DOCSLIB.ORG

Mandate to Discriminate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mandate to Discriminate Mandate to Discriminate Appointing the 2016-2022 UN Special Rapporteur on “Israel’s Violations of the Principles and Bases of International Law” Report by UN Watch March 10, 2016 Geneva, Switzerland Executive Summary Council in the end chose to appoint Mr. Wibisono. The UN Human Rights Council The decision by the plenary is scheduled (UNHRC) is soon to appoint a st replacement for Makarim Wibisono, the to take place at the end of the current 31 former Indonesian diplomat who session of the UNHRC, on Thursday, announced that he will step down March 24, 2016. prematurely, at the end of March 2016, after serving less than two years in his Mandate Against Human Rights position as “Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the The selective, prejudicial and Palestinian territories occupied since discriminatory nature of this mandate has 1967.” been recognized by several of the mandate-holders themselves—including This report examines the controversial former Special Rapporteur Hannu mandate, reviews the 10 applicants, and Halinen—as it negates the very concept of makes recommendations for relevant universal human rights and the rule of stakeholders. law. Appointment Procedure While the title of the mandate implies that the special rapporteur monitors “the Following interviews with five out of the situation of human rights in the ten applicants, the UNHRC’s Palestinian territories,” this is false. In Consultative Group (CG)—chaired by the fact, the text of the mandate, unchanged representative of Egypt— on March 4th since 1993, makes clear that the recommended two names: Penny Green rapporteur is charged with investigating of the UK, ranked first, and Michael Lynk only “Israel’s violations.” of Canada, ranked second. Palestinian, Israeli or other victims of The next step is for the Council president, human rights violations committed in the South Korean ambassador Choi Kyong- territories by the Palestinian Authority, lim, to consult broadly with UN member Hamas or Islamic Jihad are ignored. No states and to select one of the applicants other UN mandate on the human rights for the Council’s approval.1 While the situation of a specific country custom is for the president to choose from discriminates in this fashion; no other among the names shortlisted by the CG, presumes the existence of violations and he has the authority to choose any of the prejudges guilt in advance; and no other ten applicants. This is indeed what took mandate lasts forever without any review place in 2014 when the CG recommended and need for renewal. The mandate, human rights lawyer Christina Cerna for therefore, is inherently discriminatory, this position, yet the president and the and must be changed. 1 For the appointment procedure, see Human Rights Council resolution 5/1, decision 6/102 and resolution 16/21. MANDATE TO DISCRIMINATE MARCH 2016 2 UNHRC Rules of Impartiality & 2014 CG Green, who was ranked first by the Criteria Disqualify Partisan Applicants UNHRC’s vetting committee, also advocates the total boycott of Israel, Under the rules of the Council, as defined posting statements on Twitter such as: in resolution 5/1 and 16/21, the criteria of “Support BDS against Israel—best way “impartiality” and “objectivity” are to to resist this criminal government”; be of “paramount importance” when “Academics should now systematically selecting and appointing mandate-holders. refuse any invitations to visit Israeli universities or attend conferences there”; Accordingly, when the CG in 2014 “the West must impose sanctions selected applicants for this same position, against, boycott and divest from Israel.” no doubt mindful of the frequent embarrassments caused by outgoing Green also promotes the work of rapporteur and overt Hamas supporter extreme anti-Western ideologues like Richard Falk, the group said that its Noam Chomsky and Grietje Baars, and operating criteria would be to recommend heads an institute that opposes Western a candidate who was “the most likely to counter-terrorism and anti-extremism be able to objectively engage the key efforts as manifestations of interested parties,” and not those who, by Islamophobia. contrast, had “previously taken public positions on issues relevant to the Michael Lynk, also deemed impartial and mandate.” objective by the UNHRC’s vetting committee, plays a leadership role in Proceeding on that basis, the CG chose numerous Arab lobby groups, including human rights lawyer Christina Cerna, and CEPAL, which promotes “Annual Israeli rejected biased candidates such as Apartheid Week” events; signs anti-Israel William Schabas and Christine Chinkin. petitions; calls to prosecute Israel for It is deeply regrettable that this year’s CG alleged war crimes; addresses “One State” breached its obligations and failed to conferences that seek to eliminate Israel; follow its predecessor in upholding even and argues that “the