
The following international report concluding that Israel's occupation of
Palestinian territories "has become a colonial enterprise which implements a
system of apartheid" was sent out by journalist Ben White. Another stinging
statement from the report: "The Wall and its infrastructure of gates and
permanent checkpoints suggest a policy permanently to divide the West Bank into
racial cantons." (White's book 'Israeli Apartheid: A Beginner's
Guide', will be published this summer. He can be contacted at ben@benwhite.org.uk)
What follows are some of the highlights of the Executive Summary, but first a
few observations. Describing Israel or Israeli policies in terms of apartheid
has become more common in recent times, but has also provoked a strong backlash.
It is interesting to note, therefore, that this study is a measured assessment
written by legal experts on the specific ways in which Israel's policies in the
Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) can be considered to be 'colonialism'
and/or 'apartheid', as defined by international law. It is not, quite
clearly and openly, saying Israel=South Africa.
The new report was carried out by the Middle East Project of the Human
Sciences Research Council of South Africa. The Middle East Project is:
an independent two year project of the HSRC to conduct analysis of Middle
East politics relevant to South African foreign policy. Its funding was provided
by the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Government of South Africa. The
analysis in this report is entirely independent of the views or foreign policy
of the Government of South Africa and does not represent an official position of
the HSRC. It is intended purely as a scholarly resource for the Department of
Foreign Affairs and the concerned international community.
Background
In January 2007, while addressing the UN Human Rights Council in his capacity
as UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in the occupied
Palestinian territories, South African law Professor John Dugard asked the
following question:
Israel is clearly in military occupation of the OPT. At the same time,
elements of the occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid,
which are contrary to international law. What are the legal consequences of a
regime of prolonged occupation with features of colonialism and apartheid for
the occupied people, the Occupying Power and third States?
The Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa (and specifically, their
Middle East Project) "commissioned this study to test the hypothesis" put
forward by Dugard. Beginning in February 2008, fifteen months of workshops,
drafting, re-drafting and revision finally produced this report for
publication.
Aim and focus
The aim of the project "was to scrutinise the situation from the nonpartisan
perspective of international law, rather than engage in political discourse and
rhetoric". The conclusion is that "Israel, since 1967, has been the belligerent
Occupying Power in the OPT, and that its occupation of these territories has
become a colonial enterprise which implements a system of apartheid".
The study also focuses on "the responsibility of States as a result of
internationally wrongful acts", concluding:
Faced with a violation of the prohibitions of colonialism and apartheid, all
States have three duties: to cooperate to end the violation; not to recognise
the illegal situation arising from it; and not to render aid or assistance to
the State committing it.
On the legal framework in the OPT:
"The occupied status of the West Bank was confirmed by the ICJ in the Wall
advisory opinion. Israel's 'disengagement' from the Gaza Strip did not
constitute the end of occupation because, despite the redeployment of its
military ground forces from Gaza, it retains and exercises effective control
over the territory."
"…Israel's administration of the OPT systematically breaches the law of armed
conflict, both by disregarding the prohibition imposed on an Occupying Power not
to alter the laws in force in occupied territory and by enforcing a dual and
discriminatory legal regime on Jewish and Palestinian residents of the OPT.
Israel grants to Jewish residents of the settlements in the OPT the protections
of Israeli domestic law and subjects them to the jurisdiction of Israeli civil
courts, while Palestinians living in the same territory are ruled under military
law and subjected to the jurisdiction of military courts whose procedures
violate international standards for the prosecution of justice. As a consequence
of this bifurcated system, Jewish residents of the OPT enjoy freedom of
movement, civil protections, and services denied to Palestinians. Palestinians
are simultaneously denied the protections accorded to protected persons by
international humanitarian law. This dual system has gained the imprimatur of
Israel's High Court and constitutes a policy by the State of Israel to sustain
two parallel societies in the OPT, one Jewish and the other Palestinian, and
discriminate between these two groups by according very different rights,
protections, and life chances in the same territory."
Findings on Colonialism:
"Although international law provides no single decisive definition of
colonialism, the terms of the Declaration on Colonialism indicate that a
situation may be classified as colonial when the acts of a State have the
cumulative outcome that it annexes or otherwise unlawfully retains control over
territory and thus aims permanently to deny its indigenous population the
exercise of its right to self-determination. Five issues, which are unlawful in
themselves, taken together make it evident that Israel's rule in the OPT has
assumed such a colonial character: namely, violations of the territorial
integrity of occupied territory; depriving the population of occupied territory
of the capacity for self-governance; integrating the economy of occupied
territory into that of the occupant; breaching the principle of permanent
sovereignty over natural resources in relation to the occupied territory; and
denying the population of occupied territory the right freely to express,
develop and practice its culture."
"Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem is manifestly an act based on colonial
intent. It is unlawful in itself…"
"By thus partitioning contiguous blocs of Palestinian areas into cantons,
Israel has violated the territorial integrity of the OPT in violation of the
Declaration on Colonialism."
