The Campaign’s next public monthly meeting is scheduled for
Thursday, March. 29 at 4:00 p.m.
on the ground floor of the Salim Affandi Building in the Al Bireh Municipality Park
Concerned Palestinians, foreign nationals, persons with questions regarding Family Reunification Applications, consular officials, government representatives, and the media are invited to attend.
PROGRAM
4:00-4:30 Press briefing and Campaign overview.
4:30-5:00 Featured speaker Mr. Ahmad Safi, Mr Safi will represent the Ministry of Interior and speak about the relationship between the Palestinian ministry of Interior Affairs and Beit El. His talk will focus on the latest practices being employed by the ministry in order to facilitate the issuing of visas and visa extensions as well as the categories of individuals who are eligible to extend their visas.
5:00-6:00 Questions & Answers.
Presentations will be made in English with Arabic translation. The one hour Q&A session will include both English- speaking and Arabic-speaking representatives from the Campaign. .
In addition to the formal program, Campaign representatives will be staffing an information table handouts on what to do if you are denied entry or re-entry; Forms to register your case details with the Campaign, and contact details and denied entry forms to inform your consulate of problems. For those seeking to become more directly involved in the Campaign, there will be a table to register volunteers.
For further inquiries please contact: the campaign’s coordinator Yusra Jamous at +970 (0) 598-173-953 or Ghassan Abdullah at: +970 (0) 599-786-471
لجنة حماية حاملي الجنسيات الاجنبية
المقيمين أو الزائرين للمناطق الفلسطينية المحتلة
دعوة عامة
تدعوكم اللجنة إلى هذا اللقاء الشهري يوم الخميس 29 آذار 2007 الساعة الرابعة عصراً
في قاعة سليم أفندي، الطابق الأرضي- بلدية البيرة
برنامج اللقاء: 4:00 – 4:30 استعراض التطورات الأخيرة
4:30 – 5:00 السيد احمد صافي ممثلا عن وزارة الداخلية الفلسطينية، للحديث حول علاقة الداخلية مع بيت إيل وإجراءات الوزارة لتسهيل الحصول على تأشيرات الدخول وكيفية تمديدها بالإضافة إلى الفئات المؤهلة للحصول عليها بمساعدة وزارة الداخلية الفلسطينية.
ستكون هناك ترجمة إلى العربية للكلمات بالإنكليزية، وبالعكس.
ويقوم المتطوعون في اللجنة بتوفير المعلومات حول: مالعمل إذا قامت السلطات الإسرائيلية بمنع الدخول أو العودة؟ النماذج لتسجيل الحالات والوقائع، تفاصيل الاتصال والنماذج اللازمة لإبلاغ القنصليات المعنية. كما ترحب اللجنة بكل المتطوعين المستعدين للمساهمة في نشاطاتها.
لمزيد من المعلومات: الإتصال بـمنسقة الحملة يسرى جاموس 1739530598 وغسان عبدالله 786471 0599
More detentions and update on home occupation by Israeli settlers by ISM Hebron, 25 March
UPDATE on Palestinian home occupied by settlers, March 27
Tuesday, 27 March
The settlers have worked very quickly and through the nights, despite the still outstanding High Court decision on the legality of their occupation of the Palestinian house, to install electricity, water and waste pipes. They have also now fitted spotlights to the roof of the building.
The HRWs observing at the house were informed by a Palestinian family living directly opposite the occupied house that they are now under curfew from 7pm and cannot leave their house after this time, as the only way out of their home is past the settlers and the occupied house.
There is still a heavy army and police presence at the house. HRWs observed border police urinating against the outside of the Palestinian cemetery wall on two separate occasions, despite there being two outhouses just metres away from where they urinated.
25 March
At approximately 14.15 two HRWs at Tel Rumedia checkpoint (checkpoint 56) noticed a soldier refusing to allow a Palestinian boy of about 10 to take his bike either through the checkpoint or through the gate. When questioned, the soldier said that he could not see inside the bike and so did not know whether there was a bomb inside it. When asked how the child was supposed to get the bike into Tel Rumeida, the soldier said he did not know but then gestured towards the long way round into Tel Rumeida, that avoids the checkpoint. The HRWs pointed out that by telling the child to take the long way round, the bike would then still be inside Tel Rumeida, so this was not much of a solution if the soldier was really concerned about a bomb being in the bike. One of the HRWs also pointed out that if there was a bomb inside the bike, the child was not likely to be either riding it through the bumpy streets or trying to take it through the checkpoint. The solider made no answer to these comments but still refused to allow the bike through the checkpoint.
