Palestine

• Call on UNHRC to adopt a resolution on human rights situation in Occupied Palestine

  HRC 30th Special Session: Call on the United Nations Human Rights Council to adopt a resolution on the grave human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem and in IsraelOn 27 May 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) will hold aSpecial Session in relation to the escalating human rights violations against the Palestinian people on both sides of the Green Line.

  A draft resolution from the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) calling for the establishment of a commission of inquiry on the issue was circulated to UN member states. There is still time to call on our respective governments to support the resolution ahead of the vote in the UN Human Rights Council on 27 May 2021. Let’s act now!

  Israel’s repression against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line intensified in May 2021 in response to widespread Palestinian demonstrations against Israel’s imminent threat of eviction and displacement of eight Palestinian families from their homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in Jerusalem. This is only the latest in a series of measures, which form part of Israel’s decades-long institutionalized regime of racial domination and oppression over the Palestinian people as a whole. While the international community has ensured Israel’s impunity since 1948, enabling Israel to continue to commit widespread and systematic human rights violations. Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line, and refugees and exiles abroad, are denied their right of return and continue to steadfastly resist 73 years of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid.

  What can you do?

  This resolution needs all the support it can garner. Encourage your friends and colleagues throughout the world to mobilize their networks. In particular, we seek support from human rights and anti-racism movements in in all parts of the world to place pressure on their governments to support a commission of inquiry.

  1. Sign the petition through this link
  2. Write to your foreign ministry calling on it to support the OIC resolution and the establishment of an ongoing commission of inquiry on violations committed on both sides of the Green Line and to reject any proposed amendment that would undermine or seek to restrict or undermine the commission of inquiry. A list of contact information for foreign ministries can be found here.
  3. Send a copy of the correspondence to your country’s ambassador in Geneva. Contact information can be found here.
  4. Follow the Special Session, which will be livestreamed and use social media to tweet at your representatives and @UN_HRC with #SupportPalestineCOI to raise awareness about the debate and the call for an independent commission of inquiry.

  What is the Special Session about?

  The special session was convened based on a request by Pakistan, on behalf of the state members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and other UN members and observers indicated below. 

  In addition to the debate, the OIC has presented a resolution requesting that the HRC appoint an ongoing independent commission of inquiry to investigate, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in Israel, all violations and abuses of international humanitarian law and international human rights law since 1 April 2021, which will also be mandated to study all underlying root causes, including Israel’s systemic discrimination and repression, thereby encompassing the crimes of apartheid and persecution.

  This comes following years of work by civil society, including Palestinian, regional and international human rights organisations, urging states to address the root causes of Israel’s settler colonialism and apartheid imposed over the Palestinian people as a whole. 

  Palestinian civil society, supported by a broad coalition of 120 regional and international organisations, urgedmember states to ensure the creation of a commission of inquiry to monitor, document and report on all violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, including the latest Israeli attacks against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line and address the root causes of Israel’s institutionalized regime of racial domination and oppression. In addition, the organisations called for the mechanism to address the root causes of Israel’s institutionalized regime of racial domination and oppression.

  What is a commission of inquiry?

  UN commissions of inquiry are international independent investigative bodies designed to examine serious situations of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, as applicable. Based on their mandates, they collect information on violations, establish the facts, and identify perpetrators. As such, these investigatory bodies can play an important role in promoting accountability for violations and preventing future violations.

  Why is this important?

  This is an important resolution as it is the first time the Human Rights Council:

  • Addresses the root causes of Israel’s systemic discrimination, including Israel’s settler colonialism and apartheid, by establishing a commission of inquiry, which would address Israeli violations against the Palestinian people;
  • Includes a geographic scope encompassing, for the first time, Israeli violations targeting the Palestinian people on both sides of the Green Line, in recognition that Israel’s institutionalized regime of racial domination and oppression targets the Palestinian people as a whole.

  What is at stake?

  1. Some delegations may attempt to change the language and weaken the resolution given that the proposed commission of inquiry has a real potential to begin to address the root causes of human rights violations in Palestine, to seek meaningful accountability, and to preserve evidence that can be used in international criminal proceedings to hold perpetrators accountable.
  2. We need UN member states to take the opportunity to establish an ongoing commission of inquiry that addresses the current systematic violations but also future violations in the context of Israel’s institutionalized regime of racial domination and oppression over the Palestinian people, with the aim to bring an end to decades of impunity and international inaction in the face of mass atrocities against Palestinians.
• Call to reverse decision to suspend funding to 11 Palestinian and Israeli CSOs
  Arabic
  Mr. Ignazio Cassis 
  Department of Foreign Affairs 
  Switzerland
  Federal Palace West
  3003 Bern

  ---

  Dear Mr. Cassis,

  We, as representatives of civil society organisations from different regions of the world, write to you to express profound concern regarding the recent decision of the government of Switzerland to suspend vital funding for human rights organisations in Palestine. We find the timing of this decision to be alarming as it comes at a moment when these organisations are crucially needed to provide essential support. We are alarmed by the potential consequences of this decision and the impact it may have on Palestinians who rely on the invaluable work of these organisations.

• CIVICUS urges an end to attacks on civilians in Gaza

  

  Global civil society alliance, CIVICUS expressly condemns the continued bombardment of civilians in the ongoing conflict in Gaza and calls on all parties to stop the violence to prevent further humanitarian catastrophe. 

  We are appalled by the immense loss of life in the conflict and incalculable suffering being imposed on civilians. Warning by the Israeli military to more than 1.1 million Palestinians in northern Gaza to evacuate southwards amounts to forcible displacement and will have dire consequences and lead to an unprecedented loss of lives and destruction of homes. Disruption of basic necessities such as electricity, food, water supply and fuel are causing immense suffering and must stop. Imposition of collective punishment on civilians by bombarding them and their homes amounts to war crimes. 

  CIVICUS stands against all human rights abuses and war crimes. We firmly believe that preventing future outbreaks of violence necessitates respect for human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Israel. We support access to justice for victims of violence and occupation. 

  CIVICUS mourns the loss of precious lives in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We underscore the essential role of civil society organisations to help communities access their rights and pursue social cohesion and equality. Civic space and civil society participation are fundamental to ensuring accountability for human rights violations in accordance with due process because there can be no real peace or security without justice.

  CIVICUS remains concerned about the spread of disinformation which spawns hatred and violence. Finally, we urge the international community to urgently take steps to address the root causes of the conflict as a pathway to enduring peace. We urge the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security which incorporates gender perspectives.

• Civil Society Calls for Urgent Release of Palestinian Prisoners and Detainees in Israeli Prisons

  Arabic

  As we mark Palestinian Prisoners’ Day this year, Palestinian prisoners and detainees face the additional threat of a coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak in Israeli prisons and detention centers. While governments around the world are being called on to release prisoners and those detained in violation of international law, the Israeli occupying authorities have taken no steps to release Palestinian prisoners and detainees or to adequately mitigate and prevent a COVID-19 outbreak in prisons. Instead, mass arbitrary detentions and arrests, a staple of Israel’s prolonged military occupation and widespread and systematic human rights violations against the Palestinian people, have continued during the pandemic.[i]

• Civil society calls on UN member states to address Israeli attacks against Palestinians

  Regional and international civil society organisations from around the world call on United Nations Member States to address the escalating and institutionalised Israeli attacks against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line during the 30th HRC Special Session

  Your Excellency, 

  Israel’s repression against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line escalated in May 2021 in response to widespread Palestinian demonstrations against Israel’s imminent threat of eviction and displacement of eight Palestinian families from their homes in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in Jerusalem. Notably, this is only the latest example of Israel’s institutionalized regime of racial domination and oppression, which the Palestinian people have endured for decades. While the international community has ensured Israel’s impunity since 1948, enabling Israel to continue to commit widespread and systematic human rights violations, Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line and refugees and exiles abroad continue to oppose and stand steadfast against 73 years of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid. 

  As Israel intensifies its crackdown on Jerusalem and other parts of the West Bank, conducts military strikes against civilians in the Gaza Strip, which have been living under a comprehensive land, air, and sea closure for 14 years, and targets Palestinians inside the Green Line, the undersigned civil society organizations, from around the world, urge your delegation to  engage in the 30th Special Session by the UN Human Rights Council and  address all violations of human rights law and international humanitarian law, including the root causes of Israeli violations against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line.

  Since 13 April 2021, the beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, the Israeli occupying forces (IOF) have systematically targeted and attacked Palestinians in Jerusalem. The attacks escalated when the occupation police targeted worshippers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, with tear gas, sound bombs, and rubber-coated metal bullets, resulting in hundreds of injured Palestinians. The occupation police prevented paramedics from accessing the compound to treat the injured and even directly targeted emergency responders by firing tear gas and wastewater containers on volunteers, paramedics, and ambulances. In other parts of the West Bank, Israel has violently suppressed demonstrations calling for an end to Israeli oppression, including by shooting live ammunition at demonstrators, killing 14 Palestinians between 14 and 18 May 2021. According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, between 7 and 19 May, 5164 Palestinians were injured, 578 with live ammunition. 