"The economic dimension of self-determination is also expressed in the right
of permanent sovereignty over natural resources, which entitles a people to
dispose freely of the natural wealth and resources found within the limits of
its national jurisdiction. Israel's settlement policy and the construction of
the bypass road network and the Wall have deprived the Palestinian population of
the control and development of an estimated 38 percent of West Bank land. It has
also implemented a water management and allocation system that favours Israel
and Jewish settlers in the OPT to the detriment of the Palestinian
population…Moreover, it is significant that the route of the Wall is similar to
the 'red line' that delineates those areas of the West Bank from which Israel
can withdraw without relinquishing its control over key water resources that are
used to supply Israel and the settlements."
"This study demonstrates that the implementation of a colonial policy by
Israel has not been piecemeal but is systematic and comprehensive, as the
exercise of the Palestinian population's right to self-determination has been
frustrated in all of its principal modes of expression."
Findings on Apartheid:
"The Apartheid Convention criminalises 'inhuman acts committed for the
purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of
persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing
them'. The Rome Statute criminalises inhumane acts committed in the context of,
and to maintain, 'an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and
domination by one racial group over any other racial group.' Both focus on the
systematic, institutionalised, and oppressive character of the discrimination
involved and the purpose of domination that is entailed. This distinguishes the
practice of apartheid from other forms of prohibited discrimination and from
other contexts in which the listed crimes arise."
"It must be clear, however, that practices in South Africa are not the test
or benchmark for a finding of apartheid elsewhere, as the principal instrument
which provides this test lies in the terms of the Apartheid Convention
itself."
"…Palestinians are subject to legal systems and courts which apply standards
of evidence and procedure that are different from those applied to Jewish
settlers living the OPT and that result in harsher penalties for
Palestinians."
"Restrictions on the Palestinian right to freedom of movement are endemic in
the West Bank, stemming from Israel's control of the OPT's checkpoints and
crossings, impediments created by the Wall and its crossing points, a matrix of
separate roads, and obstructive and all encompassing permit and ID systems that
apply solely to Palestinians."
"The right of Palestinians to choose their own place of residence within
their territory is severely curtailed by systematic administrative restrictions
on Palestinian residency and building in East Jerusalem, by discriminatory
legislation that operates to prevent Palestinian spouses from living together on
the basis of which part of the OPT they originate from, and by the strictures of
the permit and ID systems."
"Palestinians are denied their right to leave and return to their country…
hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced to surrounding states from the
West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967 have been prevented from returning to the
OPT…Palestinian residents of the OPT must obtain Israeli permission to leave the
territory…Political activists and human rights defenders are often subject to
arbitrary and undefined 'travel bans', while many Palestinians who travelled and
lived abroad for business or personal reasons have had their residence Ids
revoked and been prohibited from returning."
"Israel denies Palestinians in the OPT their right to a nationality by
denying Palestinian refugees from inside the Green Line their right of return,
residence, and citizenship in the State (Israel) governing the land of their
birth. Israel's policies in the OPT also effectively deny Palestinians their
right to a nationality by obstructing the exercise of the Palestinian right to
self determination through the formation of a Palestinian State in the West Bank
(including East Jerusalem) and Gaza Strip."
"Israeli military actions have included extensive school closures, direct
attacks on schools, severe restrictions on movement, and arrests and detention
of teachers and students…A segregated school system operates in the West Bank as
Palestinians are not allowed to attend government funded schools in Jewish
settlements."
"Israel has divided the West Bank into reserves or cantons in which residence
and entry is determined by each individual's group identity. Entry by one group
into the zone of the other group is prohibited without a permit. The Wall and
its infrastructure of gates and permanent checkpoints suggest a policy
permanently to divide the West Bank into racial cantons. Israeli government
ministries, the World Zionist Organisation and other Jewish-national
institutions operating as authorised agencies of the State plan, fund and
implement construction of the West Bank settlements and their infrastructure for
exclusively Jewish use."
"Israel has extensively appropriated Palestinian land in the OPT for
exclusively Jewish use. Private Palestinian land comprises about 30 percent of
the land unlawfully appropriated for Jewish settlement in the West Bank.
Presently, 38 percent of the West Bank is completely closed to Palestinian use,
with significant restrictions on access to much of the rest of it."
"In sum, Israel appears clearly to be implementing and sustaining policies
intended to maintain its domination over Palestinians in the OPT and to suppress
opposition of any form to those policies."
"The comparative analyses of South African apartheid practices…is there to
illuminate, rather than define, the meaning of apartheid, and there are
certainly differences between apartheid as it was applied in South Africa and
Israel's policies and practices in the OPT. Nonetheless, it is significant that
the two systems can be defined by similar dominant features."
