Summary Report to
the United Nations Human Rights Commission Emergency Session on
Israel/Palestine, 17-18 October 2000
Submitted by Adalah: The
Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel
16 October
2000
This summary report submitted by Adalah to the
UN Human Rights Commission, Emergency Session on Israel/Palestine, focuses on
human rights violations committed by the Israeli government against Palestinian
citizens of Israel during the period of the current conflict, which began on 29
September 2000. Specifically, this report discusses the illegal actions taken by
the Israeli police and the abuse of pre-trial due process rights of Palestinian
citizens brought before the Israeli courts. Adalah obtained the information
contained in this report during the course of its legal representation of
Palestinian citizens of Israel arrested and/or detained during the current
conflict, field reports from our staff, local journalists and hospitals, and the
Government of Israel.
I. Main
Points
II.
Recommendations to the UN Human Rights Commission
(See also Appendix No. 4 - Failure of Israel
to Honor its International Obligations, Report of an International NGO Mission,
12 October 2000)
III. Illegal
Actions by the Israeli Police
1) Excessive Use of
Force against Palestinian Demonstrators in Israel
Internal guidelines
govern the police's action at demonstration sites, authorities and means of
operation, as well as procedures for opening fire. A translated copy of the
relevant sections of these guidelines is attached to this submission. (See
Appendix No. 5 - Police Guidelines)
In sum, the Israeli
police violated these guidelines, and thus used excessive force against
Palestinian citizens of Israel, in an attempt to disperse the crowds and end the
protests. These brutal, forceful, heavy-handed police tactics, used against
citizens of the State in the recent confrontations is unparalleled and
unprecedented.
Primarily:
1) The police used live
ammunition in shooting Palestinian demonstrators, citizens of Israel, although
not permitted by the guidelines. Eyewitnesses also claim that the police
deliberately used sniper-fire to target and shoot at Palestinian demonstrators
as a means of dispersing protestors in Israel.
2) The police also shot
rubber-coated steel bullets, often at close range and directed at the upper body
of Palestinian individuals, in violation of the guidelines.
3) The guidelines
recommend methods of crowd dispersal (e.g., water cannons), less dangerous than
firearms, which were not used by the police. Police officials confirmed
that these methods were not utilized due to lack of budgets.
Using these illegal
methods, the Israeli police killed 13 Palestinian citizens of Israel, and
injured approximately 1000 others during the recent clashes.
The use of excessive
force by the Israeli police against Palestinian citizens of Israel is not a new
phenomenon. In previous demonstrations staged by Palestinian citizens
against land confiscation in Al Roha, near Umm El Fahem, and home demolitions in
Umm Sahali and Lod, the police also used undue force to disperse crowds but at
nowhere near the same level, as in the recent conflict.
By contrast, the Israeli
police act in a moderate and restrained manner in similar, large-scale
demonstrations staged by non-Arab, Jewish groups in Israel. Recent
demonstrations staged by Jewish citizens, in which the police acted moderately
and in the best interest of protecting the safety and welfare of the protestors,
include Shas party supporters, students, and employees protesting against
factory closures. Fatalities and injuries among demonstrators are uncommon, and
the police never use live ammunition, rubber-coated steel bullets, and "dum-dum"
bullets against the Jewish public.
2) Police
Assistance to Jewish Rioters Perpetrating Violent Attacks Against Palestinians
in Israel
Since October 7, Jewish
Israeli citizens have attacked Palestinian citizens of Israel, their property
and holy sites. Previously, violence occurred between the police forces and
Palestinian demonstrators, however, now the violence has become communitarian.
A prime example of the
type of violence perpetuated is that which occurred in Nazareth, the largest
Arab town in Israel. On October 8, the evening of Yom Kippur during a total
media blackout due to the holiday, hundreds of Jewish residents of Nazaret Illit
entered the eastern quarter of Nazareth and attacked Palestinian residents and
their property. They hurled stones at Palestinian homes, several of which they
also attempted to burn down. They also shouted “Death to the Arabs,” and insults
against Islam.