  These attacks come in the context of increasing Palestinian mobilization against Israel’s policies and practices of racial domination and oppression, in response to the imminent eviction of eight Palestinian families, totaling 19 households of around 87 individuals, from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in Jerusalem. The forcible transfer of Palestinians from Jerusalem is a war crime and likely amounts to a crime against humanity as it is being perpetrated in a widespread and systematic manner. Principle 6 of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, prohibits arbitrary displacement, including “when it is based on policies of apartheid, ‘ethnic cleansing’ or similar practices aimed at/or resulting in altering the ethnic, religious or racial composition of the affected population.” All of these criteria are applicable to Israeli practices, policies and laws implemented with the intention of maintaining Jewish Israeli domination over the Palestinian people. 

  The Israeli police have also violently repressed Palestinian demonstrations inside the Green Line. Since 10 May 2021, thousands of Palestinian citizens of Israel came out to protest the evictions of Palestinian refugee families in Sheikh Jarrah, the use of extreme violence and attacks on worshippers and protestors by the police in Al-Aqsa Mosque and elsewhere, and the Israeli military attacks in Gaza. The Palestinian protestors were subjected to police violence and human rights violations, including denial of emergency medical care. High Commissioner Bachelet highlighted “reports of excessive and discriminatory use of force by police against Palestinian citizens of Israel”. Since 10 May, the  police have arrested 1097 Palestinians. 

  Moreover, Israeli settlers have intensified attacks against Palestinians living in the West Bank, including Jerusalem, with the support of the IOF. Inside the Green Line, far-right Jewish Israelis organized and coordinated the arrival of armed Israelis to attack Palestinians in al-Lydd, Ramle, Akka, Haifa, and Yafa, among other cities and areas. Moreover, the IOF has allowed Israeli settlers coming from the West Bank entry into Israel to target Palestinian neighborhoods and villages and provided support and protection as they attacked Palestinian residents and destroyed Palestinian property. In response, the Israeli police has not taken any action against and in some cases cooperated and supported the mob violence. High Commission Bachelet raised concern at “reports that Israeli police failed to intervene where Palestinian citizens of Israel were being violently attacked, and that social media is being used by ultraright-wing groups to rally people to bring ‘weapons, knives, clubs, knuckledusters to use against Palestinian citizens of Israel.” 

  In the Gaza Strip, the IOF continues to target civilian structures, in particular homes, wiping out whole families, and inflicting widespread destruction and collective punishment on the entire, trapped population. Since 10 May 2021, human rights organizations documented Israel’s use of disproportionate, indiscriminate, and unnecessary military force in violation of international law. Residential blocks are “being targeted pursuant to an apparent policy agreed by Israel's military and political leadership”. The number of residential buildings targeted now stands at 94, including six towers—three of which were completely destroyed—ultimately destroying 371 residential units. In addition, hundreds of private properties, as well as tens of governmental sites, schools, banks, and mosques have sustained significant damages. Israel’s airstrikes have also led to the large-scale destruction of power and water networks, as well as thousands of square meters of vital paved roads. 

  Israel’s extensive and systematic attacks on buildings, and the shelling of residential areas, especially those near the separation fence, force civilians—men, women, and children—to flee their homes in search of safety. Around 41,900 people have moved to 53 UNRWA schools, and the numbers are still increasing. Displaced people are experiencing appalling humanitarian conditions, especially when UNRWA schools have not officially been opened as shelters. 

  As of 2 pm on 17 May, 231 Palestinians, including 65 children and 39 women were killed; 1212 others have been injured in the attacks, including 277children and 204women. According to Israeli media, ten Israelis have been killed following rocket fire from Gaza. 

  It is again clear that civilians are paying the price of Israel’s pervasive impunity. Any firing of rockets or attacks must meet assessments of proportionality and the requirement for a concrete and direct military advantage. Indiscriminate attacks or targeting of civilians not taking a direct part in hostilities constitute a grave violation of international law. In order to protect all civilians, the Human Rights Council should address the root causes of Israel’s settler colonialism and apartheid to achieve lasting justice. 

  We call on your missions to:

   

  • Engage in the 30th UN Human Rights Council Special Session and address the escalating Israeli attacks against the Palestinian people, including the root causes of Israeli violations against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line.
  • Establish a commission of inquiry to:
  • Monitor, document and report on all violations of human rights and humanitarian law, including the escalating attacks against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line since April 2021;
  • Include and address the root causes of Israel’s institutionalized regime of racial domination and oppression over the Palestinian people in line with the 2019 Concluding Observations on Israel by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) which highlighted Israeli policies and practices against Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line are in violation of Article 3 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) pertaining to racial segregation and apartheid;
  • Identify individuals responsible for serious crimes; 
  • Collect and preserve evidence related to violations to be used for accountability in relevant judicial bodies and transfer evidence to the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.

  Endorsing organisations 

  1. Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies 
  2. International Service for Human Rights 
  3. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) 
  4. International Women's Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific (IWRAW AP)
  5. DefendDefenders (East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project)
  6. Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS) 
  7. Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights 
  8. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
  9. Southern Africa Human Rights Defenders Network (SAHRDN)
  10. Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) 
  11. Women League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF)
  12. Sexual Rights Initiative
  13. International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
  14. 11.11.11 
  15. The Center for Reproductive Rights 
  16. Baytna 
  17. Bytes For All, Pakistan 
  18. Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign 
  19. Human Rights solidarity 
  20. Association des Universitaires pour le Respect du Droit International en Palestine (AURDIP) 
  21. European Legal Support Center 
  22. Just Peace Advocates/Mouvement Pour Une Paix Juste
  23. Collectif Judéo Arabe et Citoyen pour la Palestine
  24. The Niagara Movement for Justice in Palestine-Israel (NMJPI) 
  25. ICAHD Finland
  26. Association belgo-Palestinienne WB
  27. Viva Salud
  28.  Intal
  29. CNCD-11.11.11
  30. EuroMed Rights
  31. The Palestinian Human Rights Organization (PHRO) - Lebanon 
  32. Scottish Palestinian Forum
  33. Trócaire
  34. European Trade Union Network for Justice in Palestine (ETUN)
  35. Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice (IIMA)
  36. UPJB (Union des Progressistes Juifs de Belgique)
  37. Akahatá
  38. Association France Palestine Solidarité (AFPS)
  39. Habitat International Coalition – Housing and Land Rights Network
  40. Canadian BDS Coalition
  41. ASGI - Association for juridical studies on immigration
  42. Network for Immigration, Development and Democracy (IDD)
  43. Aegis for Human Rights
  44. Geneva Bridge Association
  45. Association of Maghreb Workers in France
  46. Association for the Promotion of the Right to Difference
  47. El Na aura Association, Belgium
  48. Coordination for Maghreb Human rights Organizations (CMODH)
  49. SAM organization for Rights and Liberties
  50. Yemeni Observatory for Human Rights
  51. Dameer Foundation for Rights and Freedom
  52. INSAF Center for Defending Freedoms and Minorities
  53. Abductees’ Mothers Association
  54. Together We Raise (Social Association) 
  55. Watch for Human Rights 
  56. Mwatana for Human Rights 
  57. Hadramout Foundation For Legal Support and Training
  58. Yemeni Observatory of Mines
  59. Mwatana for Human Rights
  60. Social Peace Promotion and Legal Protection
  61. Al-Haq Foundation for Human Rights 
  62. Al-Rakeezeh Foundation for Relief and Development 
  63. Growth foundation for development & improvement
  64. Namaa Foundation for Development and Improvement 
  65. Lebanese Center for Human Rights
  66. Freedom of Thought and Expression
  67. Committee for Justice
  68. Belady Center for Rights and Freedoms
  69. Egyptian Front for Human Rights
  70. Egyptian Human Rights Forum
  71. The Freedom Initiative
  72. Arabic Network for Human Rights Information
  73. Centre for Egyptian Women Legal Assistance
  74. Libyan Center for Freedom of the Press
  75. February 17 Organization for Environment and Human Rights
  76. Shiraa Association to fight AIDS and drugs
  77. Thought Pioneers Organization Mattress
  78. Mattress Youth Organization
  79. Al-Tebyan Association for Human Rights Dirj
  80. Al-Massar Organization for Youth and Culture Dirj Branch
  81. Mediterranean Organization for Development and Humanitarian Relief
  82. International Arabic Organization for Women’s Rights
  83. Nass for Nass organization to support youth Misurata
  84. Defender Center for Human Rights
  85. Libyan Crimes Watch
  86. Libyan Organization for Legal Aid
  87. Human rights solidarity
  88. The Tunisian General Labor Union 
  89. The Committee for the Respect of Liberties and Human Rights in Tunisia
  90. The Tunisian Organization Against Torture
  91. The Tunisian Association for the Defense of Individual Liberties
  92. The Tunisian Association 23-10 for the Support of the Democratic Transition Process
  93. The National Observatory for the Defense of the Civic Character of the State
  94. The Tunisian Association for the Defense of Minorities
  95. Hassan Saadaoui Association for Democracy and Equality
  96. The National Union for Tunisian Journalists
  97. Vigilance for Democracy and Civic State       
  98. The Tunisian Forum for Economic and Social Rights
  99. Democratic Association of Tunisians in France
  100. Association Aswat Nissa
  101. Tunisian Federation for Citizenship on both shores
  102. Tunisian Union for Citizenship Action
  103. Tunisian Center for Press Freedom
  104. EuroMaghreb Network: citizenship and culture
  105. Vigilance for Democracy in Tunisia (Belgium)
  106. Ga3 Kifkif Network
  107. Algerian Feminist Journal Foundation
  108. Tharwa N'Fadhma N'Soumeur organisation
  109. Action for Change and Democracy in Algeria (ACDA)
  110. Algerian League for the Defense of Human Rights (LADDH)
  111. Autonomous Union of Public Administration Personnel (SNAPAP)
  112. General Autonomous Confederation of Workers in Algeria (CGATA)
  113. Riposte Internationale
  114. Collective of the Families of the Disappeared in Algeria (CFDA)
  115. National Committee for the Release of Detainees (CNLD)
  116. SHOAA for Human Rights
  117. Association for the Defense of Human Rights in Morocco (ASDHOM)
  118. Organization for freedoms of Media and Expression
  119. Libyan Organization for Independent Media 
  120. Youth for Tawergha 
• Community giving as a vehicle for democracy: Practical experiences from Palestine