At approximately 15.00 two HRWs were walking through the Old City and came upon three soldiers holding three Palestinian men against a wall and checking their IDs quite aggressively, pointing their guns at the three Palestinians and at others attempting to pass. The soliders were also preventing a Palestinian from passing in his small tractor. When the HRWs stopped to watch what was happening, one of the soldiers approached and told them they weren’t allowed to stand there. The HRWs asked why and if it was a closed military zone, to which the soldier answered that it was. When the HRWs asked to see the paperwork for this, the soldier said that he didn’t have it and walked away. Soon afterwards, all three Palestinian men were allowed to go.
At appoximately 19.15, two HRWs were returning through the Old City when they noticed two men, a father and his adult son, being held by about six soldiers. Two CTP members were already present and the two men were released almost immediately. A kindergarten teacher and friend of the family then asked the HRWs and CPT members to come into the family house and see the mess left behind by the soliders, who had previously been inside the house. The kindgergarten teacher translated the family’s story for CPT and the HRWs: one of the father’s nephews, who is five years old, had been visiting the family and upon leaving the house noticed soldiers in the street. He called up to his young female cousin to tell her this; the father heard him calling and opened the window. Once the soldiers saw this and heard the child saying that there were soldiers in the street, they told the father to take all his family and come out onto the street. When the father asked why, the soldiers said that because the child had been telling the family that soldiers were in the street, they must be hiding something in their house. The soliders insisted that all the family, including women and children, come down into the street, but the father refused to allow the women and children to go, so just himself and his adult son went. Three soldiers then detained the father and son in the street, while three others went into the house, where the mother and her youngest children were, and searched their house.
The mother had been about to bake bread and the soldiers stepped on the bread-making equipment, and rooted through their supply of blankets and their cupboards, making a mess, before leaving and releasing the father and son, who had been detained for approximately 30 minutes.
At 11am Peace Now (Gush Shalom) staged a protest demonstration against the occupation by settlers of Bayez Rajabe’s house near the Ibrahimi mosque in Hebron.
Two Members of the Knesset were present – Dove Hanin and Abu Villan – as well as Palestinians from Hebron and other groups. The demonstration took place on the road below the occupied house and then moved up to in front of the mosque besides the occupied house. There was a heavy police and army presence who controlled the route of the demonstration but the demonstration remained peaceful.
The road in front of the occupied house is already blocked to Palestinian cars by a road block of earth and concrete blocks and Palestinian youths were often told to move away from the wall between the house and mosque by the Israeli army. The army did not tell the settlers to stay away from their side of the wall. Palestinians are still allowed to pass in front of the occupied house on foot, although restrictions are already being put on this, such as a Palestinian man not being allowed to pass carrying a gas canister but having to take it a long way round to the other side of the occupied house.
Monday, 26 March
At 14.35 at checkpoint 56 in Tel Rumeida, a Palestinian man asked the two Israeli guards at the checkpoint to open the side gate for him so that he could bring through a metal trolley with a tray of yoghurt-like food and a tray of boxes of choclates. The soldiers refused to open the gate, saying that the man had to unload the two trays, carry them through the checkpoint and then take the trolley through the gate seperately. The Palestinian man said he had a slipped disc in his back and could not carry them. One of the soldiers responded that his own father had a slipped disc and could still carry such items and so therefore the Palestinian should be able to carry them. In the end, a Palestinian boy, also waiting at the checkpoint, carried the trays through and the Palestinian man was allowed through the gate with his trolley.
At 16.55 Jamil Abu Hekel, a Palestinian boy aged approximately 10, who lives in the house opposite the Tel Rumeida settlement, attempted to walk up to his house, as he does every day. A HRW accompagnied him. When they had nearly reached the soldiers’ post just below the settlement, the two Israeli soliders posted at the crossing called them back and asked Jamil his name and where he lives. Jamil told them, spelt his name and once the soldiers had checked this information on their radio, Jamil and the HRW were allowed to continue. Just past the soldiers’ post below Tel Rumeida settlement, the two were called back to the soldiers’ post there, and were again questioned as to who they were and why there were walking up the hill. One of the soldiers also asked Jamil at one point if he was a Muslim and asked who the HRW was. Jamil said that she was a friend and walking with him to his house. After a couple of minutes, Jamil was allowed to continue but the HRW was not allowed to pass and the soldier even told her that she was not allowed to stand with him to watch to see that Jamil got home safely, with no harrassment from the settlers.