Rather than assisting
the Palestinian citizens of Israel who were under attack, police directed their
force against them. Eyewitnesses reported that the police stood by while
Palestinian citizens were attacked, and only intervened when the Palestinian
residents came out to defend themselves—and their intervention was to protect
the Jewish citizens and thereby allow them to continue their attack. Thus,
the police demonstrated that they were unwilling to prevent attacks on
Palestinian citizens despite their obligation to protect all citizens of Israel.
Mr. Omar Mohammed Akawi
(42) and Mr. Wasam Yizbek (25), two Palestinian residents of Nazareth, were
killed in these attacks. As of yet, it is unclear whether they were killed
by police fire or by armed Jewish civilians. Mr. Akawi was killed by live
ammunition.
In addition to the
attack in Nazareth, other hate-crimes were also committed against Palestinian
citizens throughout Israel. In Nazareth Illit, Jewish Israelis burned an
Arab-owned bakery, and a mob of 300 Jewish rioters encircled and threw stones at
the home of an Arab Member of Knesset (MK), Dr. Azmi Bishara. The rioters,
equipped with torches, threatened to burn down the house. On the road
between Nazareth Illit and Nazareth, 200 Jewish civilians vandalized Palestinian
cars and houses. The police neither arrested nor used forceful means to
end the riot. A wave of similar attacks by Jewish citizens against
Palestinians and their property also took place in Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Tiberias,
Hadera, Afula, Haifa, and Akka.
Jewish citizens also
attacked and destroyed Muslim holy sites in villages and towns throughout
Israel. They threw molotov cocktails at the Hassan Beiq mosque in Tel
Aviv-Jaffa. In Tiberias, Jewish citizens burned another ancient mosque. A
third mosque was set ablaze and completely destroyed in Hadera.
3) Arbitrary Acts of
Violence by the Police against Palestinians in Israel
On October 1,
Palestinian citizens staged a large demonstration in Jedaide, Israel against the
recent events in Jerusalem and the Occupied Territories. Demonstrators
chanted slogans against the behavior of Northern Police District Commander, Alik
Ron, who is widely believed to be responsible for the present confrontations and
subsequent loss of life of Palestinians in his region of command. Violent
clashes between the police and Palestinian demonstrators broke out and continued
until late in the evening, when village elders came to the site and ordered the
young demonstrators to return home. When the street emptied of protestors,
eyewitnesses report that they saw 50 police officers, including special forces
and border police, enter the village from the southeast corner. The police
walked towards the center of the village, through residential areas, and began
to randomly shoot both rubber bullets and live ammunition at homes and cars.
They also used the butts of their guns to break the windows of cars parked on
the main road. In one notable incident, seven police officers entered a home,
pointed a gun at the homeowner, poured coffee on his wife, and kicked one of
their guests. Some residents called the local police station for assistance and
to report property damages, but the police refused to help them or end the
rampage.
On October 1, police
officers violently beat Ms. Nisreen Khoury, a psychologist, and her sister Ms.
Khawla Khoury, a gynecologist, while they were standing unarmed in solidarity
with demonstrators in Nazareth. The police approached Nisreen while she was
looking for her sister and ordered her to leave the scene. She responded by
telling them that she was looking for her sister, but they refused to listen to
her. At that point, they pushed her, threw her to the ground, and started
beating her. She pleaded with them to stop hurting her and told them that she
was not a threat since she was not throwing stones. They continued to beat her,
despite her pleas, with a butt of a gun and a baton until she lost
consciousness. While Khawla was looking for Nisreen, a female police
officer started beating her on her arm with a baton. When she tried to stand up,
the officer started insulting and kicking her. When Khawla saw Nisreen sister in
danger and tried to help her, the officer threatened to kill her. Khawla
grabbed hold of the officer’s baton, and a male police officer began to kick her
in the lower abdominal region. Finally, they picked her up and threw her to the
ground.
