to launch according to decisions taken by the government of Israel (a military operation, according to the Israeli Civil Torts - Liability of the State – Law of 1952, provides complete impunity against damage claims).
The prosecution further claimed that the claims that are instituted are relating to compensation with dozens of millions of NIS, and due to the high number of claimants and incidents, it is expected that the prosecution is likely to endure high expenses to make a single checking for each incident, its circumstance and the alleged injury.
Additionally, it claimed that the claimants are non-citizens or non-residents of the State of Israel, and they cannot prove that they have property in territory of the State of Israel (the claimants are out of the jurisdiction).
For this reason, according to the prosecution’s claim, it is difficult to endure the expenses if the claim is rejected, and the guaranty compels the claimant to be serious in his/her claim.
In turn, the Israeli High Court rejected PCHR’s petitions and upheld the prosecution’s claims, which confirms the Israeli judiciary’s collusion, its surrender to the government’s dictations and its provision of a legal cover for the government’s illegal actions.
PCHR reiterates that the decisions taken by the Israeli courts with regard to guaranties constitute a large monetary barrier, which deprives the victims of their fundamental right to have an effective judicial remedy, including compensation, in violation of fundamental human rights ensured under the international law.
The right to get compensation is very essential for victims to rebuild their lives partially, although such compensation is worthless in comparison to their loss.
Accordingly, PCHR believes that under the current situation, and in light of such decisions by the Israeli courts and the Israeli judiciary’s bias against Palestinian victims, compensation is one of the remaining little hopes to achieve some form of justice.
It should be noted that the decisions relating to guaranties are part of a series of decisions and measures that have been taken by Israeli occupation authorities over years in order to prevent Palestinians from claiming for compensation before Israeli courts for violations they are subjected to.
On July 27, 2005, the Israeli Knesset approved an amendment to the Civil Torts Law (Liability of the State) of 1952, preventing Palestinians from claiming for compensation for the State of Israel.
In response, 9 human rights organizations, including PCHR, filed a petition at the Israeli High Court challenging the law, and were able to obtain a decision allowing Palestinians to institute individual compensation claims before Israeli courts, and the judge would have the power of appreciation to adjust or reject it, and estimate the amount of the guaranty.
The Civil Torts (Liability of the State) Law had previously been amended to decrease the statute of limitations with respect to a compensation claim from 7 to 2 years, and requiring that a written notice be sent to the Israeli Defense Ministry within 60 days of the incident otherwise the right to judicial remedy will be terminated.
Other monetary barriers include also that Israeli courts often require claimants to pay insurance fees before initiating the judicial procedures. Such fees are left for estimations of courts. Concerning claims related to damages incurred to property, the fees are proportions of the values of property.
In claims related to killings and injuries, there is no specific range for fees. Due to such monetary burdens, PCHR was forced to return several files to the victims.
In addition, there are also physical barriers facing the victims. Since 2007, in spite of decisions by courts summoning victims or eyewitnesses, IOF have prevented them from traveling outside the Gaza Strip. As a result, the Israeli courts dismissed many claims under the pretext of the non-presence of eyewitnesses, and even imposed fines on them.
These barriers are part of a series of systematic restrictions imposed by Israel to limit the ability of Palestinian to claim for compensation before Israeli courts for damage caused to them by Israeli occupation forces. Such restrictions make achieving justice and judicial remedy for Palestinians impossible, so the resort must be to international justice mechanism.
PCHR will continue to use all available means to ensure victims’ fundamental human rights, including the right to reparation. Recently, a compensation of 500,000NIS was secured on behalf of the family of Rayah Salama Abu Hajjaj, 64, and Majeda ‘Abdul Karim Abu Hajjaj, 37.
These two women were killed by Israeli forces near Juhor al-Dik village during Operation Cast Lead. The compensation was awarded in an out of court settlement.
http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=18670
Human Rights Center: Israeli Courts Deprive Palestinian Victims of Access to Justice
The Israeli judicial system is partial and biased against Palestinian. It often imposes procedural barriers, and other times, impose more financial burdens, Thursday said a press release published on the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) website.
