Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Israel transfer of Hamas men from Jerusalem may be war crime, UN envoy says

UN human rights rapporteur says forcible transfer of four Palestinians from East Jerusalem would break international law.

By Reuters

Israel's intention to expel four Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem to the West Bank could constitute a war crime, a UN human rights expert charged on Tuesday.

Richard Falk, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories, said the move was part of a Israeli push to remove Palestinians from East Jerusalem.


Hamas official Mohammed Abu Tir was released from Israeli prison on Thursday May 19, 2010

Photo by: Lior Mizrachi

"These actions, if carried out, would violate international law, with certain actions potentially amounting to war crimes under international humanitarian law," Falk said in a statement.

"Forcibly transferring these individuals would constitute serious violations of Israel's legal obligations. At the same time, the current threats should be viewed as part of a larger, extremely worrying pattern of Israeli efforts to drive Palestinians out of East Jerusalem - all of which are illegal under international law," Falk said.

All four are members of the Palestinian Legislative Council and long-time residents of the city, Falk said. But all are also members of Hamas, which has pledged to destroy Israel and is viewed by Israel and the West as a terrorist group.

On September 6, the Israeli High Court of Justice is scheduled to consider their case, according to Falk.

He named them as Muhammad Abu-Teir, Ahmad Attoun, Muhammad Totah and Khaled Abu Arafeh. Araheh is a former Hamas cabinet minister and the other three were lawmakers elected in 2006.

"Israel, as an occupying power, is prohibited from transferring civilian persons from East Jerusalem and is prohibited from forcing Palestinians to swear allegiance or otherwise affirm their loyalty to the State of Israel," he said.

Demolitions

Falk also criticized Israel's plan to demolish some 20 Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem, calling it illegal and saying it reflected its systematic bid to drive Palestinians out of the holy city.

A local planning commission has approved a scheme to destroy the homes, as part of the King's Garden project, but it will need additional ratification which could take months, Israeli officials have said.

City spokesman Stephan Miller has said the project was intended "to improve the quality of life" in Silwan and that a park and public complex slated to be built in the area would be used by Arabs and Jews alike.

"International law does not allow Israel to bulldoze Palestinians homes to make space for the Mayor's project to build a garden, or anything else," said Falk.

Israel drew U.S. anger in March, when it announced during a visit by Vice President Joe Biden a plan to build 1,600 homes for Jews in an area of the occupied West Bank it considers part of Jerusalem. Israel assured Washington building at the Ramat Shlomo settlement site would not begin for at least two years.

In December 2008, Falk, who is Jewish, was detained and turned back from Israel while trying to carry out an official UN mission to Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem. The deportation was denounced by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

He has served in the independent post since May 2008, reporting to the UN Human Rights Council. Critics say that the 47-member state forum unfairly singles out Israeli violations.

shafique wrote:an Israeli ministry giving money to a Medical charity that helps poor third-world children, including Palestinians

shafique wrote:I think you should indeed milk it for what it's worth - even in this thread which highlights Israel's relation to International law.

shafique wrote:This is from Haaretz - but we are all familiar with what the response will be (the Jewish UN guy actually is a secret anti-Semite, he doesn't know that Israel is above international law, BOO!! look at this report about Tajikistan from the 1850s - doesn't it show the Mooslims are bad??, ooh, look here's a Memri video, oh Hamas are evil ) :

event horizon wrote:Richard Falk has a known history of delivering spin and spewing outright lies

He has served in the independent post since May 2008, reporting to the UN Human Rights Council. Critics say that the 47-member state forum unfairly singles out Israeli violations.

Do you think Elder will link to your musings that the UN is wrong to state bulldozing homes in East Jerusalem is against International Law, because Israel says it legal and 'fanbois' believe Israel over any International law?? Just asking.

Hamas, he pointed out, consistently urged the continuation of its July 2008 Egypt-sponsored ceasefire with Israel and even its extension for up to 10 years. According to the respected British newsweekly, The Economist, Falk noted, Hamas proposed an extension of up to 20 years. “What is so revealing is the Israeli refusal to even acknowledge that this was a diplomatic initiative that would have probably ended any violence.”

Hamas, he pointed out, consistently urged the continuation of its July 2008 Egypt-sponsored ceasefire with Israel and even its extension for up to 10 years. According to the respected British newsweekly, The Economist, Falk noted, Hamas proposed an extension of up to 20 years. “What is so revealing is the Israeli refusal to even acknowledge that this was a diplomatic initiative that would have probably ended any violence.”

I already showed that Falk is, quite simply, a liar. At that time, I wasn't aware of any specific Hamas truce offer that he was referring to, so I couldn't prove that he was lying on that specific point, but this repetition over here spurred me to research this supposed truce extension.