On October 2, Dr. Amer
Ramadan and his wife, Marlin, attempted to travel to a relative’s house in
Nazareth when their car was shot at from all sides. Mrs. Ramadan was shot
numerous times, causing severe injuries to her arm and chest. An
eyewitness to the event saw a large number of police officers hiding behind a
wall pointing their guns at various targets without firing. When Dr. Ramadan’s
car approached, the police officers began shooting at the car, breaking all the
windows. Dr. Ramadan exited his car and pleaded with the officers to stop
shooting. They ordered him to lie face down, while he continuously pleaded with
them to call an ambulance for his wife who remained in the car bleeding. The
police left the scene without calling for assistance. Mrs. Ramadan has
undergone three operations, and remains in critical condition in Rambam Hospital
in Haifa.
4) Police
Prevention of Emergency Medical Services to Injured Palestinians
Police prevented the
national ambulance service - Magen David Adom - from entering Palestinian
villages in Israel during the clashes. Local village ambulances were
delayed, re-routed, and even attacked by Israeli police preventing the transport
of injured individuals to hospitals and endangering the lives of medical
personnel.
Many Palestinian
villages in Israel do not have an ambulance, and no Palestinian village
possesses more than one such vehicle. Moreover, other than Nazareth, no
Palestinian towns have hospitals. Thus, the villages rely on the national
ambulance service, Magen David Adom, when there are medical emergencies.
However, during the clashes, Magen David Adom ambulance service did not enter
any Palestinian Arab village. When the Il Hayat clinic in Umm El Fahem,
for example, requested ambulance service for those seriously injured, local
clinic personnel were told that the police would not let its ambulances enter
the town.
The Il Hayat clinic in
Umm El Fahem was forced to use private cars to transport its most seriously
injured to hospitals outside the town. Because police prevented ambulances
from reaching the clinic, the clinic’s doctors were forced to treat many
individuals who were seriously injured, although it lacks adequate medical
supplies and equipment. Three Umm El Fahem residents died of their injuries.
Witnesses also report
attacks on ambulances. Mr. Nader Abu Nicola, an ambulance driver and the manager
of the Hatzala ambulance station in Nazareth, attempted to transport an injured
man from Nazareth’s Italian hospital to Haifa's Rambam hospital on October 3 at
5 p.m. Three medical assistants accompanied Mr. Nicola in the
ambulance. About 500 meter from the Italian hospital, a police officer
stopped them, and asked where they were going. Mr. Nicola told the officer
that they were going to the Italian hospital to transport a patient to Rambam.
The officer told Mr. Nicola that the road was closed, and that they must go
back. While Mr. Nicola tried to explain the necessity of his travel, the
officer punched him forcefully in the face, and five other officers pointed
their guns at him and at the other passengers. The officers told Mr.
Nicola, “Go back now.” As Mr. Nicola drove in reverse, he tried to inform
the station by walkie-talkie that he had been delayed. The five police
officers then attacked the ambulance and broke the mirror. Mr. Nicola
drove quickly away, and took a longer, more dangerous route to the hospital.
Another incident took
place in the El Akbat neighborhood in Nazareth on October 9. Mr. Francis
Abu Khaloosh, an ambulance driver, was driving to pick up Mr. Tarek Kobti, who
had been shot with rubber-coated steel bullets. The police stopped Mr. Khaloosh
and forbid him from entering the neighborhood to transport the injured
man. Mr. Khaloosh was delayed until MK Ahmad Tibi, who was in the area and
witnessed what happened, intervened. When Mr. Khaloosh finally got
through, he found that a private car had already taken the injured man to the
hospital.
5) Police
Mistreatment of Palestinian Citizens of Israel in Custody
a) Beatings,
Abuse, and the Denial of Medical Attention
While in police custody,
numerous Palestinian citizens were mistreated, abused, and/or denied any medical
detention. The following cases are notable:
D.C. Nazareth, Appeal
33/00, The State of Israel v. Tawfiq Darawshe, et. al. (decision delivered on
10 October 2000). The District Court of Nazareth granted the State’s appeal to
extend the detention of Mr. Tawfiq Darawshe (19) and three other detainees until
the end of their his trial, overruling the decision of the Magistrate Court to
release him. While in police custody, Mr. Darawshe was repeatedly beaten, and
made to lie on the floor while a dog was brought into the detention room to
scare him into confessing that he was among the protestors throwing stones at
the police. The District Court summarily considered Mr. Darawshe's injuries, and
doubted his claims. Mr. Darawshe is a first year medical student at Hebrew
University.