It said the policies of the Israeli government further imposes physical barriers on effective access of Palestinian victims to the Israeli courts, thus depriving Palestinian victims in general, and victims of the Israeli offensive on the Gaza Strip (27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009), codenamed “Operation Cast Lead,” in particular of remedy and redress according to international human rights instruments.
In spite of all such barriers, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights PCHR will continue its serious efforts to ensure remedy for victims, as it is the legal representative in 100 cases on behalf of 626 Palestinian victims affected by Operation Cast Lead.
Strongly believing in the universality of human rights, PCHR will continue it work to face injustice, assist the victims and confront the barriers imposed by the Israeli occupation authorities.
In the context of their effort to deny the victims their right to justice and remedy, Israeli courts of various degrees considering cases filed on behalf of victims of Operation Cast Lead issued a series of decisions limiting access of Palestinian victims to justice.
The most significant decision in this regard was the one compelling each claimant in a civil case to pay a court insurance fee or bank guaranty of 20,000 NIS before the court will allow the case to proceed. If the money is not paid within 60-120 days, the claim will be dismissed.
The insurance fee means that the claimant or his/her representative must pay it to the court’s fund directly, while the bank guaranty is a financial guaranty signed by the claimant or his/her representative to a bank, and the bank deposits such signed guaranty in the court’s fund.
This decision has been issued in regard to 14 of the cases followed up by PCHR before Israeli courts. PCHR filed a number of petitions at the Israeli High Court in Jerusalem, demanding canceling these decisions or decreasing the amount of the guaranty. PCHR established its claim on a number of points, including, inter alia:
1. Determining the Ministry of Defense’s responsibilities for the incidents and the resulting damage.
2. Depositing a guaranty aims at blocking the way for claimants to file compensation claims for the damage incurred to them, as they have the right to know the reasons of killing their family members and it is not a form of fraud on the state.
3. Article 8 of the Basic Law relating to respect for the individuals and their freedom, which is applicable in the Israeli courts, establishes that the rule is that a guaranty must not be obligatory, and the exception is compelling payment of such guaranty.
4. The request to deposit guaranties followed the deposition of the prosecution’s response and before the prosecution explained its narrative of the incidents individually.
5. The amounts of guaranties are too high, especially as the economic conditions of the Gaza Strip’s population is extremely deteriorated.
6. The expenses for the prosecution, when opening an investigation in each case, are less than the amounts required to be deposited.
In its response to PCHR’s petition, the Israeli prosecution claimed that the filed cases relate to incidents that occurred in the context of a clear military operation (Operation Cast Lead), which the Israeli military was forced to launch according to decisions taken by the government of Israel (a military operation, according to the Israeli Civil Torts - Liability of the State – Law of 1952, provides complete impunity against damage claims).
The prosecution further claimed that the claims that are instituted are relating to compensation with dozens of millions of NIS, and due to the high number of claimants and incidents, it is expected that the prosecution is likely to endure high expenses to make a single checking for each incident, its circumstance and the alleged injury.
Additionally, it claimed that the claimants are non-citizens or non-residents of the State of Israel, and they cannot prove that they have property in territory of the State of Israel (the claimants are out of the jurisdiction).
For this reason, according to the prosecution’s claim, it is difficult to endure the expenses if the claim is rejected, and the guaranty compels the claimant to be serious in his/her claim.
In turn, the Israeli High Court rejected PCHR’s petitions and upheld the prosecution’s claims, which confirms the Israeli judiciary’s collusion, its surrender to the government’s dictations and its provision of a legal cover for the government’s illegal actions.
PCHR reiterates that the decisions taken by the Israeli courts with regard to guaranties constitute a large monetary barrier, which deprives the victims of their fundamental right to have an effective judicial remedy, including compensation, in violation of fundamental human rights ensured under the international law.
