Issues Home About Contact Us Issue 6 - May 2013 عربى
Regional Developments

UN Human Rights Council on Colonizing Palestine: The Glass Half Empty

In exercising its mandate as the principle human rights policy-making body of the United Nations, the UN Human Rights Council, in its March 2013 session, addressed the illegal Israeli settler colonies in occupied Palestine by adopting two strong resolutions. Or were they?

The general resolution on “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan” (A/HRC/22/L.42 [Arabic]) followed the consistent pattern of UN resolutions reiterating the illegality of settler colonies and the prohibition against population transfer into occupied territory. It condemned Israel’s recent announcements of new housing construction for Israeli settlers in the West Bank and around occupied East Jerusalem, arguing that those breaches (1) undermine the “peace process,” (2) constitute a threat to the two-State solution and the creation of a contiguous, sovereign and independent Palestinian State, and (3) are in violation of international law. (This argument did not specifically mention the consequent local harm, or the people who endure it.)

That resolution called upon the Government of Israel to reverse immediately those expansionist decisions. It further urged the occupying Power to (1) reverse the settlement policy in the occupied territories, including East Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan, (2) stop immediately the expansion of the existing settlements, including “natural growth” and (3) ultimately to dismantlement them. The resolution, adopted by 44 in favor, one against (USA) and two abstentions (Cote d’Ivoire and Kenya), also carried a demand that Israel comply with the legal obligations mentioned in the 2004 International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the separation wall. (See Land Times No. 2. [Arabic])

A more-specific resolution (A/HRC/22/L.45 [Arabic]) in the same session responded to the recent independent fact-finding mission to assess “the implications of Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.” That mission followed the Council’s resolution 19/17 of 22 March 2012, calling for the investigation, which prompted Israel to suspend its cooperation with the Human Rights Council.

The resulting fact-finding mission report (A/HRC/22/63 [Arabic]) is strikingly consistent with the long series of UN reports and published findings on the subject of Israeli settler colonies. For instance, it echoes the conclusions of the Security Council Commission established under resolution 446 (1979), whose report already then confirmed that “the Israeli Government is actively pursuing its willful, systematic large-scale process of establishing settlements in the occupied territories.” That SC Commission concluded that Israel’s settler colonies violated international law, in particular the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Over thirty years later, the most recent fact-finding mission concurred. Its report was succinct and avoided lengthy and exhaustive details. However, it did add to the foregoing string of condemnatory reports with updated references to the irrepressible accumulation of evidence on the subject and the current development of international norms and remedial measures available. The fact-finding report reviewed by this year’s Human Rights Council noted the pivotal role of the World Zionist Organization in the continuum of Israeli settler colonies. It also acknowledged the prospect that the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court may enable pursuit of individual criminal responsibility for conduct that amounts to international crimes, including Israel’s “transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside that territory” and the “transfer [of] its population into the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

It’s What They Don’t Say

In its recent resolution “Follow-up to the report of the independent international
fact-finding mission,” the Human Rights Council failed to “endorse” the fact-finding report. Instead, the Council diluted the draft resolution to say merely that it “welcomed” the report, thus taking no stand. The Council further dropped the earlier “demand” that “all parties concerned, including United Nations bodies, implement and ensure the implementation of the recommendations contained therein.” Instead, the adopted resolution only “requests” such compliance.

The final version of the follow-up resolution also deleted the adjective “illegal” with reference to the settler colonies and the separation wall. European Union delegates had warned that a stronger, more detailed resolution would not have received consensus support of its members. Another last-minute change assigned reporting on the resolution’s implementation to the High Commissioner for Human Rights, instead of the New York-based Secretary General. However, the most conspicuous shortcoming of A/HRC/22/L.45 is its lack of any commitment to, or even mention of the obligations of UN Member States to act to correct the illegal situation. That is despite the fact-finding report’s assessment as to the relevance of “State responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, including third-State responsibility” (para. 17).

This ultimate omission of any commitment to action by the States in the Council was the subject of a joint statement [Arabic] of the Palestinian Human Rights Organizations Council. The united voice of eleven Palestinian NGOs called the latest UN Human Rights Council resolution on settlements “another missed opportunity to advance the rights of the Palestinian people.”  

The current resolution leaves to subtle interpretation that “all parties concerned” means a wider international community than only the adversaries of the occupying Israel and the fledgling State of Palestine. At least in its resolution 465 that followed the 1980 investigative Commission, the Security Council called upon “all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connexion with settlements in the occupied territories” (para. 3). By contrast to today’s greater clarity of systematic breaches, advanced legal norms, accountability mechanisms and remedial options, the position of the States forming the UN Human Rights Council this year was to acknowledge the violations, but commit to nothing.


Back
 

All rights reserved to HIC-HLRN