Website policy


We provide links to articles we think will be of interest to our supporters. We are sympathetic to much of the content of what we post, but not to everything. The fact that something has been linked to here does not necessarily mean that we endorse the views expressed in it.
_____________________

BSST

BSST is the leading charity focusing on small-scale grass roots cross community, anti poverty and humanitarian projects in Israel/Palestine
____________________

JfJfP comments


2016:

06 May: Tair Kaminer starts her fifth spell in gaol. Send messages of support via Reuven Kaminer

04 May: Against the resort to denigration of Israel’s critics

2015:

23 Dec: JfJfP policy statement on BDS

14 Nov: Letter to the Guardian about the Board of Deputies

11 Nov: UK ban on visiting Palestinian mental health workers

20 Oct: letter in the Guardian

13 Sep: Rosh Hashanah greetings

21 Aug: JfJfP on Jeremy Corbyn

29 July: Letter to Evening Standard about its shoddy reporting

24 April: Letter to FIFA about Israeli football

15 April: Letter re Ed Miliband and Israel

11 Jan: Letter to the Guardian in response to Jonathan Freedland on Charlie Hebdo

2014:

15 Dec: Chanukah: Celebrating the miracle of holy oil not military power

1 Dec: Executive statement on bill to make Israel the nation state of the Jewish people

25 Nov: Submission to All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism

7 Sept: JfJfP Executive statement on Antisemitism

3 Aug: Urgent disclaimer

19 June Statement on the three kidnapped teenagers

25 April: Exec statement on Yarmouk

28 Mar: EJJP letter in support of Dutch pension fund PGGM's decision to divest from Israeli banks

24 Jan: Support for Riba resolution

16 Jan: EJJP lobbies EU in support of the EU Commission Guidelines, Aug 2013–Jan 2014

2013:

29 November: JfJfP, with many others, signs a "UK must protest at Bedouin expulsion" letter

November: Press release, letter to the Times and advert in the Independent on the Prawer Plan

September: Briefing note and leaflet on the Prawer Plan

September: JfJfP/EJJP on the EU guidelines with regard to Israel

14th June: JfJfP joins other organisations in protest to BBC

2nd June: A light unto nations? - a leaflet for distribution at the "Closer to Israel" rally in London

24 Jan: Letter re the 1923 San Remo convention

18 Jan: In Support of Bab al-Shams

17 Jan: Letter to Camden New Journal about Veolia

11 Jan: JfJfP supports public letter to President Obama

Comments in 2012 and 2011

_____________________

Posts

UN backs Gaza ‘war crimes’ report

bbc_blackThe UN Human Rights Council has backed a report into the Israeli offensive in Gaza that accuses both Israel and Palestinian militants of war crimes.

And here is the Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights letter calling on David Miliband to support the Goldstone Report in the UN Human Rights Council (sad to say, Miliband did not do so…)


The BBC (16 October 2009):
The report by Richard Goldstone calls for credible investigations by Israel and Hamas, and suggests international war crimes prosecutions if they do not.

Twenty-five countries voted for the resolution, while six were against.

Both Israel and the US opposed official endorsement of the report, saying it would set back Middle East peace hopes.

GOLDSTONE REPORT VOTE
For: Argentina, Brazil, China, Russia and 21 others
Against: US, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovakia and Ukraine
Abstentions: Belgium, Bosnia, Burkina-Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Japan, Mexico, Norway, South Korea, Slovenia and Uruguay
No vote: UK, France and 3 others

The Palestinian Authority initially backed deferring a vote, but changed its position after domestic criticism.

Palestinians and human rights groups say more than 1,400 Gazans were killed in the 22-day conflict that ended in January, but Israel puts the figure at 1,166.

Thirteen Israelis, including three civilians, were killed.

‘Culture of impunity’

Before the vote in Geneva – in which 11 countries abstained and five others, including the UK and France, chose not to vote – the Palestinian Authority’s representative argued that the matter was simply about respect for the rule of law.

The UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, meanwhile insisted that now was the time to end the “culture of impunity” which continues to prevail in Israel and the Palestinian Territories.

Israeli air strike in Rafah, Gaza, on 13 January 2009
The report accuses Israel of using “disproportionate force” in Gaza

In contrast, the Israeli government had lobbied intensively against the resolution, saying the Goldstone report was biased against Israel and removed the right of nations to defend themselves against terrorists.

It also complained that the vote was not simply on the Goldstone report, but on a Palestinian-backed resolution that criticised Israel and ignored Hamas. The resolution also made references to recent Israeli actions East Jerusalem that were not in the document.

The US deputy representative in Geneva agreed, saying that the resolution’s approach and “sweeping conclusions of law” made the prospect of a meaningful Middle East peace process more difficult.

As why it did not vote, UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband told the BBC that the British and French governments had been “in the middle of detailed discussions with Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel about three key issues – the establishment of an independent inquiry, humanitarian aid to Gaza and the restart of the peace process”.