solution” to “the the most minimal impartiality criteria problem” must go back to Israel’s very required by the relevant UNHRC creation in 1948, which he calls “the start resolutions. of ethnic cleansing.” Nominees Penny Green and Michael Lynk Are On his campus, Lynk tried to stop the Disqualified by Partisan Advocacy president of Western University from accepting an award from the Jewish Penny Green, whom the UNHRC’s National Fund, which advances vetting committee deemed impartial and reforestation and water treatment in objective as a potential investigator of Israel, and he regularly organizes anti- Israel’s violations, accuses Israel of Israel events and speakers. Lynk’s stated “criminal state practices,” “ethnic goal is to “isolate Israel.” cleansing,” and “apartheid.” She laments that the US and UK haven’t yet started Like Penny Green, Lynk also promotes an “bombing Israel for its massacres.” extreme anti-Western political agenda. Three days after the 9/11 terrorists MANDATE TO DISCRIMINATE MARCH 2016 3 attacks, Lynk instinctively blamed the systematic violations of human rights, West, pointing the finger at “global then they must believe that the facts will inequalities” and “disregard by Western speak for themselves, and that designating nations for the international rule of law.” those who have a long record of making previous statements—knowing full well that their records will be discredited by Recommendations legal scholars and human rights activists —does not serve their cause. Two recent Recommendation to EU and USA: Take action to finally eliminate the cases are illustrative. Though the human rights protection gap, prejudice, Palestinian Authority and the Arab and and discriminatory nature of the mandate, Islamic states ensured Richard Falk’s as recognized by numerous democracies, appointment as Special Rapporteur in Amnesty International, and even by 2008, less than two years later the several of the mandate-holders Palestinian delegation found themselves themselves. freezing Falk’s reports—for his support of their rival Hamas—and pleading with him Recommendation to UN Human to resign, and for the U.S. to help remove Rights Council President Choi Kyong- him. Similarly, the Palestinians and their lim: supporters successfully lobbied for Reject the grossly partisan applicants William Schabas to head the UNHRC’s recommended by the Consultative Group, 2014 Gaza inquiry, yet his prior on the grounds that they fail to meet the statements and actions were found to be minimal criteria of impartiality and objectivity as required by Human Rights so egregious that his appointment was Council resolution 5/1 and resolution condemned by leading international law 16/21. The president should instead scholars, and Schabas was forced to resign follow the precedent and criteria set by the in disgrace only six months later—after it previous Consultative Group for this was also revealed that he had done paid mandate by selecting applicants without legal work for the PLO—making him the biased records. This year’s pool of first UN inquiry chair forced to quit over applicants include human rights lawyers an actual conflict of interest. who have not gone on record about the conflict. As in 2014, the appointment process can be extended as necessary beyond the current March session. Recommendation to Palestinian Authority, Arab League, and Organization of Islamic Cooperation: Recognize that, as McGill international law professor Frédéric Mégret has noted regarding similar appointments in the past, surely if the Arab and Islamic states believe that Israel is committing gross and MANDATE TO DISCRIMINATE MARCH 2016 4 Mandate’s Deceptive Title they Israeli or Palestinian. The mandate as it actually is, however, applies only to The UN gives the Human Rights Israeli actions—and with its violations Council’s lead investigator on Israel the prejudged and presumed in advance. title of “Special Rapporteur on the There is a substantial difference between situation of human rights in the the two. Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.” The position was held from 2008 Mandate Against to 2014 by Richard Falk, and then by Human Rights Makarim Wibisono, who announced he would step down at the end of March Indeed it may be said that the mandate 2016. negates the very idea of universal human rights and the rule of law. Victims of The title is deliberately misleading, human rights violations cannot be ignored designed to mask the discriminatory and or addressed by the United Nations prejudicial nature of the UNHRC’s depending on the identity of the alleged permanent investigative mandate on perpetrator. Israel. The
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Phyllis Bennis
