Author: ISM Media Group

November 2007

Out of our serious concern for our national cause and legitimate rights, which have been under direct and systematic attack from the Israeli Occupation and the United States, who wish to liquidate the Palestinian struggle by taking advantage of the split that has weakened us in the face of the huge pressure that they and their allies have brought to bear;

We the undersigned, political and mass movements, civil society federations and networks, private sector nstitutions and national figures, inside and outside Palestine, assert the following:

First: that the inalienable rights of our people must be the central principle for any Palestinian political action. These fundamental rights should never be a subject for negotiation and must not be ompromised:

1. The right of refugees to return to their homeland and properties, from which they were expelled, in accordance with United Nations Resolution 194. This right is a basic human right that is not negotiable
and therefore cannot be based on an ‘agreed upon solution’;

2. The right to self-determination, an end to the military occupation and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state enjoying full sovereignty;

3. Occupied Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine, free from colonies and colonial settlers;

4. The departure of all Israeli settlers from our land, which was occupied in an act of aggression in 1967, and the removal of the apartheid wall and all the colonies, which are illegal and stand in defiance of international law and international agreements.

Second: that any political step or negotiations at a local, regional or international level should be under international supervision, based on principles of justice and international law, and aimed at the implementation of the inalienable and historical rights of our people, and the establishment of a
timeline for such implementation, not negotiation on the rights themselves.

1. Because the Annapolis meeting is not based on these principles, and because it does not aim for the implementation of international law, we call on the PLO and the Palestinian Authority not to participate in this meeting; we further call upon Arab countries to boycott Annapolis and not to acilitate the United States’ desire to expand its aggression in the region and its attempt to crush all the forces opposed to its domination in the region.

2. In the event that the PLO and PA decide to attend the Annapolis conference, they must not bow to the American and Israeli demands for concessions on these fundamental rights under any circumstances,
under any justification.

3. We warn all individuals and organizations who attempt to meddle with the inalienable rights of our people and to promote normalization with the occupation and it institutions under slogans of “peace” and “dialogue”. These normalization efforts and initiatives must be widely boycotted by Palestinian society, and all normalizers must be exposed and shamed.

4. We call for a boycott of all bilateral, regional and international conferences or meetings not based on the principles stated above, now or in the future.

5. We stress the unity of the Palestinian people in all parts of our homeland and in the diaspora, and the unity of our national rights and cause

Third: We categorically reject any attempt to recognize Israel as a “Jewish state”, as this would necessarily mean:

1. Exempting Israel from the crimes of ethnic cleansing perpetrated against our people over the past sixty years;

2. Waiving the right of return of Palestinian refugees to their homeland and their properties, from which they were expelled in 1948 and in the years after;

3. Justifying and reinforcing the Israeli system of racial discrimination and apartheid against Palestinian citizens of Israel, as a prelude to expel them from their homeland on the pretext of preserving the Jewish State;

4. Reinforcing the Zionist ideology which is based on racism, ethnic cleansing and colonialism.

Therefore, we consider that any recognition of this kind is equivalent to conceding the right of return, which would entrench the exile and dispossession of our people and put an end to our cause. Anyone contemplating
taking this path will bear the resulting historical responsibility.

Fourth: We assert the need to embark on serious and immediate action to find a solution to the recourse to armed internecine conflict in Gaza, through national dialogue, in order to end the division in Palestinian society in order to:

1. Reunite the Gaza Strip and the West Bank in one entity, and to agree to start preparations for early legislative and presidential elections based on the National Accord document;

2. In parallel with the above, start implementing the Cairo Agreement regarding the reform of the PLO through activation of the Preparatory Committee for the election of the Palestinian National Council with the participation of all Palestinian national and Islamic forces.

National and Islamic

Forces

National Committee for the Commemoration of 60 Years of Nakba

Palestinian Grassroots Anti Apartheid Wall Campaign

The Union of Social Youth Centres in the Refugee Camps /Palestine

The Higher Committee for Prisoners’ Affairs

Union of Arab Community-Based Associations (Ittijah), Palestine ’48

The Executive Office of the Grassroots Committees, Gaza

Palestinian General Federation of Trade

Unions (PGFTU)

Union of the Women’s Centres in the West Bank Refugees Camps

Gathering of Expelled Villages and Cities People / Ramallah

National Committee to Defend the Right of Return / Ramallah

General Union of Palestinian Women

Badil – Palestinian Resource Center for Refugee and Citizenship Rights

Union of Palestinian Women Committees (UWC)

Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC)

Union of Health Work Committees (UHWC)

Ma’an Development Centre

Palestinian Farmers’ Union

Palestinian Right of Return Defence Committee / Balata refugee camp, Nablus

Health, Development, Information and Policy Institute (HDIP)

Defense for Children International / Palestine (DCI – Palestine)