  Open submission by Aisha Mansour, Lina Ismail, Nermin Hwaihi and Rasha Sansur, Dalia Association

• El Reino Unido responde a las preguntas realizadas por los miembros de CIVICUS al Consejo de Seguridad

  En el marco de sus consultas con la sociedad civil durante su presidencia del Consejo de Seguridad del mes de agosto, la Misión Permanente del Reino Unido de Gran Bretaña e Irlanda del Norte ante las Naciones Unidas respondió a las preguntas presentadas por los miembros de CIVICUS sobre la situación de seguridad en la República Democrática del Congo, Eritrea, Etiopía, Gaza y Birmania.

  ---

  La sociedad civil ocupa un papel importante en los programas del Consejo de Seguridad y CIVICUS desea agradecer al Reino Unido y a todos los miembros del Consejo de Seguridad por su compromiso constante con la participación de la sociedad civil en el trabajo del Consejo.

  El Consejo de Seguridad sigue de cerca la situación en la República Democrática del Congo (RDC).  En la resolución 2409 solicitamos al Secretario General que se nos proporcionaran informes cada treinta días.  El Consejo también aborda con frecuencia la situación de la RDC. El Consejo de Seguridad insiste en la importancia de que se celebren elecciones pacíficas, creíbles, inclusivas y oportunas el 23 de diciembre de 2018, en conformidad con el calendario electoral, que conduzcan a un traspaso pacífico del poder, según las disposiciones de la Constitución congoleña.  El Consejo de Seguridad también destaca la importancia de proteger a los civiles, incluso mediante el mandato de la MONUSCO, para la cual su protección es una prioridad estratégica. Durante la presidencia británica tuvo lugar una sesión informativa del Consejo de Seguridad sobre la RDC centrada en las próximas elecciones. Aquí puede consultarse la declaración del embajador.
   
  El Consejo de Seguridad publicó una comunicado sobre la firma de la Declaración conjunta de paz y amistad entre Eritrea y Etiopía del 9 de julio de 2018

  El OOPS fue creado por mandato de la Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas.  La posibilidad de que se suspendan sus servicios debido al actual déficit financiero del OOPS es motivo de gran preocupación para los miembros del Consejo de Seguridad, como así se expresó durante las consultas del Consejo celebradas el 22 de agosto sobre la situación en Oriente Medio.

  El Reino Unido sigue firmemente comprometido con el OOPS y con los refugiados palestinos de todo Oriente Medio. Ante las crecientes presiones financieras, el Reino Unido ha aportado alrededor de 60 millones de dólares americanos en 2018. Instamos a otros países a que proporcionen financiación adicional y a que efectúen desembolsos periódicos para garantizar que el OOPS siga llevando acabo su labor esencial.

  El Consejo de Seguridad sigue de cerca y con preocupación la situación en Gaza, por ejemplo, a través de las reuniones informativas periódicas como la que la Secretaria General Adjunta, Rosemary DiCarlo, ofreció ante el Consejo el 22 de agosto.
   
  El principal objetivo a largo plazo del Reino Unido es el retorno seguro, voluntario y digno a Rakáin, bajo supervisión internacional, del mayor número posible de refugiados rohinyás que se encuentran actualmente en Bangladés. En la actualidad, consideramos que las condiciones no son las adecuadas para el regreso de los refugiados. Apoyaremos a Birmania para que así lo haga, pero necesita realizar mejoras tangibles sobre el terreno. De manera más inmediata, Birmania debería permitir el acceso sin trabas de la ONU al norte de Rakáin.

  El Reino Unido ha acogido con satisfacción el anuncio de Birmania de crear una comisión de investigación sobre la violencia en Rakáin. Ahora es esencial que el gobierno birmano establezca las condiciones para que dicha investigación sea creíble, transparente e imparcial. Aún esperamos la decisión de la CPI con el fin de saber si tiene jurisdicción sobre las deportaciones de rohinyás a Bangladés (país signatario del Estatuto de Roma).
   
  Este mes, los miembros de CIVICUS preguntaron por las libertades cívicas en Colombia, la retirada de las tropas de la UNAMID de Darfur, la inseguridad alimentaria en el Sahel, la reubicación de la embajada de los Estados Unidos en Jerusalén, el deterioro del espacio cívico en Uganda, el caso de Omar Al Bashir en la Corte Penal Internacional y la amenaza mundial que supone la ciberdelincuencia.

  Estas preguntas y respuestas son el resultado de un llamamiento mensual a los miembros de CIVICUS para que envíen sus preguntas al presidente del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU. Esta es una oportunidad para que los miembros entren en contacto con un importante foro internacional de toma de decisiones. El personal de CIVICUS plantea las preguntas en nombre de los miembros de CIVICUS durante el informe mensual del presidente. ¡Hágase socio de CIVICUS para mantenerse informado y participar en esta acción!

• En cette journée du prisonnier palestinien, la société civile appelle à la libération urgente des prisonniers/ères et détenu/es palestiniens des prisons israéliennes

  En cette journée du 17 avril qui leur est consacrée, les prisonniers/ères palestiniens affrontent une menace supplémentaire avec l’apparition du risque de propagation du coronavirus (COVID-19) dans les prisons et les centres de détention israéliens. Alors qu’un appel a été lancé aux gouvernements du monde entier pour la libération des prisonniers/ères et notamment de ceux détenus en violation du droit international, les autorités d’occupation israéliennes n’ont pris aucune mesure dans cette direction, et n’ont pas adopter de mesures visant à atténuer la propagation du coronavirus derrière les barreaux. Au contraire, les arrestations et les détentions arbitraires de masse, au centre de la politique ’occupation militaire israélienne prolongée et des violations des droits de l’homme généralisées et systématiques à l’encontre du peuple palestinien, se poursuivent pendant la pandémie.

• En el Día de los Prisioneros Palestinos, la sociedad civil pide la liberación urgente de los presos y presas palestinos en las cárceles israelíes

  Mientras conmemoramos otro año más el Día de los Prisioneros Palestinos, los presos, presas, detenidos y detenidas palestinos se enfrentan a una amenaza adicional con la propagación del coronavirus (COVID-19) en las prisiones y centros de detención israelíes. Mientras se está pidiendo a muchos gobiernos de todo el mundo la liberación de las personas presas y detenidas en contravención del derecho internacional, las autoridades de ocupación israelíes no han tomado ninguna medida para liberar los presos y presas palestinos ni para mitigar o prevenir adecuadamente el brote de la COVID-19 en las prisiones. Al contrario, las detenciones masivas y arbitrarias y los arrestos, características básicas de la ocupación militar prolongada de Israel y de las generalizadas y sistemáticas violaciones de Derechos Humanos contra el pueblo palestino, han continuado durante la pandemia.

• GAZA: ‘The attacks and disinformation campaign against UNRWA are aimed at dismantling it’

  CIVICUS speaks with Jonathan Fowler of the United Nations Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), about the agency’s role in Gaza and the challenges it faces.