    Phyllis Bennis: Resolving Iraq and Syria through Diplomacy, Not War a videoconference forum Monday, May 18, 2015 6:30-8:30 PM This event is free and open to the public; donations will be accepted. Multnomah Friends Meeting House 4312 SE Stark On-street parking is limited; Meeting House is 4-5 blocks from bus lines #15 (Belmont @ 42nd), #20 (Burnside @ 44th) or #75 (Cesar Chavez/39th @ Stark). Or watch it live on ustream.tv/channel/occucakes (remove ads using Firefox and AdBlockPlus) Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies will conduct a video forum in Portland including a question and answer period Appearing via the internet from the east coast, the renowned analyst will focus on the US War on ISIS (/Islamic State), the debate over the Authorization for Use of Military Force, and the effects on the people of Iraq and Syria of the US-led war-- in which Iran is playing a key role. Bennis has been an advocate for diplomatic solutions in light of the ongoing state of war the US has been in at least since the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. Bennis will also give brief updates on Israel/Palestine and what's going on in Yemen. Coordinated by: Peace and Justice Works Iraq Affinity Group, funded in part by the Jan Bone Memorial Fund for public forums. cosponsored by Occupy Portland Elder Caucus, Americans United for Palestinian Human Rights (AUPHR), Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, Jewish Voice for Peace-Portland, American Friends Service Committee, Veterans for Peace Chapter 72, Pacific Green Party, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom-Portland, and others.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 the Right-Wing Media Enablers of Anti-Islam Propaganda
    Chapter 4 The right-wing media enablers of anti-Islam propaganda Spreading anti-Muslim hate in America depends on a well-developed right-wing media echo chamber to amplify a few marginal voices. The think tank misinforma- tion experts and grassroots and religious-right organizations profiled in this report boast a symbiotic relationship with a loosely aligned, ideologically-akin group of right-wing blogs, magazines, radio stations, newspapers, and television news shows to spread their anti-Islam messages and myths. The media outlets, in turn, give members of this network the exposure needed to amplify their message, reach larger audiences, drive fundraising numbers, and grow their membership base. Some well-established conservative media outlets are a key part of this echo cham- ber, mixing coverage of alarmist threats posed by the mere existence of Muslims in America with other news stories. Chief among the media partners are the Fox News empire,1 the influential conservative magazine National Review and its website,2 a host of right-wing radio hosts, The Washington Times newspaper and website,3 and the Christian Broadcasting Network and website.4 They tout Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, Steven Emerson, and others as experts, and invite supposedly moderate Muslim and Arabs to endorse bigoted views. In so doing, these media organizations amplify harm- ful, anti-Muslim views to wide audiences. (See box on page 86) In this chapter we profile some of the right-wing media enablers, beginning with the websites, then hate radio, then the television outlets. The websites A network of right-wing websites and blogs are frequently the primary movers of anti-Muslim messages and myths.
    [Show full text]
  • J Street Sides with Israel's Enemies & Works to Destroy Support for Israel
    ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA J Street Sides With Israel’s Enemies & Works to Destroy Support for Israel Special Report Including Executive Summary by The Zionist Organization of America by Morton A. Klein, Elizabeth Berney, Esq., and Daniel Mandel, PhD “J Street is one of the most virulent anti-Israel organizations in the history of Zionism and Judaism.” - Prof. Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School Copyright 2018, Zionist Organization of America CONTENTS Table of Contents . i Executive Summary . ES-00 - ES-13 Full Report . 1 Introduction . 1 I. J Street’s Anti-Israel, Foreign & Muslim Donors, and Its Lies About Them. 1 (1) For years, J Street Falsely Denied that Anti-Zionist Billionaire George Soros Was A Major J Street Funder . 1 (2) J Street’s Arab, Muslim and Foreign Donors . 4 II. J Street’s Interconnected Web Of Extremist Anti-Israel Organizations . 9 (1) J Street Is Part of a Soros-Funded Web of Anti-Israel Organizations . 9 (2) J Street Is Also Part of an Interconnected Web of Extremist Organizations Working to Delegitimize Israel, Founded by and/or Coordinated by J Street President Ben-Ami’s Consulting Firm . 11 III. J Street Persistently Even Opposes Israel’s Existence, Persistently Defames and Condemns Israel, And Has Even Encouraged Anti-Israel Violence. 12 (1) J Street Persistently Maligns and Blames Israel . 12 (2) J Street Speakers Have Called for the End of the Jewish State; and a J Street Official Letter to Congress Supported Those Calling for an End to Israel’s Existence . 15 (3) J Street’s Co-Founder Condemned Israel’s Creation As “Wrong” – A Repeated J Street Theme .
    [Show full text]
  • The BDS Movement: Why Israel?