D.C. Nazareth, Appeal
34/00, The State of Israel v. Wissam Ghazali, et. al. (decision delivered on
10 October 2000). The District Court of Nazareth granted the State’s appeal to
extend the detention of Mr. Ghazali (22) from Jaffa/Nazareth and the other two
detainees until the end of their trials, overruling the decision by the
Magistrate Court to release him. Mr. Ghazali appeared at his court hearing
with a bruised skull, a fractured shoulder, and a black eye. His shirt was also
covered with bloodstains. The doctor at the police station only asked Mr.
Ghazali how he was injured without examining his injuries. The Court refused to
allow an external physician to check him, stating that it does not have the
authority to do so and that it was not necessary in this case.
b) Prohibition
on Access to Counsel
In about seven recent
cases represented by and/or known to Adalah, the General Security Services (GSS)
or the police issued orders, in accordance with their authority under Section 35
of the Law of Arrests (1996), prohibiting detained Palestinian citizens of
Israel from meeting with their lawyers. In general, this authority is
exercised only in national security cases, and not in criminal cases involving
demonstrators. Where this prohibition was ordered, the police and the GSS also
asked the court to ban the publication of all information regarding the arrest,
including the names of the detainees. These methods are currently being used as
a means of pressure, replacing torture, which was banned by the Supreme Court of
Israel one-year ago.
In these cases, lawyers
asked the court to reduce the number of days of detention so that the judge, who
is the only individual permitted to hear and see the detainee, can watch over or
supervise the progress of the investigation of the detainee. Adalah argued
in these cases that the measures used by the GSS and the police are
unconstitutional, and violate the limitation clause of the Basic Law: Human
Dignity and Freedom (1992). Few cases involving the prohibition on access
to counsel reach the Supreme Court, as prosecutors tend to agree to withdraw the
ban, upon the filing of an this appeal.
IV. Abuse of
Pre-Trial Due Process Rights of Defendants by the Courts
One) Pre-Indictment
Detention Without Bond
Under Israeli law, in
nearly all cases, a person arrested must be brought before a judge within 24
hours. At this initial hearing, a judge must determine whether there are
reasonable grounds to believe that the accused in fact committed the crime
charged, and whether there are legitimate grounds to keep the suspect
in detention to ensure the integrity and efficiency of the criminal
investigation, the scope, nature and severity of the criminal offense, and the
special public interest in detention of the suspect. In addition, the court will
consider the personal circumstances of the accused. Based on these
factors, the court may decide to extend the detention, or release the individual
outright or with conditions. Detention may be initially ordered for up to 15
days, in this pre-indictment period, and extended periodically by request of the
police and order of the Court. The longer the detention, the more weighty the
evidence must be that the accused actually committed the crime to justify
extending the remand.
Adalah found in its
representation of Palestinian citizens of Israel and learned from other lawyers
that the police, in requesting that defendants be initially detained or that
their detention be extended, filed incomplete, inadequate reports, which were
accepted by most judges as the basis for issuing detention orders. In numerous
cases, the police reports contained vague accusations, lacking any direct or
supporting evidence linking the detainee to the alleged crime. That is to
say, the police simply filled in the name of the accused, ID number, vague
accusation such as "stone-throwing," and suggested period of detention.
The judges, in turn, immediately accepted these allegations and extended the
period of detention.
On October 2, the
Magistrate Court in Haifa ordered the extension of detention of Mr. Motasim
Taha, Mr. Ahmad Yassin, and Mr. Mohammad Abou-Elheja, although the police
reports filed in these cases lack sufficient evidence and provided incomplete,
vague information. The District Court in Haifa rejected Adalah's subsequent
appeal to release the accused on 4 October.