I could not find any mention of this in The Economist (although I did find an article that called Falk's obscene comparison between Israel and Nazi Germany "absurd.") But I did find some articles about Hamas' offer of a twenty year truce, and as I thought, it was not an "extension" of the existing six month calm period that Falk claims. It was a fake offer that Hamas had made years ago whose terms were that after Israel withdraws completely from all lands captured in 1967, then Hamas would offer a ten or twenty year truce without recognizing Israel's existence.

Falk explicitly calls this a "continuation of its July 2008 Egypt-sponsored ceasefire" and he knows very well that it was nothing of the sort. And when Hamas was given the chance to continue the truce, it rejected it.

shafique wrote:but if you are going to criticise Prof Falk's reports - which are meticulous and unambiguous =

Hamas, he pointed out, consistently urged the continuation of its July 2008 Egypt-sponsored ceasefire with Israel and even its extension for up to 10 years. According to the respected British newsweekly, The Economist, Falk noted, Hamas proposed an extension of up to 20 years. “What is so revealing is the Israeli refusal to even acknowledge that this was a diplomatic initiative that would have probably ended any violence.”

I already showed that Falk is, quite simply, a liar. At that time, I wasn't aware of any specific Hamas truce offer that he was referring to, so I couldn't prove that he was lying on that specific point, but this repetition over here spurred me to research this supposed truce extension.

I could not find any mention of this in The Economist (although I did find an article that called Falk's obscene comparison between Israel and Nazi Germany "absurd.") But I did find some articles about Hamas' offer of a twenty year truce, and as I thought, it was not an "extension" of the existing six month calm period that Falk claims. It was a fake offer that Hamas had made years ago whose terms were that after Israel withdraws completely from all lands captured in 1967, then Hamas would offer a ten or twenty year truce without recognizing Israel's existence.

Falk explicitly calls this a "continuation of its July 2008 Egypt-sponsored ceasefire" and he knows very well that it was nothing of the sort. And when Hamas was given the chance to continue the truce, it rejected it.

There's nothing ambiguous or factually incorrect in the UN, EU and Prof Falk's clear statements that Israel is breaking international law. Next you'll be saying he can't be trusted because he has a beard! (That's the level of your and elder's critique).

[Hamas] consistently urged the continuation of its July 2008 Egypt-sponsored ceasefire with Israel and even its extension for up to 10 years.

Hamas 'might renew' truce in Gaza

But I did find some articles about Hamas' offer of a twenty year truce, and as I thought, it was not an "extension" of the existing six month calm period that Falk claims. It was a fake offer that Hamas had made years ago whose terms were that after Israel withdraws completely from all lands captured in 1967, then Hamas would offer a ten or twenty year truce without recognizing Israel's existence.

"These actions, if carried out, would violate international law, with certain actions potentially amounting to war crimes under international humanitarian law," Falk said in a statement.

"Forcibly transferring these individuals would constitute serious violations of Israel's legal obligations. At the same time, the current threats should be viewed as part of a larger, extremely worrying pattern of Israeli efforts to drive Palestinians out of East Jerusalem - all of which are illegal under international law," Falk said.

Hamas still offered to extend the truce in Dec 2008 - as the articles above show

Hamas 'might renew' truce in Gaza

Hamas would consider renewing the expired Gaza truce if...

shafique wrote:And the reason the fanbois are making a fuss and slurring Prof Falk? Well it's because their idol Israel has been exposed on points of law:

"These actions, if carried out, would violate international law, with certain actions potentially amounting to war crimes under international humanitarian law," Falk said in a statement.

"Forcibly transferring these individuals would constitute serious violations of Israel's legal obligations. At the same time, the current threats should be viewed as part of a larger, extremely worrying pattern of Israeli efforts to drive Palestinians out of East Jerusalem - all of which are illegal under international law," Falk said.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon wrote:Let me know when I should start taking Falk seriously.

And the reason the fanbois are making a fuss and slurring Prof Falk? Well it's because their idol Israel has been exposed on points of law:

"These actions, if carried out, would violate international law, with certain actions potentially amounting to war crimes under international humanitarian law," Falk said in a statement.

"Forcibly transferring these individuals would constitute serious violations of Israel's legal obligations. At the same time, the current threats should be viewed as part of a larger, extremely worrying pattern of Israeli efforts to drive Palestinians out of East Jerusalem - all of which are illegal under international law," Falk said.

Richard Falk wrote:Hamas, he pointed out, consistently urged the continuation of its July 2008 Egypt-sponsored ceasefire with Israel and even its extension for up to 10 years. According to the respected British newsweekly, The Economist, Falk noted, Hamas proposed an extension of up to 20 years. “What is so revealing is the Israeli refusal to even acknowledge that this was a diplomatic initiative that would have probably ended any violence.”