    Alex Feuerherdt The BDSMovement: Why Israel? The BDSMovement – Past and Present The BDS movement is currentlythe most active and best known anti-Israel asso- ciation. The abbreviation “BDS” stands for “Boycott, Divestment,and Sanc- tions.” Officially,the movement was founded in July 2005 by more than 170or- ganizations,supposedlyrepresenting the Palestinian civil society.Atleast,this is how the BDSmovement likes to tell the story.¹ Since 2005,BDS has gained many supporters,evenoutside the Palestinian territories, among them celebrities like South African archbishop Desmond Tutu, Britishfilm director KenLoach,Amer- ican philosopher Judith Butler, and ex-Pink Floydsinger Roger Waters.The BDS movement perceivesand describes Israel as an “Apartheid state,” like South Af- rica previously, and calls for acomprehensive economic, political,academic, and artistic boycott,aswell as for awithdrawal of investments, an embargo, and coercive measures.Thus, it targets the Jewish state as awhole. It is headed by Omar Barghouti,who, albeit having studied at TelAvivUniversity, accuses Is- rael of “Apartheid,”² “Nazi practices,”³ and “ethnic cleansing.”⁴ He categorically rejects atwo-state solution and maintains thatany dialogue with Israeliswould be “unethical” and “dangerous.” Another well-known BDS activist is Lebanese-American professor of politics As’ad AbuKhalil, who in 2012 said: The real aim of BDS is to bringdown the stateofIsrael. […]That should be stated as an unambiguous goal. Thereshould not be anyequivocation on the subject.Justiceand free- dom for the Palestiniansare incompatible with the existenceofthe stateofIsrael.⁵ Cf. “Palestinian Civil SocietyCall for BDS,” BDS Movement,issued July 9, 2005,accessed April 1, 2020,https://bdsmovement.net/call. O. Barghouti, “BesiegingIsrael’sSiege,” TheGuardian,August 12, 2010,https://www.the guardian.com/commentisfree/2010/aug/12/besieging-israel-siege-palestinian-boycott.
    [Show full text]
  • Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) Our Mission: to Stop the Defamation of the Jewish People and to Secure Justice and Fair Treatment to All
    NOV 2018 Background Information on Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) Our Mission: To stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all. ABOUT ADL ADL is a leading anti-hate organization that was founded in 1913 in response to an escalating climate of anti-Semitism and bigotry. Today, ADL is still the first call when acts of anti-Semitism occur and continues to fight all forms of hate. A global leader in exposing extremism, delivering anti-bias education and fighting hate online, ADL’s ultimate goal is a world in which no group or individual suffers from bias, discrimination or hate. 2 Background Information on Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) 3 Preface This article provides background on the beliefs, tactics and activities of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP). At the outset, it is important to note that while we profoundly disagree with what SJP represents, we understand that they have the right to their views and to express them. ADL fully supports and defends free speech principles in America, and we recognize that the First Amendment protects even hateful or offensive speech. We have also long believed that the best answer to hate speech is not censorship, but more speech. It is because of these principles that ADL does not seek to censor or silence SJP, but rather to exercise our own First Amendment rights to report on them, criticize them, and expose their views to greater public scrutiny. 4 Introduction Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is a network of pro-Palestinian student groups across the US which disseminate anti-Israel propaganda often laced with inflammatory and at times combative rhetoric.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel at the UN: a History of Bias and Progress - September 2013
    Israel at the UN: A History of Bias and Progress - September 2013 Introduction The United Nations (UN) has long been a source of mixed feelings for the Jewish community. While the UN played a pivotal role in the creation of the State of Israel, the international body has a continuing history of a one-sided, hostile approach to Israel. After decades of bias and marginalization, recent years have brought some positive developments for Israel to the UN. Nonetheless, the UN‟s record and culture continue to demonstrate a predisposition against Israel. Israel is prevented from fully participating in the international body. Indeed, in a meeting in April 2007, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon acknowledged to ADL leaders that Israel has been treated poorly at the UN and that, while some progress has been made, this bias still remains an issue. Secretary Ban stated this view publicly during his visit to Israel in August 2013. Considering the international body‟s pivotal role in the establishment of the Jewish State, there is a certain paradox that the UN is often a forum for the delegitimization of the State of Israel. In fact, the UN laid the essential groundwork for the establishment of Israel by passing UN Resolution 181 in 1947, which called for the partition of British Mandate Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. Following Israel's independence in 1948, the Jewish State became an official member-state of the international body. Since Israel‟s establishment, Arab member states of the UN have used the General Assembly (GA) as a forum for isolating and chastising Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • U. S. Foreign Policy1 by Charles Hess
    H UMAN R IGHTS & H UMAN W ELFARE U. S. Foreign Policy1 by Charles Hess They hate our freedoms--our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other (George W. Bush, Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People, September 20, 2001). These values of freedom are right and true for every person, in every society—and the duty of protecting these values against their enemies is the common calling of freedom-loving people across the globe and across the ages (National Security Strategy, September 2002 http://www. whitehouse. gov/nsc/nss. html). The historical connection between U.S. foreign policy and human rights has been strong on occasion. The War on Terror has not diminished but rather intensified that relationship if public statements from President Bush and his administration are to be believed. Some argue that just as in the Cold War, the American way of life as a free and liberal people is at stake. They argue that the enemy now is not communism but the disgruntled few who would seek to impose fundamentalist values on societies the world over and destroy those who do not conform. Proposed approaches to neutralizing the problem of terrorism vary. While most would agree that protecting human rights in the face of terror is of elevated importance, concern for human rights holds a peculiar place in this debate. It is ostensibly what the U.S. is trying to protect, yet it is arguably one of the first ideals compromised in the fight.