Two) Post-Indictment
Detention Without Bond
Under Israeli law,
numerous pre-conditions exist for ordering the post-indictment detention of a
defendant until the end of trial, in view of the severe restriction placed on an
individual’s liberty by remand. These include:
However, even if the Court is satisfied that all of
these pre-conditions are met, it may not order a defendant’s remand unless it is
convinced that the purpose of the detention cannot be achieved by release on
bail or by imposing any other conditions of release.
In two cases decided
last week, the Supreme Court ordered the detention until the end of trial of two
Palestinian citizens of Israel – one an adult and one a minor - without
considering any alternative, less restrictive conditions to remand. After these
decisions, no District Court, in any other cases represented by or known to
Adalah, permitted the release of any Palestinian citizens of Israel. (See
e.g., D.C. Haifa, Appeal 3893/00, The State of Israel v. Yasser Ben Faiz
Ismail (decision delivered 12 October 2000), in which the District Court
ordered that the defendant, charged with throwing stones, be held without bond
until the end of his trial, reversing the decision of the lower court to release
him from custody). In sharp contrast, following the Supreme Court decisions,
three Jewish minors, allegedly involved in crimes against Palestinian citizens
of Israel, were released from detention and placed under home arrest until the
end of trial by the District Court in Nazareth.
H.C. 7171/00 – The State
of Israel v. Mohammed Mahmoud Hamid (decision delivered 8
October 2000). The Supreme Court, by Justice Heshin, accepted the appeal by the
State and ordered the defendant held without bond until the end of trial,
reversing the decisions of both the Magistrate and the District Courts in
Nazareth. Justice Heshin ruled that the charges of rioting, and the allegations
that the defendant participated in a crowd, which was throwing stones at the
police, is sufficient justification for remand.
H.C. 7103/00 – Anonymous
(Palestinian Citizen of Israel, Minor Under the Age of 18) v. The State of
Israel (decision delivered 10
October 2000). The Supreme Court, by Justice Heshin, upheld the decision
of the District Court of Haifa ordering the post-indictment remand of a 15-year
old minor, until the end of trial. Justice Heshin ruled that the serious nature
of the charges alone justify remand. The Court rejected all arguments of
counsel including the lack of evidence that the stone thrown by this minor broke
a car window, the age and health problems of the defendant, which required daily
medical treatment, and lack of any criminal record.
D.C. Nazareth, Appeal 2752/00, The State of Israel v.
Morad Shoham Ben Gidon, Lezme Yisrael Ben Shimon, Ben Ami David Ben
Yaacov (decision delivered 13
October 2000). The District Court of Nazareth dismissed the State’s
appeal, and upheld the decision of the Magistrate Court, Juvenile Division,
Afula ordering the release of the defendants – three Jewish minors - with the
conditions of house arrest, the deposit of 2,000 NIS in cash, and the
posting of a 7,000 NIS bond. Defendants, charged with Article 151 –
Forbidding Crowding, Article 152 – Rioting, and Article 452 – Intentional
Destruction of Property, alleged to have participated with hundreds of others at
Afula junction, threw stones at Arab-owned restaurants, set fire to tires, and
screamed “Death to Arabs.” The State did not ask the District Court to stay its
decision pending appeal to the Supreme Court.
Oral Statement of the World Federation of Democratic
Youth*
Delivered Before the United Nations Human
Rights Commission
Emergency Session on Israel/Palestine, 17-18 October
2000
As Presented by Mr.
Muhammed Dahleh, Advocate
Adalah:
The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel
18 October
2000
Members of the UN Human Rights Commission – I thank you for this opportunity to speak before you today, given the crowded agenda and the limited time in which this Special Session is taking place. I submit these remarks to you as a common statement of the World Federation of Democratic Youth and of Adalah: The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, the sole Palestinian-run legal center in Israel. As a deeply concerned member of the Palestinian community and as a citizen of Israel, I will focus my comments on the human rights violations committed by the Israeli government against Palestinian citizens of Israel, during the period of the current conflict, which began on 28 September, 2000.