The right to get compensation is very essential for victims to rebuild their lives partially, although such compensation is worthless in comparison to their loss.
Accordingly, PCHR believes that under the current situation, and in light of such decisions by the Israeli courts and the Israeli judiciary’s bias against Palestinian victims, compensation is one of the remaining little hopes to achieve some form of justice.
It should be noted that the decisions relating to guaranties are part of a series of decisions and measures that have been taken by Israeli occupation authorities over years in order to prevent Palestinians from claiming for compensation before Israeli courts for violations they are subjected to.
On July 27, 2005, the Israeli Knesset approved an amendment to the Civil Torts Law (Liability of the State) of 1952, preventing Palestinians from claiming for compensation for the State of Israel.
In response, 9 human rights organizations, including PCHR, filed a petition at the Israeli High Court challenging the law, and were able to obtain a decision allowing Palestinians to institute individual compensation claims before Israeli courts, and the judge would have the power of appreciation to adjust or reject it, and estimate the amount of the guaranty.
The Civil Torts (Liability of the State) Law had previously been amended to decrease the statute of limitations with respect to a compensation claim from 7 to 2 years, and requiring that a written notice be sent to the Israeli Defense Ministry within 60 days of the incident otherwise the right to judicial remedy will be terminated.
Other monetary barriers include also that Israeli courts often require claimants to pay insurance fees before initiating the judicial procedures. Such fees are left for estimations of courts. Concerning claims related to damages incurred to property, the fees are proportions of the values of property.
In claims related to killings and injuries, there is no specific range for fees. Due to such monetary burdens, PCHR was forced to return several files to the victims.
In addition, there are also physical barriers facing the victims. Since 2007, in spite of decisions by courts summoning victims or eyewitnesses, IOF have prevented them from traveling outside the Gaza Strip. As a result, the Israeli courts dismissed many claims under the pretext of the non-presence of eyewitnesses, and even imposed fines on them.
These barriers are part of a series of systematic restrictions imposed by Israel to limit the ability of Palestinian to claim for compensation before Israeli courts for damage caused to them by Israeli occupation forces. Such restrictions make achieving justice and judicial remedy for Palestinians impossible, so the resort must be to international justice mechanism.
PCHR will continue to use all available means to ensure victims’ fundamental human rights, including the right to reparation. Recently, a compensation of 500,000NIS was secured on behalf of the family of Rayah Salama Abu Hajjaj, 64, and Majeda ‘Abdul Karim Abu Hajjaj, 37.
These two women were killed by Israeli forces near Juhor al-Dik village during Operation Cast Lead. The compensation was awarded in an out of court settlement.
http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=18670
9 jan 2012
Gaza father: I want to address soldier who killed teen daughter
The family of a 16-year-old girl killed in Israel's Operation Cast Lead remain plagued by questions three years after her death, as a criminal complaint to Israeli authorities goes unanswered.
"Why my daughter? What were their motives? What were their reasons?" asks Ahmed Abu Oda.
"The Israeli military say they are the most moral army in the world, but they killed my daughter, they didn’t respect her right to live."
Nariman Abu Oda was killed on Jan. 9, 2009 by Israeli fire on her home in Beit Hanoun, and the house remains riddled with bullet holes, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, which submitted the complaint in August that year, reports.
"It is clear the shooting was completely indiscriminate," her mother Itidal explains.
Her husband says he knows the legal compliant will not change the fact of his daughter's death, but "the only thing I want is to address the soldier who killed my daughter."
"But I hope one day that we can reach peace with the Israelis and end the war and the killing," he says.
The family, whose citrus grove and poultry farm was also destroyed in the three-week offensive, are struggling to move from their home. "We do not want to live in the house that Nariman was killed in," Ahmed says.
All three of their children have since had daughters who they named Nariman, in memory of their sister.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=451455
The Abu Oda family
"The Israeli military say they are the most moral army in the world, but they killed my daughter, they didn’t respect her right to live.”