"A troika of key laws underpinned the South African apartheid regime—the
Population Registration Act 1950, the Group Areas Act 1950, and the Pass
Laws—and established its three principal features or pillars…Israel's practices
in the OPT can be defined by the same three 'pillars' of apartheid."
"The first pillar derives from Israeli laws and policies that establish
Jewish identity for purposes of law and afford a preferential legal status and
material benefits to Jews over non-Jews… At the root of this system are Israel's
citizenship laws, whereby group identity is the primary factor in determining
questions involving the acquisition of Israeli citizenship…Israeli law conveying
special standing to Jewish identity is then applied extra-territorially to
extend preferential legal status and material privileges to Jewish settlers in
the OPT and thus discriminate against Palestinians.
"The second pillar is reflected in Israel's grand policy to fragment the OPT
for the purposes of segregation and domination….That these measures are intended
to segregate the population along racial lines in violation of Article 2(d) of
the Apartheid Convention is clear from the visible web of walls, separate roads,
and checkpoints, and the invisible web of permit and ID systems, that combine to
ensure that Palestinians remain confined to the reserves designated for them
while Israeli Jews are prohibited from entering those reserves but enjoy freedom
of movement throughout the rest of the Palestinian territory."
"…the policy of geographic fragmentation has the effect of crushing
Palestinian socio-economic life, securing Palestinian vulnerability to Israeli
economic dominance, and of enforcing a rigid segregation of Palestinian and
Jewish populations."
"The third pillar upon which Israel's system of apartheid in the OPT rests is
its 'security' laws and policies. The extrajudicial killing, torture and cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment and arbitrary arrest and imprisonment of
Palestinians, as described under the rubric of Article 2(a) of the Apartheid
Convention, are all justified by Israel on the pretext of security.
"This study does not contend that Israel's claims about security are by
definition lacking in merit; however, Israel's invocation of 'security' to
validate severe policies and disproportionate practices toward the Palestinians
often masks the intent to suppress Palestinian opposition to a system of
domination by one racial group over another. Thus, while the individual
practices listed in the Apartheid Convention do not in themselves define
apartheid, these practices do not occur in the OPT in a vacuum, but are
integrated and complementary elements of an institutionalised and oppressive
system of Israeli domination and oppression over Palestinians as a group; that
is, a system of apartheid."
"This discriminatory treatment cannot be explained or excused on grounds of
citizenship, both because it goes beyond what is permitted by ICERD and because
certain provisions in Israeli civil and military law provide that Jews present
in the OPT who are not citizens of Israel also enjoy privileges conferred on
Jewish-Israeli citizens in the OPT by virtue of being Jews. Consequently, this
study finds that the State of Israel exercises control in the OPT with the
purpose of maintaining a system of domination by Jews over Palestinians and that
this system constitutes a breach of the prohibition of apartheid."
Implications and Recommendations:
"The legal consequences of these findings are grave and entail obligations
not merely for Israel but also for the international community as a whole."
"Israel bears the primary responsibility for remedying the illegal situation
it has created. In the first place, it has the duty to cease its unlawful
activity and dismantle the structures and institutions of colonialism and
apartheid that it has created. Israel is additionally required by international
law to implement duties of reparation, compensation and satisfaction in order to
wipe out the consequences of its unlawful acts."
"Breaches of peremptory norms, which involve a gross or systematic failure by
the responsible State to fulfil the obligations they impose, generate derivative
obligations for States and intergovernmental organisations of cooperation and
abstention. States, and intergovernmental organisations, must cooperate to bring
to an end any and all serious breaches of peremptory norms."
"States must not recognise as lawful situations created by serious breaches
of peremptory norms nor render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation.
In particular, States must not recognise Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem
or its attempt to acquire territory in the West Bank through the consolidation
of settlements, nor may they bolster the latter's economic viability. Should any
State fail to fulfil its duty of abstention then it risks becoming complicit in
Israel's internationally wrongful acts, and thus independently engaging its own
responsibility, with all the legal consequences of reparation that this
entails…If a State aids or assists another State in maintaining that unlawful
situation, knowing it to be unlawful, then it becomes complicit in its
commission and itself commits an internationally wrongful act.
"States cannot evade their international obligations by hiding behind the
independent personality of an international organisation of which they are
members."
"Accordingly we respectfully suggest that, in accordance with Article 96 of
the Charter of the United Nations and pursuant to Article 65 of the Statute of
the International Court of Justice, an advisory opinion be urgently requested on
the following question:
Do the policies and practices of Israel within the Occupied Palestinian
Territories violate the norms prohibiting apartheid and colonialism; and, if so,
what are the legal consequences arising from Israel's policies and practices,
considering the rules and principles of international law, including the
International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial
Discrimination, the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment
of the Crime of Apartheid, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to
Colonial Countries and Peoples, UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (1960), the
Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and other relevant Security Council and
General Assembly resolutions?