I am
aware of the fact that an oral agreement was reached yesterday between the
Palestinian leadership and the Israeli Government. Nonetheless, I do not
think that such an agreement renders your work irrelevant or unnecessary. On the
contrary, I think that this special commission has a very important role to play
for the following reasons:
First:
The
Summit in Sharm El Sheikh is the eighth summit to have resulted in agreements
between Israel and the PLO. Yet all of these agreements did not prevent acts of
violence and violations of basic rights of the Palestinians by Israel.
Therefore, and in light of the recurrent events of violence and abuse of human
rights committed by Israel against the Palestinian people, including the
Palestinian minority inside Israel, the Commission should not be discouraged by
the fact that an agreement has been reached. Rather, the Commission should
move forward in its current mission and establish an Investigation Committee for
the recent violence by Israel against the Palestinian people. Such a measure
might prevent future violence by Israel, something that the political agreements
have not yet successfully achieved.
Second:
The
Palestinian minority composes 20% of Israel’s population or close to 1 million
people; however, their core issues, including the recent violence against them,
have not been represented in Sharm El Sheikh. The summit did not deal with the
Palestinians in Israel, and the agreements reached will not stem the tide of
Israeli violence—both by the police and Jewish citizens of Israel—perpetrated
against us. It will not stop the interference of the Israeli Shin Beit, the
General Security Service in our life and will not guarantee that the vulnerable
Palestinian minority not be harassed on a daily basis. The events of the last
three weeks—particularly the illegal police actions against Palestinian citizens
of Israel, including the killing of 13 Palestinian citizens of Israel, and the
abuse of their due process rights—show that the Palestinian minority is an
extremely vulnerable group. As in the past, their core issues and
concerns—political prisoners, land confiscation and dispossession, blatant
racism, and discrimination in all aspects of life—have been neglected and
forgotten. We have never been represented by any official body or leader in any
of the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations, and the Sharm El Sheik Summit was no
different. We call upon this Commission not to continue the trend of neglecting
one million people, but rather pay special attention to their vulnerable status.
Third:
This
Commission should not give free hand to the attempts to substitute the UN by the
US. We all know that a fact-finding Committee led by the US is not enough; it is
not and should not be a substitute to an Investigation Committee established by
this distinguished UN body.
I. Main
Points
Mr. Chairman, be
sure that these acts of the Israeli police and of the harassment of the Israeli
Shin Beit will not stop because of the agreement reached at Sharm El Sheikh. The
one million Palestinians inside Israel will continue to suffer with no
international attention paid to them.
Therefore we recommend
to the UN Human Rights Commission the following:
II.
Recommendations to the UN Human Rights Commission
*Thank you to World Federation of Democratic Youth for
assisting Adalah to obtain consultative status before UN
HRC.
Grave
and Massive Violations of the Human Rights of the Palestinian People by Israel
Resolution S-5/1 of the
Fifth Special Session of the Commission on Human Rights
27 October
2000
Distr.