When the HRW asked the soldier why she wasn’t allowed to do this, the soldier said that there were cameras and soldiers all around and so Jamil would be protected. The HRW countered that the settlers had often attacked this particular family and the cameras and the soliders had not protected them then. The soldier answered that “those who should be protected are protected”. After questioning by the HRW, the soldier admitted that Jamil should be protected.
Jamil said that these difficulties in being allowed home happened every day.
Follow the link to the American Hummus website to watch the video, as aired by CNN, by clicking HERE.
The first issue of Palestine Times to be sold in Israel ran a front page story called:
‘East Jerusalem is occupied territory’ by Asa Winstanley
RAMALLAH – In a private letter to Morocco’s King Muhammad VI, British Prime Minister Tony Blair says his government “considers East Jerusalem to be occupied territory,” the Council for the Advancement of Arab-British Understanding (CAABU) said yesterday.
Working as chair of the Organization of the Islamic Conference’s committee on Jerusalem, King Muhammad had sent letters to various heads of state asking them to clarify their position on the status of Jerusalem. In his March 12 reply, Blair stated explicitly that Britain does not recognize Israeli sovereignty over any part of the city.
Leaked to CAABU, and passed on to Palestine Times, the letter represents the Prime Minister’s clearest ever statement on the occupied status of Jerusalem.
Chris Doyle, the Director of CAABU told Palestine Times over the phone, that it has been “a challenge to get any senior government minister to make such an official explicit statement” and that “to get Mr. Blair to say it has been impossible.”
Tony Blair typically avoids strong statements on Palestine-Israel issues, so the letter represents a radical departure for the Prime Minister. “Jerusalem’s status has yet to be determined, and should be resolved as part of a final status agreement,” says Blair in the letter. “Pending agreement, we consider East Jerusalem to be occupied territory. We recognize no one claim to sovereignty over the city. We do not support any action that predetermines final status negotiations on the future of Jerusalem.”
Although the British government has long officially held this position, it is the first time in a publicly available statement that a senior minister has made such an explicit statement in over a decade, and the first time ever for Tony Blair.
Doyle said that the last time a senior British minister had made a statement so clearly in opposition to the Israeli occupation of Jerusalem was Malcolm Rifkind back in 1995. His speech was made to the annual Medical Aid for Palestinians dinner when he was foreign secretary under John Major’s Conservative government.
Doyle said that Tel Aviv would not like the idea of Blair referring to the city as occupied, especially against the background of Israeli excavations near al-Aqsa compound.
Israel occupied East Jerusalem in 1967, and has claimed sovereignty over the entire city since then, though no other government recognizes the claim – including the United States. In 1980, Israel declared the city to be their “eternal, undivided” capital. The U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 478 in response, declaring it to be a violation of international law.
Palestinians born and living in East Jerusalem have no citizenship in Israel, their status under Israeli law being similar to that of so-called “guest workers” from overseas. They are granted special Jerusalem ID cards but are not citizens of Israel with voting rights.
The Palestinian people consider East Jerusalem their capital, and the recently formed unity government, as other previous Palestinian governments, has spoken of the desire to establish an independent Palestinian state on all of the West Bank including East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, occupied by Israel since 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital. The Arab Peace Initiative also endorsed this platform.
CAABU said in a letter to Palestine Times that it “was extremely concerned at ongoing Israeli activities to create facts on the ground in an attempt to predetermine the final status of the city.”
The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, John Dugard, commented recently that “The Wall being built in East Jerusalem is an instrument of social engineering designed to achieve the Judaization of Jerusalem by reducing the number of Palestinians in the city.”
My son lived a worthwhile life from The Guardian March 26, 2007
‘My son lived a worthwhile life’
In April 2003, 21-year old Tom Hurndall was shot in the head in Gaza by an Israeli soldier as he tried to save the lives of three small children. Nine months later, he died, having never recovered consciousness. Emine Saner talks to his mother Jocelyn about her grief, her fight to make the Israeli army accountable for his death and the book she has written in his memory.