  Established after the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, UNRWA is the UN agency tasked with supporting the welfare and human development of Palestine refugees. It’s funded almost entirely by voluntary contributions from UN member states.

  What’s UNRWA’s role?

  UNRWA was established by the UN General Assembly in 1949 to deal with the effects of the refugee crisis caused by the Arab-Israeli war. Its initial mandate was to meet immediate humanitarian needs, but over the years it evolved and expanded to include a wide range of services.

  We are a unique agency in the UN system. We are not an advisory agency – we are direct providers of education, healthcare, relief and social services, camp infrastructure and improvement, microfinance and emergency relief.

  UNRWA employs some 30,000 staff, most of whom are Palestine refugees. We are the agency with the largest presence in Gaza, where 13,000 staff were engaged in pre-war operations, notably in education. Recently, the agency has suffered an unprecedented number of casualties among its staff, with 189 members losing their lives. There are still 3,500 to 4,000 people working heroically on the ground, while the rest have been forced to flee.

  UNRWA’s work extends beyond Gaza. We also work in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as well as Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Each place has its own challenges.

  In the context of a dire humanitarian crisis such as the war in Gaza, we have shifted to a more traditional humanitarian role. Because of our size, we’re the backbone of humanitarian operations in Gaza. We are indispensable to other parts of the UN system that rely on our logistics on the ground.

  How has UNRWA responded to accusations of collaboration with Hamas?

  Over the years UNRWA has faced a number of allegations of breaches of neutrality by its staff. We work in a highly politicised environment, but we’re not here to reconcile different narratives about the conflict or the history of the region – we’re here to help Palestinian refugees. We believe in the need for a just and lasting solution to the refugee crisis, but our goal and mission are primarily humanitarian, not political.

  While staff are allowed to have their opinions, neutrality is essential for any UN official. But in a large organisation like ours, there will inevitably be occasional breaches of neutrality. When they occur, we conduct internal – and sometimes external – investigations.

  We strongly condemned the Hamas attacks on civilians on 7 October. They were abhorrent and unacceptable, and completely contrary to international humanitarian law.

  But at the end of January, we were faced with allegations that 12 of our staff were involved in the 7 October attacks. We acted swiftly in what we call ‘reverse due process’, which is something the executive authority of any UN agency can do in situations where it’s deemed essential to protect ongoing operations. Our Commissioner-General, Philippe Lazzarini, terminated the staff members’ contracts and referred the investigation to the UN’s top investigative body, the Office of Internal Oversight Services.

  These allegations were later expanded to involve 19 people. We are talking about a tiny percentage of the 30,000 people working for UNRWA. So, the real story here is that in an extremely high-pressure and politicised environment, the vast majority of our staff have remained neutral.

  However, these incidents were misconstrued by Israeli officials and media, leading to unfounded claims that Hamas has infiltrated UNRWA. Allegations against individual staff were turned into accusations against the whole agency. Supporters and social media amplified the claim. It was an attempt to smear our agency. Our detractors want to portray us as part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

  How have these allegations affected your work?

  Unfortunately, the allegations gained enough traction to cause several UN member states, including major donors, to suspend funding to our organisation at a time when we’re dealing with the biggest humanitarian crisis in the region in decades.

  This became a huge problem for us. Underfunding constrains our operations and puts our staff at risk. Our facilities have been affected by the war and repeatedly targeted. More than 160 of our facilities have been hit in over 300 separate incidents. Hundreds of people seeking safety in shelters under the UN flag have been injured or killed.

  We have also been refused permission by the Israeli authorities to deliver aid to northern Gaza, exacerbating the ongoing humanitarian crisis. In the West Bank, our staff are routinely intimidated and denied access to our offices in East Jerusalem. In East Jerusalem, our office has been the target of regular protests, vandalism and, most recently, arson attacks.

  We believe in freedom of expression, but not in violence. Some people, including a deputy mayor of Jerusalem, have incited crowds. Their highly inflammatory language soon became real flames. We expected the deputy mayor to apologise, or at least acknowledge these weren’t the right means. But instead, he ramped up his aggressive rhetoric and singled out the next compounds to be attacked. We’re worried about what might come next and whether this campaign of intimidation and active violence might turn into something more serious.

  All in all, the attacks and the disinformation campaign are aimed at dismantling the agency. But we are committed to fulfilling our mandate. We believe passionately in what we do and why we do it. And we count on the invaluable support of UN member states that have publicly affirmed that UN entities have diplomatic privileges and immunities that protect us and our mission.

  What are you doing to rebuild trust among donors?

  In January, the Commissioner-General decided that because of the constant attacks on UNRWA’s reputation, we needed an independent review of our neutrality framework. A few days later, the allegations surfaced. As a result, many people portrayed the independent review as a response to the allegations, but that wasn’t the case.

  Nevertheless, some member states decided to suspend their funding and presented it as a response to the allegations. However, countries such as Australia, Canada and Sweden resumed their support shortly afterwards, either because we were able to reassure them or because they realised that such a decision couldn’t be taken without evidence.

  Last month the independent review was published. It was led by Catherine Colonna, the former French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, and conducted by some Nordic think tanks. This report confirmed that UNRWA has one of the most robust systems of neutrality among both UN and non-governmental organisations. Nevertheless, it made some 50 recommendations to improve our neutrality mechanisms and implementation, which we are implementing. As a result, other member states, such as Germany, decided to restore their funding.

  Different countries need different kinds of reassurance – not just from us, but also internally. We are currently working to bring back two major donors: the UK and the USA, our largest donor. Over the years, the USA has often been a strong supporter of UNRWA, although the level of funding has fluctuated from administration to administration. Unfortunately, the US Congress has blocked all funding for UNRWA until March 2025. To put this in perspective, US contributions make up almost 90 per cent of our US$260 million shortfall.

  We are dealing with a huge humanitarian crisis, and we need enormous amounts of money to alleviate its terrible effects. At the moment, we have enough funds to continue operations until the end of June.

  However, we have also seen a renewed outpouring of support as the suspensions have taken place. Some existing donors, such as Ireland, Norway, Portugal and Spain, have increased their donations. These are very important symbolic gestures, but also very significant contributions to our finances. We have also had new, non-traditional donors, such as Iraq with US$25 million and Algeria with US$15 million.

  Individual and private sector donors came to our aid, contributing more than US$115 million to date. A foundation in Singapore has raised US$5 million through individual and corporate donations, but the support has not only come from Islamic communities. We’ve seen all kind of examples, including an artwork auction organised by artists in Ireland that raised thousands of euros for us. This shows how strong grassroots solidarity for Palestinian refugees currently is.

  How do you see the future of UNRWA?

  Although UNRWA has a long history of financial challenges, we have never faced anything like this. To maintain the quality and level of our services to the Palestinian refugee community across the region, we must find ways to sustain our finances, or we’ll be forced to reduce or even cut our operations after June. This could mean reducing school days or clinic hours, which would be catastrophic.

  We shouldn’t be asked to do something and then not have the funds to do it. But unfortunately, this is quite common in the UN system.

  But there’s a silver lining. Because of this crisis, there is a greater awareness of what UNRWA does and why it’s important. Nobody else can do what we do on the scale that’s needed. If we were to disappear, there would still be a Palestinian refugee question that would need to be addressed. Someone would have to provide the services. The issue is who would replace us.

  Legally, Israel, as the occupying state, must provide for the welfare of the population under occupation. So even if it doesn’t like us, it needs us. We’re just not replaceable. So we need sustainable funding to continue to do the work we’re mandated to do. It’s up to the international community to ensure this budgetary consistency. We hope all donors will return soon.

  What else needs to be done to avert a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza?

  First, we need an immediate ceasefire. We’ve been campaigning for one since the beginning of this war, but it has to happen immediately. There is no other way to ensure people’s wellbeing. We also need a steady, sustained and predictable flow of humanitarian aid to keep people alive. Many people are on the brink of famine. They need food and water, as well as healthcare and shelter.

  The next phase is recovery. People need to be able to return to their homes, which means clearing the huge amount of unexploded ordnance and rebuilding housing.

  After that, we need to restore economic activity, which is the only way to get a society back on its feet. And we need to help people heal psychologically from the horrors and traumatic stress they have experienced. We need to rebuild the health sector and get children back to school.

  All of this must be done, and quickly. But the first step is to secure a ceasefire now, and then we’ll be able to take the next steps.

  ---

  Civic space in Palestine is rated ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.

  Civic space in Israel is rated ‘obstructed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.

  Get in touch with UNRWA through itswebsite or itsFacebook andInstagram pages, and follow@UNRWA and@UN_JWFOWLER on Twitter.