    [Show full text]
  • And Pale Odia Palestinian Woman in Jabaliya Camp, Gaza Strip
    and Pale odia Palestinian woman in Jabaliya Camp, Gaza Strip. Her home was demolished by Israeli military, (p.16) (Photo: Neal Cassidy) nunTHE JOURNAL OF SUBSTANCE FOR PROGRESSIVE WOMEN VOL. XV SUMMER 1990 PUBLISHER/EDITOR IN CHIEF Merle Hoffman MANAGING EDITOR Beverly Lowy ASSOCIATE EDITOR Eleanor J. Bader ASSISTANT EDITOR Karen Aisenberg EDITOR AT LARGE Phyllis Chester CONTRIBUTING EDITORS Charlotte Bunch Vinie Burrows Naomi Feigelson Chase Irene Davall FEATURES Above: Goats on a porch at Toi Derricotte Mandala. All animals are treated with Roberta Kalechofsky BREAKING BARRIERS: affection and respect, even the skunks. Flo Kennedy WOMEN AND MINORITIES IN (p.10) (Photo: Helen M. Stummer) Fred Pelka THE SCIENCES Cover: A single mother and her Helen M. Stummer ON THE ISSUES interviews children find permanency in a H.O.M.E.- ART DIRECTORS Paul E. Gray, President of MIT, and built home. (Photo: Helen M. Stummer) Michael Dowdy Dean of Student Affairs, Shirley M. Julia Gran McBay, on sexism and racism in A SONG SO BRAVE — ADVERTISING AND SALES academia 7 PHOTO ESSAY DIRECTOR Text By Phyllis Chesler Carolyn Handel H.O.M.E. Photos By Joan Roth ONE WOMAN'S APPROACH Phyllis Chesler and an international ON THE ISSUES: A feminist, humanist TO SOCIETY'S PROBLEMS group of feminists present a Torah to publication dedicated to promoting By Helen M. Stummer political action through awareness and the women of Jerusalem 19 education; working toward a global Visual sociologist Helen M. Stummer political consciousness; fostering a spirit profiles a unique program to combat TO PEE OR NOT TO PEE of collective responsibility for positive homelessness, poverty and By Irene Davall social change; eradicating racism, disenfranchisement 10 A humorous recollection of the "pee- sexism, ageism, speciesism; and support- in" that forced Harvard to examine its ing the struggle of historically disenfran- FROM STONES TO sexism 20 chised groups to protect and defend STATEHOOD themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Discrimination in the Time of COVID-19: Unequal Access to Medical Care in West Bank and Gaza Hana Cooper Seattle University ‘21, B.A
    Medical Discrimination in the Time of COVID-19: Unequal Access to Medical Care in West Bank and Gaza Hana Cooper Seattle University ‘21, B.A. History w/ Departmental Honors ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE A SYSTEM OF DISCRIMINATION COVID-19 IMPACT Given that PalestiniansSTRACT are suffering from As is evident from headlines over the last year, Palestinians are faring much worse While many see the founding of Israel in 1948 as the beginning of discrimination against COVID-19 has amplified all of the existing issues of apartheid, which had put Palestinians the COVID-19 pandemic not only to a under the COVID-19 pandemic than Israelis. Many news sources focus mainly on the Palestinians, it actually extends back to early Zionist colonization in the 1920s. Today, in a place of being less able to fight a pandemic (or any major, global crisis) effectively. greater extent than Israelis, but explicitly present, discussing vaccine apartheid and the current conditions of West Bank, Gaza, discrimination against Palestinians continues at varying levels throughout West Bank, because of discriminatory systems put into and Palestinian communities inside Israel. However, few mainstream news sources Gaza, and Israel itself. Here I will provide some examples: Gaza Because of the electricity crisis and daily power outages in Gaza, medical place by Israel before the pandemic began, have examined how these conditions arose in the first place. My project shows how equipment, including respirators, cannot run effectively throughout the day, and the it is clear that Israel is responsible for taking the COVID-19 crisis in Palestine was exacerbated by existing structures of Pre-1948 When the infrastructure of what would eventually become Israel was first built, constant disruptions in power cause the machines to wear out much faster than they action to ameliorate the crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • Press Release United Nations Department of Public Information • News and Media Services Division • New York PAL/1887 PI/1354 13 June 2001