It is one of the poignancies of Tom Hurndall’s short life that he had gone to Gaza in search of a story, and ended up becoming it. A 21-year-old photography student at Manchester Metropolitan University, he went to Baghdad in February 2003 to photograph human shields, activists who were trying to protect ordinary Iraqis from the threat of Anglo-American attack. While he was there he heard about Rachel Corrie, a 23-year-old American peace activist with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), who had been protecting a Palestinian’s family’s house in Rafah, in the southern Gaza strip, when an Israeli bulldozer crushed her to death. Tom went to Gaza to find out what had happened.
All that is clear from the book his mother, Jocelyn, has written about Tom’s life, and about his family’s battle to bring the Israeli army to account for killing him. It’s not a political book, she stresses, though the anger, frustration and disappointment she feels towards the army, and the Israeli and British governments, is obvious.
Tom was in Rafah, in the Israeli-occupied Gaza strip, on April 11, at an ISM demonstration. Suddenly low shots were fired from an Israeli army watchtower in the direction of children playing on a mound of rubble. Most of them ran – but three froze. Tom, wearing a bright orange ISM jacket, ran to help them. He scooped up a boy and carried him to safety. He ran back for the two girls, bent down to put his arm round one of them and was shot in the head.
Jocelyn was at work, at a school in London where she was head of learning support, when she got a call from her daughter Sophie saying that Tom had been shot. It was the last day of the spring term. She calmly finished photocopying a report she had been working on and distributed it into pigeonholes, before setting off for home. It was as if she was trying to put off discovering the full horror of the story. “I think you do anything to delay the moment of impact,” she says in the bright sitting room of her north London home.
After nearly two months by his hospital bedside in Israel, the family – Hurndall, her former husband, Anthony, and their children Sophie, Billy and Fred – were allowed to bring Tom back to the UK. The brain injury had left him in a coma; his main organs working, but nothing else. Did she accept that Tom would die from the start? “I think I knew,” she says. “The pressure in Tom’s head had damaged other parts of his brain. I knew he would never recover.”
Tom eventually died nine months later on January 13 2004 – Jocelyn’s birthday – in hospital in London. Was it a relief, in a way? “It was, because he wasn’t in pain any more,” says Hurndall. “But it was also impossible when he died.” She is silent for a long time. “I still haven’t accepted it.”
Hurndall is softly spoken with gentle, pale blue eyes. She seems fragile but with an intense strength. She’s a battler but seems surprised by it. She tells of the time she met Tony Blair at a dinner. “I remember saying to him, ‘You’ve hurt me’. I couldn’t imagine saying that to anybody five years ago.” She laughs at this. “This middle-class mother coming out with these strident things.” Tom’s death has changed her. “You develop this language when there’s this anger. I’m not usually a strident person, I’ve never needed to be.”
Her book is called Defy the Stars, words Tom had tattooed on his wrist. They come from Romeo’s cry “Then I defy you, stars!” in Romeo and Juliet, and seemed to say a lot about his attitude to life. Hurndall says she finds herself carrying her book around the house, “because it’s what’s left of Tom. It’s my gift to Tom, it’s my gift from Tom.”
Apart from the anger and the love and the pain, one of the strongest senses in the book is that of discovering Tom, as his mother has since his death. She read his journals and pored over his photographs. Tom was young and idealistic, but he also knew how dangerous it would be to go to Iraq and Gaza. “He was very mature in many senses,” says Hurndall. “He was aware of the risks, but his desire to see and question and be curious was greater. People are surprised to read that Tom considered the possibility of being shot. I gulp when I read it, but I understand that of course he would consider it. If you’re there, it’s on your mind all the time.”
She didn’t want him to go to Baghdad but she knew she couldn’t stop him. “I couldn’t condone it. I felt angry with Tom and a terrible worry that weighed me down and affected me every minute he was away. I was numb, anaesthetised, blank. I kept expecting him to come home. I think he would have left Rafah within 48 hours of his final entry in his journal.” His final entry was on the morning of the day he was shot.