• Gaza: We condemn the killing of Palestinian protesters

  Special session of the UN Human Rights Council on the deteriorating human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem
  Oral Statement

  CIVICUS, the Palestinian NGO Network and the Arab NGO Network for Development condemn the atrocities committed by the Israeli Occupation Forces against peaceful Palestinian protesters in Gaza. On 14 May alone more than 61 Palestinians including 8 children were killed and nearly 3000 wounded as Israeli forces used live ammunition on protesters who were demonstrating against the relocation of the US embassy to Jerusalem.

  Since 30 March 2018, when Palestinians embarked on a campaign of peaceful protests against forced evictions and demanding their right to return, more than 110 Palestinians have been systematically killed including at least 11 children, 2 journalists and several people with disabilities. In addition, over 12000 Palestinians have been wounded.

  The use of unnecessary, indiscriminate and disproportionate force against protesters is a grave violation of international law. Israel’s occupation forces have used snipers, plastic coated steel bullets, explosive bullets and gas grenades fired from drones in a calculated attempt to kill, maim and inflict serious bodily harm on Palestinians.

  Mr. President, the lack of concrete action from the international community and the defence of these atrocious acts by some states emboldens Israel’s occupation forces to maintain a shoot to kill policy, preserve its prolonged occupation and disregard for the rule of law.

  We urge Council members to call on the Israeli government to respect all United Nations resolutions and its obligations under international law, giving an immediate end to occupation and recognizing Palestinians right to self-determination. We call on the Council to urgently establish a Commission of Inquiry to facilitate independent international investigations and ensure accountability for perpetrators of violations of international law in occupied Palestine.

  For updates on the state of civic space, please see the Palestine and Israel and country pages on the CIVICUS Monitor. 

• GLOBAL: ‘Only through adherence to humanitarian principles and the rule of law can we shift away from armed conflict’

  CIVICUS speaks with Neshan Gunasekera, an international lawyer from Sri Lanka, about the role of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the context of the case brought by South Africa against Israel under the 1948 Genocide Convention.

  Neshan is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Lead Counsel on Peace, Justice and Governance at the Centre for International Sustainable Development Law, Council member at the World Future Council and director of the International Association of Lawyers against Nuclear Arms.

  What’s the ICJ and why is it important?

  The ICJ is the main judicial organ of the United Nations (UN) and its role is to help peacefully settle disputes between member states and provide advice on matters relating to international law. Its creation was the result of a long journey to find peaceful ways to solve international disputes.

  In 2024, we will be commemorating 125 years since the founding of the ICJ’s earliest predecessor, the Permanent Court of Arbitration. This was one of the biggest achievements of the 1899 Peace Conference held at The Hague in the Netherlands. The extensive bloodshed that marked the 19th century prompted world leaders to gather and discuss how to transition from the outdated notion of war as a way to resolve disputes and towards preventive diplomacy, and the result was the Permanent Court of Arbitration, a forum for member states to bring their cases for resolution rather than resorting to armed conflict, violence or aggression as tools of diplomacy.

  World leaders at The Hague also discussed how armed conflict should be conducted, and how it could be limited. The outcomes of these discussions are referred to as the Hague Law and, taken together with the Geneva Law, resulting from the Geneva Conference of 1864, are collectively known as the 1949 Geneva Conventions that are the basis of international humanitarian law.

  Unfortunately, these notions took a backseat as the First World War erupted in 1914, and only resurged with the founding of the League of Nations in 1919. Three years later, the closest predecessor to the ICJ, the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), was formed. While it heard some interesting cases, the PCIJ was also short-lived, as the League of Nations shut down as the world prepared for another world war.

  In 1945, when the UN was founded, the ICJ assumed its position as the highest judicial institution within the system and the Statute of the International Court of Justice became an integral part of the Charter of the UN. As it took forward PCIJ precedents, the ICJ has now accumulated over 100 years of jurisprudence.

  The ICJ is one of the most important tools ever established for peacefully resolving disputes between states. Its 15 judges are meant to represent all UN geographic regions, civilisations and legal systems worldwide, including Indigenous and traditional legal systems. This entails a huge responsibility, particularly when it comes to representing voices that are still marginalised or underrepresented, such as those of Indigenous peoples.

  The ICJ is now more relevant than ever because we are a critical time in history when we need urgently to correct our course. The danger of nuclear weapons going off becomes more real every day. And this is no longer the time of Hiroshima and Nagasaki: today’s nuclear arsenal can obliterate life as we know it.

  Why has South Africa brought a case against Israel before the ICJ?

  This case is intriguing because South Africa didn’t appear to be in direct conflict with Israel. But it didn’t need to: South Africa came to the Court alleging that Israel was violating the Genocide Convention, a treaty signed by most UN member states, including both Israel and South Africa. This convention grants all its signatories the right to bring a case before the ICJ against another if it’s suspected of committing, inciting or continuing to commit genocide.

  The ICJ has jurisdiction to hear contentious cases, including those where parties have entered into an agreement and to provide advisory opinions on matters pertaining to international law. It also has compulsory jurisdiction, although this is limited to states that accept it, and authority to provide interpretations of international treaties This means it can make binding rulings in legal disputes submitted to it by states and give advisory opinions on legal questions at the request of UN bodies, specialised agencies or member states. The South Africa v. Israel case is a contentious case, which means it will eventually produce a binding court ruling.

  What are the challenges of bringing genocide cases before the ICJ?

  Genocide is possibly one of the worst crimes recognised as such by the international community. The Genocide Convention was the very first human rights convention the UN agreed on in the aftermath of the Second World War.

  While there is considerable consensus on what constitutes genocide, it often takes decades to gather the necessary evidence to prove that genocide has been committed. Following the Second World War, a wealth of documentation was submitted as evidence of genocide, but the burden of proof was quite high to demonstrate the systematic and intentional engagement of individuals and states in genocidal practices. For individuals, this was dealt with under international criminal law and for states under international law.

  However, in recent years several cases of genocide have been presented before the Court and the burden of proof has been increasingly scrutinised.

  In 2019 The Gambia, also a state not directly involved in the conflict, brought a case against the state of Myanmar, alleging that Myanmar’s military and other security forces perpetrated genocide against its Rohingya Muslim minority in Rakhine province. It could do so because both were signatories of the Genocide Convention. In 2022, the ICJ decided it had jurisdiction under the Genocide Convention to hear the application filed by The Gambia.

  The case is ongoing, and in November 2023 several additional states joined The Gambia’s genocide case against Myanmar. This was subsequent to the provisional measures the ICJ issued in January 2020 requesting Myanmar to prevent genocidal acts against Rohingya people while the case continued, and to report regularly on its implementation of the order. Developments in this case, as well as earlier cases relating to genocide, are most relevant to current proceedings.

  Notably, unlike Myanmar, Israel did not contest South Africa’s jurisdiction to bring the case before the court; that seemed like a settled issue. Still, proving genocide can be a long and arduous process, particularly when people are afraid to bring evidence before the Court, although in this age of information and technology there’s a lot of video evidence to support these cases. But when it comes to genocide cases, what’s most challenging is proving criminal intent.

  Why’s it so hard to prove genocidal intent?

  The ICJ faces the daunting task of proving the deliberate attempt to eradicate an ethnic, political or religious group. This isn’t only about the amount of violence or the number of deaths, but about the intent to eliminate a specific group, including through means other than murder, such as taking away children.

  This is why the interim measures requested by South Africa are so crucial. South Africa requested the immediate suspension of all hostilities by the Israeli military and for entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza to be allowed. While it did not order Israel to cease hostilities as had been requested, the ICJ’s interim measures requested Israel to take all necessary steps to prevent the commission of any acts of genocide. Further, it requested it take all necessary measures to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide of Palestinians in Gaza, an order on which the respected judge appointed by Israel also agreed with the majority decision.

  This is key because in international relations statements made by prime ministers, presidents and other high officials, including military officers, are interpreted as reflections of a state’s intentions. What they say is weighed against their actions and could serve as a way of proving intent.

  What are the consequences of the ICJ’s interim measures?

  All ICJ rulings and orders are binding, so the interim measures impose an obligation on Israel to comply. Additionally, when the ICJ issues a judgment, opinion or interim measure on a topic, its application extends beyond the specific case that originated it. This is why we are starting to see a wider impact of the case South Africa brought to the ICJ.

  For instance, in the Netherlands, civil society groups have filed several cases against their government to prevent it entering into military agreements that could incite or support the violation of human rights and humanitarian law in Gaza.

  In other words, the ICJ case is enabling deeper discussions on how member states should respond to armed conflicts and how citizens can hold their governments accountable and ensure that tax money is not used to fuel armed conflict.