    Press Release United Nations Department of Public Information • News and Media Services Division • New York PAL/1887 PI/1354 13 June 2001 DPI TO HOST INTKRNATIONAI, MEDIA ENCOUNTER ON QUESTION OF PALESTINE IN PARIS, 18 - 19 JUNE Search for Peace in Middle East, Role of United Nations To Be Discussed Prominent journalists and Middle East experts, including senior officials and lawmakers from Israel and the Palestinian Authority, will meet at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) headquarters in Paris, on 18 and 19 June, at an international media encounter on the question of Palestine organized by the Department of Public Information (DPI). The overall theme of the encounter is "The search for peace in the Middle East". It is designed as a forum where media representatives and international experts will have an opportunity to discuss the status of the peace process, ways and means to break the deadlock, and the cycle of violence and reporting about the developments in the Middle East. They will also discuss the role of the United Nations in the question of Palestine and in the overall search for peace in the Middle East. The Secretary-General of the United Nations is expected to issue a message welcoming the participants, which will be delivered by Shashi Tharoor, Interim Head, DPI. The Secretary-General of the French Foreign Ministry, Loic Hennekinne, and the Director-General of UNESCO, Koichiro Matsuura, will also welcome the participants. Terje Roed-Larsen, United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative of the Secretary-General to the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestinian Authority, will present the keynote address of the encounter, focusing on the peace process in the Middle East.
    [Show full text]
  • Advance Unedited Version Distr.: General 3 June 2013
    A/HRC/23/21 Advance Unedited Version Distr.: General 3 June 2013 Original: English Human Rights Council Twenty-third session Agenda item 7 Human rights situation in Palestine and other occupied Arab territories Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, Richard Falk* Summary In the present report, while noting the continuing non-cooperation of Israel, the Special Rapporteur addresses Israel‟s Operation “Pillar of Defense” and the general human rights situation in the Gaza Strip, as well as the expansion of Israeli settlements – and businesses that profit from Israeli settlements and the situation of Palestinians detained by Israel. * Late submission. GE.13- A/HRC/23/21 Contents Paragraphs Page I. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1–7 3 II. The Gaza Strip ......................................................................................................... 8–30 5 A. Operation “Pillar of Defense” ......................................................................... 8–15 5 B. Economic and social conditions...................................................................... 16–19 9 C. Health in Gaza ................................................................................................ 20–22 10 D. Ceasefire implementation ............................................................................... 23–30 11 III. Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons and detention
    [Show full text]
  • In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias Kenneth Lasson University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Baltimore Law ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law All Faculty Scholarship Faculty Scholarship 2011 In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias Kenneth Lasson University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/all_fac Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, and the First Amendment Commons Recommended Citation Kenneth Lasson, In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias, 3 J. Study of Antisemitism 349 (2011). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias Kenneth Lasson* Current events and the recent literature strongly suggest that antisemitism and anti-Zionism are often conflated and can no longer be viewed as distinct phenomena. The following paper provides an overview of con- temporary media and scholarship concerning antisemitic/anti-Zionist events and rhetoric on college campuses. This analysis leads to the con- clusion that those who are naive about campus antisemitism should exer- cise greater vigilance and be more aggressive in confronting the problem. Key Words: Antisemitism, Higher Education, Israel, American Jews In America, Jews feel very comfortable, but there are islands of anti- Semitism: the American college campus. —Natan Sharansky1 While universities like to nurture the perception that they are protec- tors of reasoned discourse, and indeed often perceive themselves as sacro- sanct places of culture in a chaotic world, the modern campus is, of course, not quite so wonderful.
    [Show full text]