GENERAL
E/CN.4/RES/S-5/1
27
October 2000
Original: ENGLISH
The
Commission on Human Rights,
Meeting in special session,
Guided
by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the
various provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the
International Covenants on Human Rights, the Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Convention on the
Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women,
Recalling Security
Council resolutions 476 (1980) of 30 June 1980, 478 (1980) of 20 August 1980,
672 (1990) of 12 October 1990, 1073 (1996) of 28 September 1996 and 1322 (2000)
of 7 October 2000,
Recalling also its
previous resolutions on the situation of human rights in the occupied
Palestinian territories, including Jerusalem, the most recent of which was
resolution 2000/6 of 17 April 2000,
Taking
note of the report of the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Giorgio Giacomelli
(E/CN.4/S-5/3), presented to the special session on 17 October 2000, regarding
his mission undertaken in accordance with Commission resolution 1993/2 A of 19
February 1993,
Condemning the
provocative visit to Al-Haram Al-Sharif on 28 September 2000 by Ariel Sharon,
the Likud party leader, which triggered the tragic events that followed in
occupied East Jerusalem and the other occupied Palestinian territories,
resulting in a high number of deaths and injuries among Palestinian
civilians,
Gravely
concerned at the widespread, systematic and gross violations of human rights
perpetrated by the Israeli occupying Power, in particular mass killings and
collective punishments, such as demolition of houses and closure of the
Palestinian territories, measures which constitute war crimes, flagrant
violations of international humanitarian law and crimes against humanity,
Taking
into account the principles of international law and international humanitarian
law, particularly the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian
Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949 and the First Additional Protocol
thereto of 1977, and the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and
Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials of 1990, which prescribe that such
officials should, inter alia, "minimize damage and injury, and respect and
preserve human life" and "ensure that firearms are used only in appropriate
circumstances in a manner likely to decrease the risk of unnecessary
harm",
Bearing
in mind the outcome of the Sharm El Sheikh Summit of 17 October 2000,
1.
Strongly condemns the disproportionate and indiscriminate use of force in
violation of international humanitarian law by the Israeli occupying Power
against innocent and unarmed Palestinian civilians, causing the death of one
hundred and twenty civilians, including many children, in the occupied
territories, which constitutes a flagrant and grave violation of the right to
life and also constitutes a war crime and a crime against humanity;
2.
Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to put an immediate end to any use of
force against unarmed civilians and to abide scrupulously by its legal
obligations and responsibilities under the Geneva Convention relative to the
Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949;
3.
Calls upon the international community to take immediate effective measures to
secure the cessation of violence by the Israeli occupying Power and to put an
end to the ongoing violations of human rights of the Palestinian people in the
occupied territories;
4.
Affirms that the Israeli military occupation in itself constitutes a grave
violation of the human rights of the Palestinian people;
5. Also
affirms that the deliberate and systematic killing of civilians and children by
the Israeli occupying authorities constitutes a flagrant and grave violation of
the right to life and also constitutes a crime against humanity;
6.
Decides:
(a) To
establish, on an urgent basis, a human rights inquiry commission, whose
membership should be based on the principles of independence and objectivity, to
gather and compile information on violations of human rights and acts which
constitute grave breaches of international humanitarian law by the Israeli
occupying Power in the occupied Palestinian territories and to provide the
Commission with its conclusions and recommendations, with the aim of preventing
the repetition of the recent human rights violations;
(b) To
request the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to undertake an
urgent visit to the occupied Palestinian territories to take stock of the
violations of the human rights of the Palestinian people by the Israeli
occupying Power, to facilitate the activities of the mechanisms of the
Commission on Human Rights in implementation of the present resolution, to keep
the Commission on Human Rights informed of developments and to report to the
Commission on Human Rights at its fifty-seventh session and, on an interim
basis, to the General Assembly at its fifty-fifth session;
(c) To
request the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary
executions, the Representative of the Secretary-General for internally displaced
persons, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, the Special
Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, the Special
Rapporteur on religious intolerance, the Special Rapporteur on racism, racial
discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, the Special Rapporteur on
the right to housing and the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary
Disappearances to carry
out immediate missions to the occupied Palestinian territories and report the
findings to the Commission on Human Rights at its fifty-seventh session and, on
an interim basis, to the General Assembly at its fifty-fifth session;
(d) To
request the High Commissioner to bring the present resolution to the attention
of the Government of Israel and all other Governments, the competent United
Nations organs, the specialized agencies, regional intergovernmental
organizations and international humanitarian organizations, to ensure the widest
possible dissemination of the text of the resolution and to report on its
implementation by the Government of Israel to the Commission at its next
session;
7.
Decides to consider this question at its fifty-seventh session under item 8 of
its provisional agenda, as a matter of high priority;
8.
Requests the Economic and Social Council to meet on an urgent basis in order to
act on the proposals contained in the present resolution.
6th
meeting
19 October 2000
[Adopted by a roll-call vote of 19 votes to 16,
with 17 abstentions.]