  The case also underscores the ICJ’s vital role and its accumulated work over the years. States are increasingly resorting to the ICJ. Between 1947 and 2000, the ICJ issued interim measures on nine to 10 instances, while from 2001 to 2023 it has done so almost a dozen times, and most of these measures have been complied with. Overall, between 1947 and 2023, the ICJ has heard close to 200 cases and its opinions have been mostly respected. As of October 2023, there were 20 cases before the ICJ, including 18 contentious cases and two requests for advisory opinions. The two cases seeking advisory opinions are important: one is about the  ‘Legal consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem’, filed by 53 UN member states with proceedings currently underway at the Hague. The other one is about the obligations of states regarding climate change, with a deadline of 22 March 2024 for UN member states to submit written statements.

  This demonstrates the growing influence of the ICJ in interpreting international law and its adherence across the world. It also underscores the significance of international law. It is only through adherence to humanitarian principles and the rule of law that we can shift away from armed conflict. It is our collective responsibility to prevent future generations experiencing prolonged cycles of violence in which human rights and basic humanity are compromised. It is our collective duty towards all species on our planet.

  What challenges does the ICJ face?

  The ICJ is an integral component of the UN Charter, and its rulings should guide the actions of every member state. Unfortunately, out of the 196 UN members, only 74 have so far accepted the ICJ’s compulsory jurisdiction. To address this issue, a broad global civil society coalition supported by a group of likeminded UN member states has started the ‘LAW not War’ campaign to encourage other states to sign up and agree to its compulsory jurisdiction, so as to commit to go before the ICJ before resorting to the use of force.

  It’s also important to highlight that the ICJ does not operate in isolation. It is part of a broader network of international tribunals, such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the International Criminal Court, as well as regional institutions like the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Further, national-level courts and tribunals also play a role. Understanding the interconnectedness of these systems is essential in assessing the international system of adjudication and to achieving an international rules-based order.

  In terms of impact on foreign and domestic policies, there is a discrepancy between what countries sign up to in the international arena and what they end up implementing domestically. The primary reason for this gap is that, although the ICJ’s rulings are binding, the Court lacks its own enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance and depends on principles of international law such as good faith and respecting promises made through treaties, also referred to as the ‘pacta sunt servanda’ principle. As a result, universal human rights principles are unevenly implemented at the domestic level.

  There is still clearly much to be achieved and we must come together, urgently and with agency, to work towards a peaceful and sustainable planet, based on the principles of international law.

  Get in touch with Neshan through LinkedIn.

  ---

  

  This interview was conducted as part of the ENSURED Horizon research project funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed in this interview are those of the interviewee only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or any of the institutions the interviewee is a member of. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.

• ISRAEL: There is a lack of political will to end the occupation

   

  

  After a tough year for dissent in the occupied Palestinian territories, CIVICUS speaks to Amit Gilutz, spokesperson of B’Tselem – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. Founded in 1989, B’Tselem (which means ‘in the image of’, pointing to the universal moral edict to respect and uphold the human rights of all people) strives to end Israel’s occupation, which it sees as the only way to achieve a future in which human rights, democracy, liberty and equality are ensured to all people, Palestinian and Israeli alike, who inhabit the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. It does so by documenting and publicising acts of injustice, violence and human rights violations in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Gaza Strip, and by challenging the legitimacy of the occupation regime both in Israel and internationally.

  How would you describe the environment for civil society in Israel over the past year? Has it worsened or improved?

  The recent Israeli governments - each more extremely right-wing than its predecessor - have for years engaged in a campaign aimed at silencing criticism of their policies in general and specifically stifling any debate about the occupation. Not only are human rights organisations such as B’Tselem targeted: anyone critical of the government, whether they be journalists, academics, or artists, easily becomes the target for incitement through smear campaigns and legislation designed to narrow the space available for political or even cultural action. At the same time the government is engaged in intensive international lobbying aimed at cutting funding for civil society organisations (CSOs). This process, widely referred to as ‘shrinking democratic space’, is the predictable consequence of the prolonged occupation itself, now in its 51st year. It is paralleled with another push to erase the occupation, namely the formal annexation of the territories, which the current government seems to be keener on than previous ones.

  What effects have the turn towards right-wing populism abroad, and particularly in the USA, Israel’s most powerful ally, had in Israel?

  Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has been joining forces with other reactionary and populist governments around the world, aiming to create new alliances that would diminish the ability of the international community to act effectively against the occupation. These alliances, together with the green light Israel sees coming from Washington, including through a series of unilateral measures the US administration has taken against Palestinians, has emboldened the pro-settlement camp in Israel, as well as the government to step up its efforts in the dynamic process of gradually taking over more and more Palestinian land and resources, while pushing Palestinians onto enclaves that are detached from one another and from resources needed for a sustainable future.

  A case in point is the plan to forcibly remove the Palestinian community of Khan al-Ahmar, which is a war crime under international law. For decades Israel has created a coercive environment for dozens of Palestinian communities in the West Bank, hoping they will give up and leave, as if by their own volition, while stopping short of directly loading them onto trucks and dumping them elsewhere. These are the kinds of images that would damage the PR efforts of a state that purports to be a democracy, while at the same time controlling millions of subjects with no political rights. In the current political climate, Israel seems to be nearing a point in which this consideration will no longer stop it, although the planned forcible transfer of Khan al-Ahmar’s residents is for now on hold, thanks to international pressure.

  How significant was the Knesset’s decision to pass the contentious nation-state bill into law, declaring Israel as “the national home of the Jewish people”?

  Although significant, none of the laws passed recently should be seen in isolation because it is their totality that matters. Their combined purpose is to mark any opposition to the occupation as illegitimate, as lying beyond the border of acceptable politics, and to further marginalise the Palestinian citizens of Israel. That said, the opposition to the nation-state bill has been quite exceptional, and one can only hope that this opposition can be sustained.

  How do you work in the occupied territories, and what challenges do you face in doing so?

  B’Tselem field researchers are Palestinians who work in the communities in which they live, all across the Occupied Territories. The reality of the occupation is something that they experience on both the personal, as well as the professional, level. Take for example the B’Tselem field researchers based in blockaded Gaza: together with two million Palestinians they live under this reality. On a personal level, it’s part of their lives. On a professional level, the fact that they never get a permit from Israeli authorities to leave the Gaza Strip means that it’s almost impossible for them to meet with colleagues from the B’Tselem team. A permit to exit the strip would also mean some relief from the inhumane conditions that the blockade Israel imposes on Gaza has created. In the occupied West Bank, our field researchers and volunteers have been arrested, strip-searched and harassed, have had their equipment confiscated and otherwise prevented from doing their work.

  On the other side, in Israel proper, life of course is much more ‘normal’ – as exposed as our team is to the ongoing hate speech and government incitement. Specifically, Hagai El-Ad, B’Tselem’s Executive Director, has once again recently been a target of incitement. In October 2018, when he appeared for the second time in front of the United Nations (UN) Security Council, Israel’s Envoy to the UN, Danny Dannon, boasted in English about Israeli democracy, while addressing Hagai in Hebrew and accusing him of being a traitor.

  What extra help, including from international civil society, does progressive civil society in Israel need to help create a future in which Israelis and Palestinians can coexist and enjoy equal human rights?

  We need civilians around the world to demand that their representatives do nothing short of decisive action in order to bring an end to the occupation. What we lack is not political solutions but political will, and meanwhile an unbearable toll is taken on Palestinians.

  Civic space in Israel is rated as ‘obstructed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor

  Get in touch with B’Tselem through theirwebsite orFacebook page, or follow@btselem and@amit_gilutz on Twitter

• Joint letter on several European governments’ decisions to suspend or review their funding to Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations

  We the undersigned are writing to you to raise concern regarding the decision by several European governments to suspend or review their funding to several Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations. We are deeply concerned by these developments and call on your government to reverse any decision to halt such crucial funding. A reduction in funds to these groups and organizations erodes human rights protections across Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) and call into question your ability to credibly promote and protect universal human rights values across the Middle East and North Africa.

• Le Royaume-Uni répond aux questions posées par les membres de CIVICUS sur le Conseil de sécurité

  Durant les consultations du mois d’août de la présidence du Conseil de sécurité avec la société civile, la Mission permanente du Royaume-Uni auprès de l’Organisation des Nations Unies a répondu aux questions soumises par les membres de CIVICUS concernant les situations sécuritaires en République Démocratique du Congo, Érythrée-Éthiopie, Gaza et Myanmar.

  ---

  La société civile joue un rôle important dans l’agenda du Conseil de sécurité et CIVICUS remercie le Royaume-Uni et tous les membres du Conseil de sécurité pour leur engagement à impliquer la société civile dans son fonctionnement.