On 9 January 2009, the Abu Oda household in the Al Amal neighbourhood of Beit Hanoun came under sustained fire from Israeli positions close to the Gaza-Israeli border two kilometres away.
Nariman Abu Oda, 16, was hit in the right side of her body by Israeli fire as she was walking from the hallway, where the family were taking cover, to the kitchen. Medics were unable to reach the family and Nariman died before she could receive medical attention.
The pockmarked concrete walls of the Abu Oda household tell a good deal of the story of Nariman’s death. Despite the best efforts of father Ahmed Abdel Kareem Muhammad, fifty-seven, and mother, I’tidal Abd al Aziz, fifty-three, to plaster over the patch work of holes and indentations in the walls, ceiling, floors and doors, the house remains riddled with bullet holes. As I’tidal explains “it is clear the shooting was completely indiscriminate.”
Nariman’s mother and father keep returning to the question, why did this happen? For them, it is not an empty rhetorical question, but one that holds a great deal of weight and a great deal of their concern. “Why my daughter? What were their motives? What were their reasons?” asks Ahmed. “The Israeli military say they are the most moral army in the world, but they killed my daughter, they didn’t respect her right to live.”
The Abu Oda family find themselves caught in a deep state of mourning regarding Nariman’s absence, yet at the same time feel her constant presence. Recalling that Nariman used to make him his coffee in the morning, Ahmed says that, he still absentmindedly calls for Nariman when he wants coffee or tea.
“Her room is still exactly as she left it three years ago, with everything still in its place.” Despite this, the family are desperately seeking to move; “we do not want to live in the house that Nariman was killed in,” says Ahmed.
Adding to the sense of presence Nariman has in the house, I’tidal and Ahmed’s children Shadi, thirty-four, Abdel Kareem, thirty-two, and Sahar, thirty, have all since had daughters whom they named Nariman, in the memory of their younger sister.
I’tidal was deeply affected physically and mentally by the loss of her daughter who used to help her a lot with daily household chores. “When I see young girls going to school I imagine her with them, I see her in every room of the house, I will never forget her.
After the incident I was admitted to the hospital for ten days due to shock” recalls I’tidal, “since then I have suffered from huge physical problems resulting from stress.” I’tidal has health complications relating to blood pressure, heart disease and diabetes.
The family did not only lose Nariman during the Israeli offensive, but also their livelihood. The family had a citrus grove and a poultry farm that were totally destroyed during the attack and have another farm that they cannot reach due to its proximity to the Israeli imposed buffer zone.
The family have recently planted seedlings in one of the destroyed farms again but are still waiting to harvest them. However, the loss of income from the farms is mentioned merely as an afterthought to the loss of Nariman. “We care nothing for the loss of our land compared to the loss of our daughter” says Ahmed.
Speaking of the future the couple are desperately seeking answers and demand accountability. “I don’t expect the case to be successful, they will change the facts, the only thing I want is to address the soldier who killed my daughter” says Ahmed. “But I hope one day that we can reach peace with the Israeli’s and end the war and the killing.”
PCHR submitted a criminal complaint to the Israeli authorities on behalf of the Abu Oda Family on 30 August 2009. To-date, no response has been received.
http://fwd4.me/0jxK
Gaza father: I want to address soldier who killed teen daughter
The family of a 16-year-old girl killed in Israel's Operation Cast Lead remain plagued by questions three years after her death, as a criminal complaint to Israeli authorities goes unanswered.
"Why my daughter? What were their motives? What were their reasons?" asks Ahmed Abu Oda.
"The Israeli military say they are the most moral army in the world, but they killed my daughter, they didn’t respect her right to live."
Nariman Abu Oda was killed on Jan. 9, 2009 by Israeli fire on her home in Beit Hanoun, and the house remains riddled with bullet holes, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, which submitted the complaint in August that year, reports.