Yaffa Cultural Centre –Balata refugee camp, Nablus

Civil NGOs Gathering, Nablus

Palestinian Counseling Centre

The Local Committee to Protect the Environment in Nablus

The Society of Hawa’ Centre, Nablus

Handala Cultural Centre

Yabus Art Production Centre, Jerusalem

al-Marsad al-Arabi for Human Rights

Palestine Company for Media and Communication

Haifa Cultural Centre, Tulkarem

Committee to Defend the Rights of the Internally Displaced in Israel, Nazareth

Arab Cultural Committee, Nazareth

League for the Care of Arab Affairs in Yaffa

Friends of Arab Children Committee, Haifa

The Arab Institute for Human Rights, Nazareth

Al Ahali – Popular Development Centre, Nazareth

Friends of the Detainees and Prisoners Association, Nazareth

New Morisiquion Committee, Nazareth

Centre for Human Rights and Democracy

Centre to Defend Freedom and Civil Rights, Ramallah

Centre for the Return of Palestinians, Bethlehem

al-Anq’a Cultural centre, Hebron

The Coordination Committee of Civil

Societies Working in thePalestinian Gatherings, Lebanon

Returnees Committee, Lebanon

Returnees Committee, Syria

Family of Editors of Freedom Magazine, Syria

The Palestinian Centre for Archiving, Syria

194 Committee, Syria Besan Centre for Social

Development, Syria Palestinian Women’s Civil Committee, Syria

The Palestinian Cultural Centre, Syria

Union of the Right of Return Committees, Syria

Right of Return Committee, Switzerland

Right of Return Committee, Denmark

Right of Return Committee, Sweden

Right of Return Committee, France

Right of Return Committee, Greece

Right of Return Committee, Holland

National Organisation to Confront Fundamentalism Towards Liberalism

Popular Arts Centre

Nidal Center

Civil Coalition in defense of Jerusalem

Young Women’s Christian Association, Palestine (YWCA)

Young Men’s Christian Association, Palestine (YMCA)

Collaborative Committee for the Development of Animal Farming

Youth Development Committee

The Project of Rebuilding

The Forum of Cultural Graduates

Alternative Tourism Centre, Bethlehem

Refugee Centre, Aida Refugee Camp, Bethlehem

The Twinning Committee Between French Cities and Palestinian RefugeeCamps

The Executive Office of Refugees

Popular Committee of Deheisha Refugee Camp

Popular Committee of Aida Refugee Camp

Popular Committee of Tulkarem Refugee Camp

The Society of Phoenix Centre, Deheisha Refugee Camp

Avant-Garde Cultural and Theatre Training Centre, Aida Refugee Camp

Committee of Refugees and Right of Return, Syria

Sons of Nations to Defend the Right of Return Centre, Syria

Farah Childhood Centre, Syria

Guevara Youth Centre, Syria

Palestinian Youth Organisation, Syria

Palestinian Women’s committee, Syria

The Returnees Band for Art and Palestinian Folk Tradition, Syria

The Campaign to Free Ahmed Sahdat, Canada

The Right of Return Committee inVancouver

Taqaful Network to Support Palestinian Refugees, Canada

Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Geneva

European Confederation for the Right of Return

One Democratic State Committee, Gaza

The Committee of University Teachers in Palestine, Gaza

Arab Cultural Forum, Gaza

Progressive National Democratic Gathering, Gaza

Social Media Centre, Gaza

Union of Independent Workers Committees, Gaza

Progressive Students Front, Gaza

United Palestinian Progressive Youth, Gaza

Palestinian Cultural Centre, Gaza

Popular Gathering for Right of Return, Gaza

AL-HAQ: JOINT OPEN LETTER

26 November 2007

Joint Letter to Negotiating Parties by Palestinian Civil Society Organisations*

As Palestinian human rights and civil society organisations, we the undersigned, are deeply concerned by the lack of a clearly articulated legal framework for the upcoming diplomatic negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) to be held at Annapolis on 27 November. While the process of negotiation is inherently political, the legitimate demands of the Palestinian people to dignity, territorial sovereignty and self-determination as enshrined in binding international law may not be made the subjects of negotiation.

Following 40 years of occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, and numerous rounds of failed diplomatic initiatives, international law must at last be understood to be the essential over-arching framework for negotiations. International law not only provides a means of dispassionately assessing Israel’s existing policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), but also limits the discretion of the negotiating parties, and their sponsors, in deciding certain fundamental issues. Under the terms of Article 4 of the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 1949 (the Fourth Geneva Convention), the Palestinian civilian population of the OPT are “protected persons.” By virtue of this status, they are entitled to certain protections that may not be undermined or disregarded in political agreements. This is clearly set forth in Article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which establishes:

Protected persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived, in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present Convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.

This provision seeks to address the obvious imbalance of power between the occupied and the occupier in any negotiation process. It recognises that an Occupying Power can, by virtue of its occupation, seek to legally validate through “negotiation” the unilateral imposition of facts on the ground that violate international humanitarian law and harm the civilian population. As noted by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in its authoritative commentary to the Fourth Geneva Convention, there is in the case of occupation, “a particularly great danger of the Occupying Power forcing the Power whose territory is occupied to conclude agreements prejudicial to protected persons.” This danger is clearly present in the context of the current negotiations, and is most obvious in relation to Israel’s settlement policy.