  Le Conseil de sécurité suit de près la situation en RDC. Dans le cadre de la résolution 2409, nous avons demandé au Secrétaire général de nous faire transmettre des rapports mensuels. Le conseil tient des discussions fréquentes sur la RDC. Le Conseil de sécurité continue de souligner à quel point il est important que les élections du 23 décembre 2018 soient tenues dans le calme, de façon crédible, inclusive et dans les temps et qu’elles respectent le calendrier électoral, menant à un transfert pacifique du pouvoir, en accord avec la constitution congolaise. Le Conseil de sécurité continue aussi d’accentuer l’importance de la protection des civils, y compris à travers le mandat de la MONUSCO qui fait de la protection des civils une priorité stratégique. Durant la présidence du Royaume-Uni, un briefing s’est tenu au Conseil de sécurité sur les élections à venir en RDC. La déclaration de l’ambassadeur se trouve ici.

  Le Conseil de sécurité a publié un communiqué concernant la signature de la déclaration conjointe de paix et d’amitié entre l’Érythrée et l’Éthiopie du 9 Juillet 2018.

  L’UNRWA (l'Office de secours et de travaux des Nations unies pour les réfugiés de Palestine dans le Proche-Orient) a été établi et reçoit son mandat de l‘assemblée générale de l’ONU. La possibilité qu’elle doive suspendre ses services à cause de sa mauvaise situation financière préoccupe énormément les membres du Conseil de sécurité, comme cela a été exprimé durant les consultations du conseil du 22 août sur la situation au Moyen-Orient. Le Royaume-Uni reste fortement engagé dans son soutien à l’UNRWA et aux réfugiés palestiniens à travers le Moyen-Orient. Face à des pressions financières de plus en plus fortes, le Royaume-Uni a versé environ 60 millions de dollars en 2018. Nous continuons d’encourager d’autres à verser des financements additionnels et à effectuer des versements réguliers pour assurer que l’UNRWA puisse continuer son travail essentiel.
   
  Le Conseil de sécurité suit avec beaucoup de préoccupation la situation à Gaza, y compris à travers des briefings réguliers, comme par exemple celui du 22 août par la Secrétaire générale adjointe Rosemary DiCarlo.

  Sur le long-terme, le Royaume-Uni a pour but ultime le retour sans danger, volontaire et avec dignité du million de réfugiés Rohingyas, actuellement au Bangladesh, vers l’Etat Rakhine sous la surveillance internationale. Nous estimons que les conditions actuelles ne sont pas suffisantes pour que les réfugiés y retournent. Nous soutiendrons la Birmanie pour y arriver, mais une amélioration concrète des conditions sur le terrain est nécessaire. Dans l’immédiat, la Birmanie devrait donner à l’ONU un accès sans restriction à l’Etat du Nord-Rakhine. L’ONU s’est réjouie de la déclaration du gouvernement birman annonçant la mise en place d’une commission d’enquête sur les violences commises dans l’Etat Rakhine. Il est à présent essentiel que le gouvernement birman démontre comment l’enquête sera crédible, transparente et impartiale. Nous sommes toujours en attente d’une décision de la CPI concernant sa compétence à juger des déportations des Rohingyas au Bangladesh (qui est un état signataire du statut de Rome).

  D’autres questions soumises par les membres de CIVICUS ce mois concernent les libertés civiques en Colombie, le retrait des troupes de l’UNAMID au Darfur, l’insécurité alimentaire au Sahel, la relocalisation de l’Ambassade des États-Unis d’Amérique à Jérusalem, la détérioration de l’espace civique en Ouganda, le cas du dirigeant Soudanais, Omar Al Bashir auprès de la Cour Pénale Internationale et la menace globale du cyber crime.

  Ces questions-réponses résultent d’un appel mensuel auprès des membres CIVICUS de soumettre leurs questions au président du Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies. Il s’agit d’une opportunité pour nos membres d’être reliés à un forum international important où des décisions sont prises. Les employés de CIVICUS posent les questions au nom de nos membres durant le briefing du président tous les mois. Tenez-vous informé en devenant membre de CIVICUS.

• Letter of appeal for the release of Ameer Makhoul

  Letter of appeal for the release of Ameer Makhoul - Click here to download

• Más de 100 fundaciones y donantes mundiales se comprometen a mantener la solidaridad con la sociedad civil palestina tras la prohibición por parte de Israel de seis importantes organizaciones de derechos humanos

  Los líderes filantrópicos instan a los gobiernos a defender la democracia y los derechos humanos protegiendo a la sociedad civil contra las políticas represivas.

• My Participation in the Bridge 47 Event and its Impact on our Education Program in Palestine

  By Jamil Derbashi, from Palestinian Centre for Communication and Development Strategies (PCCDS), Palestine, and CIVICUS member

  How the Bridge 47 project relates to our work in Palestine

  My participation in the Bridge 47 Event in Brussels was one of my most important international meeting involvement in 2018. It focused mainly on the seventh objective of the fourth Sustainable Development Goal as defined by the United Nations for 2020-2030 (SDG4.7). The SDG 4.7 focuses on quality education towards a fair and resilient world (goal 4) and educating people as citizens of the world particularly (objective 7).

  SDG4 is the framework of the Palestinian Centre for Communication and Development Strategies (PCCDS)’s work on education in Palestine. We will further be focusing on having a dialogue with the Palestinian Government and building coalitions to reach the objective of integrating “global citizenship” education within our strategic educational plan.

  Indeed, the Sustainable Development Goals were approved and signed by the Palestinian President who has the highest authority, and he has demanded the various ministries to apply them, with the Ministry of Education being one of these ministries. The Ministry of Education responded gradually to address some objectives of goal 4, but hasn't yet implemented SDG 4.7.

  How my participation at the Bridge 47 will further nurture our work

  My attendance to the Bridge 47 event was side by side with 100 of the largest institutions working on global and/or sustainable education from Europe mainly, and from around the world in general, as well as representatives of international alliances. I was one of the members of these alliances: CIVICUS – the World Alliance for Citizen Participation.

• NETHERLANDS: ‘No government should allow transfers of weapons to a state committing war crimes’

  CIVICUS speaks with Frank Slijper, Arms Trade project lead at PAX, about a recent court victory in a case brought jointly with Oxfam Novib and the Rights Forum against the Dutch government for exporting arms to Israel that are being used in the assault on Gaza.

  PAX is the largest peace organisation in the Netherlands. It works to protect civilians against acts of war, end armed violence and build inclusive peace.

  Why did you bring a lawsuit against the Dutch government?

  We brought this lawsuit to stop our government exporting military equipment to Israel. PAX does research into the arms trade in countries that violate human rights and approaches those who finance it by appealing to their social responsibility. Oxfam and the Rights Forum share our values, so we decided to sue the government together. We had previously called on it to stop giving Israel free rein in Gaza but the government had not acted on our calls, choosing instead to continue supplying Israel with F-35 fighter jet parts despite the rapidly deteriorating situation.

  No government should allow transfers of weapons to a state committing war crimes. If there was ever a clear case of why this is so, this is it.

  Given the urgency of the situation we had to act quickly, and so we did, Merely four weeks after we learned about these exports to Israel, through a government leak posted by the NRC newspaper, we were in court making our case.

  What did the court decide?

  On 12 February, the Court of Appeal in The Hague ordered the Dutch government to stop all transfers of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel within seven days, given the clear risk of violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. The court ruled that after 7 October 2023 the minister of Foreign Affairs was obliged to reassess the licence for the export and transit of F-35 parts to Israel and that this assessment should conclude that further export and transit must no longer be permitted. In addition, the court stated that such an assessment cannot be ‘weighed’ against other interests such as potential damage to diplomatic relations or economic interests. It also made clear that any ‘general’ arms transfer licence for an indefinite period must include a reassessment trigger in case the situation changes drastically, because otherwise the very idea of arms export controls would be undermined.

  The court also made clear that violations of international humanitarian law don’t need to be proved and that a ‘clear risk’ of such violations suffices. It found it ‘sufficiently plausible’ that F-35 fighter jets were involved in violations of international humanitarian law while also pointing out that there’s no requirement to prove a direct link between a specific weapons transfer and the alleged violations of international humanitarian law.

  Importantly, the court rejected claims by the government that information provided by human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and by United Nations (UN) special rapporteurs could not be credibly verified. Instead, it said that such sources must be taken ‘extremely seriously’.

  It also reaffirmed the very important role of civil society organisations in monitoring and ensuring the implementation of state obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT).

  The government had a week to comply with the court ruling and said it would do so. Sadly, however, it didn’t agree with the Appeals Court verdict and announced it would take the case to the Supreme Court for a final decision.

  Are you taking any further steps in relation with the Dutch government’s approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict?

  The Dutch government claims it is taking a balanced approach, speaking to both sides, when in fact it has refused to clearly condemn Israel, voted alongside the USA against UN resolutions that condemn Israel and demand an immediate ceasefire, and has refused to stop supplying weapons to Israel. Yes, it has enabled airdrops of medical supplies, but that is nothing more than a basic humanitarian obligation.