"It is clear the shooting was completely indiscriminate," her mother Itidal explains.
Her husband says he knows the legal compliant will not change the fact of his daughter's death, but "the only thing I want is to address the soldier who killed my daughter."
"But I hope one day that we can reach peace with the Israelis and end the war and the killing," he says.
The family, whose citrus grove and poultry farm was also destroyed in the three-week offensive, are struggling to move from their home. "We do not want to live in the house that Nariman was killed in," Ahmed says.
All three of their children have since had daughters who they named Nariman, in memory of their sister.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=451455
The Abu Oda family
"The Israeli military say they are the most moral army in the world, but they killed my daughter, they didn’t respect her right to live.”
On 9 January 2009, the Abu Oda household in the Al Amal neighbourhood of Beit Hanoun came under sustained fire from Israeli positions close to the Gaza-Israeli border two kilometres away.
Nariman Abu Oda, 16, was hit in the right side of her body by Israeli fire as she was walking from the hallway, where the family were taking cover, to the kitchen. Medics were unable to reach the family and Nariman died before she could receive medical attention.
The pockmarked concrete walls of the Abu Oda household tell a good deal of the story of Nariman’s death. Despite the best efforts of father Ahmed Abdel Kareem Muhammad, fifty-seven, and mother, I’tidal Abd al Aziz, fifty-three, to plaster over the patch work of holes and indentations in the walls, ceiling, floors and doors, the house remains riddled with bullet holes. As I’tidal explains “it is clear the shooting was completely indiscriminate.”
Nariman’s mother and father keep returning to the question, why did this happen? For them, it is not an empty rhetorical question, but one that holds a great deal of weight and a great deal of their concern. “Why my daughter? What were their motives? What were their reasons?” asks Ahmed. “The Israeli military say they are the most moral army in the world, but they killed my daughter, they didn’t respect her right to live.”
The Abu Oda family find themselves caught in a deep state of mourning regarding Nariman’s absence, yet at the same time feel her constant presence. Recalling that Nariman used to make him his coffee in the morning, Ahmed says that, he still absentmindedly calls for Nariman when he wants coffee or tea.
“Her room is still exactly as she left it three years ago, with everything still in its place.” Despite this, the family are desperately seeking to move; “we do not want to live in the house that Nariman was killed in,” says Ahmed.
Adding to the sense of presence Nariman has in the house, I’tidal and Ahmed’s children Shadi, thirty-four, Abdel Kareem, thirty-two, and Sahar, thirty, have all since had daughters whom they named Nariman, in the memory of their younger sister.
I’tidal was deeply affected physically and mentally by the loss of her daughter who used to help her a lot with daily household chores. “When I see young girls going to school I imagine her with them, I see her in every room of the house, I will never forget her.
After the incident I was admitted to the hospital for ten days due to shock” recalls I’tidal, “since then I have suffered from huge physical problems resulting from stress.” I’tidal has health complications relating to blood pressure, heart disease and diabetes.
The family did not only lose Nariman during the Israeli offensive, but also their livelihood. The family had a citrus grove and a poultry farm that were totally destroyed during the attack and have another farm that they cannot reach due to its proximity to the Israeli imposed buffer zone.
The family have recently planted seedlings in one of the destroyed farms again but are still waiting to harvest them. However, the loss of income from the farms is mentioned merely as an afterthought to the loss of Nariman. “We care nothing for the loss of our land compared to the loss of our daughter” says Ahmed.
Speaking of the future the couple are desperately seeking answers and demand accountability. “I don’t expect the case to be successful, they will change the facts, the only thing I want is to address the soldier who killed my daughter” says Ahmed. “But I hope one day that we can reach peace with the Israeli’s and end the war and the killing.”
PCHR submitted a criminal complaint to the Israeli authorities on behalf of the Abu Oda Family on 30 August 2009. To-date, no response has been received.
http://fwd4.me/0jxK