Throughout the 40 years of the occupation, Israel has used its effective control over the OPT to implant some 149 settlements, currently home to over 470,000 settlers, which control over 40% of the West Bank, including essential agricultural and water resources. The current planned route of the Wall will incorporate some 69 settlements, home to 83% of the settler population, on 12.8% of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, that will remain on the western side of the Wall. Under Article 49(6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention, an Occupying Power is prohibited from transferring parts of its civilian population into occupied territory. Israeli settlements in the OPT are in flagrant violation of this prohibition. Further, the construction and expansion of settlements, and their associated infrastructure, requires the extensive appropriation and destruction of property, and severe movement restrictions which are further violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law.

In March 2006 Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert stated his intention to make the Wall the new border of the State of Israel, incorporating settlements in the OPT and annexing Palestinian land. To accept Israel’s retention of the settlement blocs as part of a negotiated solution clearly deprives the Palestinian civilian population of the benefits of the Fourth Geneva Convention, as it would validate Israel’s violations thereof. As such any agreement recognising the settlements is in flagrant violation of Article 47.

In the event that negotiations were to lead to recognition of Israeli settlements in the OPT as part of the State of Israel, this would amount to the endorsement of the acquisition of territory by force. The illegality of the acquisition of territory by force is a norm accepted and recognised by the international community as a peremptory norm of international law — a norm from which no derogation is permitted.

The right of all peoples to self-determination is also considered a peremptory norm of international law. The retention of settlements and their associated infrastructure by Israel would not only amount to the illegal annexation of territory, but would also fragment the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, into isolated geographical units. This would severely undermine the meaningful exercise by the Palestinian people of their inalienable right to self-determination by limiting the possibility of a contiguous territory and the ability to freely dispose of natural resources, both of which are required for the meaningful exercise of this right.

Under Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Laws of Treaties, “a treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law.” This therefore casts severe doubt on whether a negotiated solution that accepts Israel’s retention of settlements and
de facto annexation of territory would be valid under international law.

Other State parties accessory to the negotiations are also obliged to duly consider their international law obligations in relation to these negotiations. Under common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions, the High Contracting Parties “undertake to respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all circumstances.” As specified by both the ICRC and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), this provision entails an obligation on all State parties, whether or not they are a party to the specific conflict, to take all possible steps to ensure that the provisions of the Convention are respected. In respect of the current negotiations, it is important to note that the ICJ, in its Advisory Opinion on the Wall, found all States to be under “an obligation, while respecting the United Nations Charter and international law, to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in [the Fourth Geneva] convention.” Similarly, and as also noted by the ICJ, under customary international law all States have the duty not to recognise or to assist in the creation or maintenance of illegal situations. Such illegal situations would clearly include the acquisition of territory by force, the denial of the right to self-determination and the construction of settlements in occupied territory.

To date, all diplomatic initiatives have ignored international law as the essential foundation of any solution to Israel’s occupation of the OPT, thereby allowing for the proliferation of violations. To cite but a few examples, in spite of former negotiations, Palestinians saw, inter alia, the imposition of draconian movement restrictions and unrestrained settlement construction and expansion, during the Oslo Process. Similarly, since the “Road Map” was initiated in 2002, Palestinians have seen the further entrenchment and expansion of settlements and the unilateral creation of a de facto border between Israel and the would-be Palestinian state through the building of the Wall.

Most recently, on 19 September 2007, Israel declared the Gaza Strip an “enemy entity,” and began the imposition of further sanctions on the already beleaguered Palestinian civilian population therein. Having no basis in international law, the designation of the Gaza Strip as an “enemy entity” represents a clear effort by the Israel, the Occupying Power, to negate its responsibility for the welfare of the civilian population of the Gaza Strip under the terms of Fourth Geneva Convention. The sanctions, which further exacerbate an already dire humanitarian situation, further amount to unlawful reprisals and the collective punishment of the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.

In this context, we urge the parties to approach the upcoming negotiations with a renewed sense of purpose, giving due recognition of the international legal obligations incumbent upon them, including UN Security Council and General Assembly resolutions addressing Palestinian refugees. The task which they face is a heavy one, as any final agreement must reflect a commitment to the principles of international law, justice in addressing wrongful acts, and respect for human rights. The fundamental rights of the Palestinian people are matters of binding international law, not political bargaining chips. Their implementation must not be left to Israel’s beneficence, but rather established as the foundation of any just and durable solution to the conflict.

Al-Haq

Al-Dameer Association for Human Rights in Gaza

Addameer Prisoner’s Support and Human Rights Association

Al Mezan Center for Human Rights

Defence for Children International – Palestine Section

Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center

Palestinian Center for Human Rights

Palestinian Counselling Center

Palestinian NGO Network (PNGO)

Ramallah Center for Human Rights Studies

Women’s Studies Center