  In all the years our government has taken this supposedly balanced approach, not much has been achieved and a solution has not come any closer. More Palestinians have been forcibly displaced and illegal Israeli settlements have grown. We keep advocating for practical steps and measures to stop these violations and for an end to military cooperation between the Netherlands and Israel.

  For now, we are awaiting the last part of the legal process, and we have no choice other than keep defending our case, as we have successfully done so far.

  Do you expect this court ruling to have any international repercussions?

  The Appeals Court’s broad analysis of states’ obligations under the ATT and the European Union Common Position on Arms Exports makes this ruling an important source for any other organisation considering litigation. This case has been incredibly important for the future of arms export control, because it is the first time Dutch judges have set out so clearly and in such detail the government’s obligations to implement export controls. Governments that export arms must ensure that their exports comply with obligations under the ATT.

  ---

  Civic space in the Netherlands is rated ‘open’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.

  Get in touch with PAX through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow it onTwitter andInstagram.

• OLYMPICS: ‘This was supposed to be a unifying event, but the reality is always more complicated’

  CIVICUS discusses the political, economic, social and human rights implications of the recent Olympic Games with UK-based academic, journalist and author David Goldblatt, whose latest book isThe Games: A Global History of the Olympics.

  The Olympics have long been a global celebration of sport and unity, but recent editions have sparked intense debate about their impact on human rights. While the Paris 2024 Games sought to highlight gender inclusivity, environmental initiatives and urban development, they also generated significant controversies. The exclusion of Russia and Belarus but not Israel and the displacement of people from excluded groups raised questions about consistency, fairness and respect for human rights. As the focus shifts to Los Angeles 2028, concerns remain about the lasting effects of the extensive security measures put in place for the Games.

  What are the Olympics for, and why are they important?

  The purpose of the Olympic Games has evolved over time. In the original model conceived by Pierre de Coubertin in the late 19th century, they were a neo-Hellenic celebration of Victorian athletic amateurism and a space for personal diplomacy among the elite. More than 120 years on, both sport and society have changed, and so has the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) vision of the Games. Today, they are a cosmopolitan celebration of humanity through sport.

  Since abandoning amateurism in 1992, the IOC has linked the Games to several international issues, including support for universal human rights, international peace-making through the idea of an Olympic Truce, environmental sustainability with a focus on carbon neutrality and progressive urban development. Whether it succeeds in all these areas is another matter.

  The Olympic Games have also made significant progress in terms of gender inclusiveness, as they are no longer a male-only event. In recent years, there have been particular efforts to include more women as competitors and in television coverage, with Paris 2024 the first gender-equal Olympics. However, the issue of how transgender athletes should be treated remains unresolved, with highly controversial cases such as the Algerian boxer whose gender was questioned. This is a global sports problem, not just an IOC problem, and there isn’t a clear way out.

  The Games are supposed to be a unifying event, but the reality is always more complicated. The fact that Belarus and Russia were banned from taking part while Israel was accepted caused a great deal of controversy. It also seemed the focus of the event wasn’t on the athletes. Apart from global stars like Simone Biles and Léon Marchand, much of the attention was given to rapper Snoop Dogg, which is questionable for a multi-billion-dollar sporting event. The Games seem to be moving away from de Coubertin’s original vision and turning into a commercial television spectacle.

  What were the 2024 Olympics criticised for?

  The exclusion of Belarus and Russia raised questions of consistency, particularly in the light of Israel’s participation. While Israel argues it hasn’t violated international law and should therefore be treated differently to Russia, most of the world – and particularly the global south – disagrees. The IOC needs to rethink its criteria for participation, as there will always be ongoing conflicts and there should be clear rules about who can and can’t participate.

  Despite these problems, France handled protests reasonably well. Compared to the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, where pro-Iranian, pro-migrant worker and pro-LGBTQI+ protesters were severely repressed, pro-Palestinian protesters were allowed to make a statement with their T-shirts and flags. And it was definitely better than the 2008 Olympics in China, where there was no room for any kind of protest, even as the human rights situation was getting worse.

  Paris 2024 also showcased a diverse, multicultural and multiracial France, both through its athletes and in the opening ceremony. This display of diversity drew criticism from conservative groups and the French far right. But one thing is clear: once the Games began, attention shifted away from these issues, making it difficult for them to gain media visibility.

  What is your overall assessment of the event?

  It’s a complex assessment. One of the biggest problems with the Olympics is that they tend to cost much more than is budgeted for. But Paris 2024 managed to keep the budget under control. France aimed for a more modest Olympics, with a budget of around US$9 billion, making it one of the cheapest editions compared to London, Rio and Tokyo. Half of the money came from public funds and the rest from IOC sponsorship and ticket sales.

  Another positive aspect of Paris 2024 was that, unlike many other Olympic Games, it was explicitly linked to an existing urban development project. The only other notable case was Barcelona 1992, which was integrated into a wider urban plan. While the Paris model was not as comprehensive as Barcelona’s, it definitely stood out. Development plans focused on Saint Denis, France’s poorest region, with new public transport links and social housing in the Olympic Village expected to benefit the area.

  However, the extent to which these developments will contribute to a greener, more equitable Paris is still under debate. Houses in the Olympic Village are likely to be sold at prices local people can’t afford, and it’s not clear that the new jobs will benefit the people of Saint Denis. It’s likely to end up with a process of gentrification similar to what happened in Vancouver and London, where most of the housing is now owned by the Qatar Investment Authority and sold at prices locals can’t afford.

  What was the environmental cost of these Olympics?

  Paris made considerable efforts to reduce its carbon footprint. Although we don’t have the final data yet, it’s likely to be a significant improvement on previous editions – with the sole exception of Tokyo, where the COVID-19 pandemic prevented many people travelling. The Paris venues were powered by renewable energy, high environmental standards were applied to the construction of the Olympic Village and car use in the city was severely restricted during the event.

  However, air travel is still a problem. Hosting an international event such as the Olympics involves people travelling from all over the world and results in a very large carbon footprint, estimated at 1.5 million tonnes or more. Attempts have been made in the past to offset this by planting forests or investing in renewable energy, but the carbon credit market has proved ineffective. We must ask whether it’s justifiable to burn as much carbon as a Caribbean island consumes in a year just to host a global sporting event and transport dressage horses. Yet this is an issue no one in the global sports industry or any other major international event is willing to address.

  Were there any major human rights concerns?

  There are at least two major areas of concern. One is the large number of unhoused or poorly housed people evicted from the city in the run-up to the Games. At least 12,500 migrant workers and residents of temporary camps were moved to other parts of France, far from their communities and jobs. This number is likely to have increased in recent months and the situation remains a tragedy.

  Clearing the streets to create the illusion that there isn’t a housing problem before staging a global event is simply wrong. But this wasn’t the first time – there have been similar evictions in Tokyo and even more in Rio. With Los Angeles 2028 on the horizon, we can expect an even higher number of evictions given the city’s large unhoused population.

  Civil society organisations advocating for the unhoused made their voices heard in the run-up to the Games, with much media coverage. But once the spectacle began, they struggled to make headlines and advocacy was quickly overshadowed by the sport.

  Another human rights issue concerns the extensive security measures for the Paris Olympics, which involved a complex process of zoning Paris, with strict policing and rules about who could enter certain areas near the venues. If you lived in one of these areas, you needed a QR code. It was a very complicated and intrusive system, but for all the grumbling, it worked reasonably well. More worrying was the use of artificial intelligence, CCTV cameras and facial recognition technology to control crowds, raising questions about privacy and the long-term use of these measures.

  The French government and police promised to dismantle all these special security measures after the Games, but there is reason for scepticism. Similar measures were introduced for previous Olympics, such as Athens 2004 and London 2012, and remain in place today. And the enormous amount of money spent on Rio’s various police and paramilitary forces for riot control ahead of the 2016 games wasn’t returned either.

  What are your expectations for the next Olympics?

  We’re going to have another four years of global warming, so Los Angeles 2028 is going to be very hot. Extreme heat could have a significant impact on events and spectators, as seen at Tokyo 2020, where a marathon had to be cancelled due to the weather.

  The high number of unhoused people in Los Angeles is another major concern. While Mayor Karen Bass has plans to address the ‘issue’, the situation is likely to worsen in the run-up to the Games, with multiple evictions, as we’ve seen in Paris.

  On the positive side, Los Angeles 2028 has promised to be a car-free Olympics. It’s difficult to see how this could be achieved in a country with such a strong car culture. But Los Angeles has public transport and a light rail network, so it’s a question of getting locals out of their cars and onto trains and buses. Whether this ambitious goal can be achieved remains to be seen, but it could be an opportunity for a lasting change in habits and more sustainable urban development.

  ---

  Civic space in France is rated ‘narrowed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.

  Follow@davidsgoldblatt on Twitter.