“The vote was called in the middle of those discussions and we thought it right to continue with our work on the three fundamental issues so that could really contribute to a reversal of what is a dangerous spiral of trust and mistrust in the Middle East,” he said.

‘One-sided resolution’

The BBC’s Tim Franks in Jerusalem says momentum behind the Goldstone report will grow and the UN may take it up in New York.

ANALYSIS
Jeremy Bowen
Jeremy Bowen
BBC Middle East editor
The row about the report is an antidote to any over-optimistic hope for peace. In many ways, it is a more honest expression of reality, of the deep divisions that exist, than the uncomfortable handshake between Israel’s prime minister and the Palestinian Authority president that US President Barack Obama manufactured in New York last month. Mr Obama, who came to office hoping to renew and reinvigorate a peace process, has had another reminder of how difficult a job he has taken on.

Israel says it will not take risks for peace, if it cannot defend itself. And the Israelis have once again been condemned in an international forum.

There was some confusion among Israel’s European allies. UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown had a “robust” discussion with his Israeli counterpart last night, apparently talking about a British abstention in Geneva. The UK did not vote in the end, although initially the Foreign Office said it had abstained. Then Downing Street said it was a non-vote rather than a formal abstention. Perhaps Israeli pressure worked, partly. Perhaps Mr Brown decided to send a signal to the Israelis, but on second thoughts, not too much of one.

The 575-page report by the South African judge concluded that Israel had “committed actions amounting to war crimes, possibly crimes against humanity” by using disproportionate force, deliberately targeting civilians, using Palestinians as human shields and destroying civilian infrastructure during its offensive in Gaza.

It also found there was also evidence that Palestinian militant groups including Hamas, which controls Gaza, had committed war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity, in their repeated rocket and mortars attacks on southern Israel.

The report demanded that unless the parties to the Gaza war investigated the allegations of war crimes within six months, the cases should be referred to the International Criminal Court at The Hague.

In the short term, the Human Rights Council resolution will provide some political relief for the Palestinian Authority (PA) President, Mahmoud Abbas, our correspondent says.

Mr Abbas had been the butt of intense criticism among the Palestinian public and from his Islamist rivals in Hamas, for initially trying to delay a vote on the Goldstone report, he adds.

In Ramallah, a spokesman for Mr Abbas welcomed the endorsement of the report and said international action should not end there.

Israeli and Palestinian representatives addressed the council ahead of the vote

“What is important now is to translate words into deeds in order to protect our people in the future from any new aggression,” Nabil Abu Rudainah said.

A Hamas spokesman told the BBC it also supported further UN action, but said nothing about the charges against the group.

“We thank whoever voted for it, and we hope that this vote will be the beginning of the process to bring the Israeli war criminals to justice,” Taher al-Nono said.

The Israeli foreign ministry rejected the “one-sided resolution”, which it said ignored “the murderous attacks perpetrated by Hamas and other terrorist organisations against Israeli civilians” and the “unprecedented precautions taken by Israeli forces in order to avoid harming civilians”.

“This resolution provides encouragement for terrorist organisations worldwide and undermines global peace. Israel will continue to exercise its right to self-defence, and take action to protect the lives of its citizens,” the statement added.

If the report comes before the UN Security Council, the US is expected to veto any call for ICC action against Israel.



lphr
Friday 16 October 2009

RE: Britain’s vote on the Goldstone Report at the UN Human Rights Council

Dear Mr Miliband MP,

We are writing to strongly urge HM Government to support the Goldstone Report in the UN Human Rights Council Vote on Friday 16 October 2009. Supporting the report will send a strong message: (1) that impunity will not be tolerated; those who commit war crimes and crimes against humanity will be held accountable – regardless of power and nationality; (2) that the only way to secure peace in the Middle East is through justice and human rights, not violence and war; and (3) that the voice of the hundreds of innocent civilians that lost their lives and those still rebuilding their lives as a result of the war, will be heard by the international community.

There is no reason why accountability for the victims in Gaza, the West Bank and Israel, for violations allegedly committed by Israel, the authorities in Gaza and the PA will affect the peace process. On the contrary, accountability goes some way to establishing law and responsibility as a part of the conflict, displacing the need for violence and war. Britain must adhere to its international legal obligations to hold those who commit the gravest international crimes accountable and to its own foreign policy statements that those who commit such crimes will not be met with impunity.

Justice Goldstone’s words at the presentation of the report at the HRC on 29 September cannot be improved on: “This is the time for action. The lack of accountability for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity has reached a crisis point; the ongoing lack of justice is undermining any hope for a successful peace process and reinforcing an environment that fosters violence.”

To this end, we strongly urge HM Government not to vote against or abstain in Friday’s vote at the Human Rights Council; instead it should vote for the report and demonstrate its commitment to justice, accountability and peace.

Yours sincerely,

Daniel Machover, Chair, Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights

Print Friendly

Comments are closed.