From the beginning, the Hurndalls worried that there could be a cover-up. The first news reports, heard by an Israeli friend on the radio station Kol-Israel, said a man wearing military fatigues had been shooting at a watchtower. “Even days later no one from the Israeli army or Israeli government had been in touch with us,” says Hurndall. “So that in itself spoke volumes. We really felt this draught of silence.” At the hospital, one doctor suggested that Tom’s head injury “was commensurate with a blow from a baseball bat”, even though on his notes it clearly said “gunshot wound”, with an entry point and exit point – as though someone was suggesting that the injury had been caused at close range and so not from the watchtower.
The Palestinians, meanwhile, held Tom up as a hero. Hurndall received a letter from Yasser Arafat praising her son. “I do understand something of the mentality of the need to make Tom an icon, a martyr,” she says. “Having seen the level of Palestinian desperation myself, you would grasp at people who seemingly have taken up your cause and suffered because of it, and you idolise them because they represent hope.”
It was shortly after seeing Tom in hospital for the first time that she took her first trip into Rafah. “I remember the faces of the women and the men and the grandfathers, which spoke of such a worn kind of loss. Life was very, very hard. I definitely had a feeling that they were thinking, ‘Here’s this shocked western family. Do they know that this happens to us every day and we live under the threat of it happening every minute?’ I remember really wanting to find a way of saying ‘I understand’.”
Tom’s father, Anthony, a lawyer, set about collecting witness statements and writing his own report into his son’s death, an attempt to get the Israeli army to accept accountability. It was intensely frustrating. The report the Israeli army produced was amateurish, the incident itself reduced to simplistic scenarios including the idea that Tom was hit by a Palestinian gunman, or that he was even the gunman himself. Little of what they said tallied with the many witness statements that Anthony had collected. The map they produced to show where it had happened was out of date, and they had got the location of where Tom had been shot wrong. The Israeli army said they had fired a single shot; witnesses stated there had been at least five shots, maybe as many as eight.
The Hurndalls’ requests for a meeting with Israeli officials went unanswered until, on the day they were due to fly Tom home, they were granted a meeting at the ministry of foreign affairs. Major Biton, the Israeli soldier in charge of the inquiry, insisted that the army couldn’t have seen Tom from the watchtower, saying buildings were in the way of the window where the soldier was standing. Anthony calmly pointed out that there was a surveillance platform on the top of the tower, and that visibility would have been perfect. When he asked for CCTV footage to prove it, he was told there was no footage, although a camera could clearly be seen on the photographs of the tower Tom had taken. Anthony raised the shootings of two young Palestinian men who had been shot within 48 hours of Tom’s shooting, in the same area. “It was clear that Anthony had mentioned the unmentionable,” writes Hurndall. “The shooting of a young Englishman was one thing, but to mention the shooting of young Palestinians was quite another.”
The Israeli government eventually sent a cheque to pay for the repatriation (though it covered only a fraction of the cost), but they did not admit liability. The cheque, for £8,370, bounced. Compensation and damages are still an issue.
When the Hurndalls met Rachel Corrie’s parents, their experience was painfully familiar. The Corries said the doctor who did the autopsy had claimed that her death had been caused by tripping over, though as her father pointed out, “I would like to ask the doctor how many times he’s seen somebody with broken ribs, breaks in her spinal column, crushed shoulder blades and cut lungs just from tripping.”
The British government wasn’t much help. Despite assertions that it had “repeatedly pressed the Israeli government for a full and transparent inquiry”, the Hurndalls felt this was hollow. When the Hurndalls met Jack Straw, the then foreign secretary, they found him remote and cold. Blair never publicly condemned the shooting. On top of all this, she received anonymous phone calls and letters calling her a “Nazi-lover” for questioning the Israeli authorities.
With a son in hospital wasting away, and three grieving children at home, how did she cope? “I don’t think I did. I made sure there was food in the fridge and I didn’t crack up. As a mother, you’re used to getting in there if there’s a problem and suddenly I couldn’t get in there. Suddenly motherhood seemed distanced and that is terrible. Grief is such that you do have to do it on your own. The only way that I could grieve for Tom was to uncover who he was and to think about my relationship with him. And to untangle this complex bundle of tragedy.”
The fight still isn’t over. Taysir Walid Heib, a soldier in the Israeli army, was put on trial for shooting Tom, and it was unbearable. A medical witness called by the Israeli army suggested that Tom’s death had nothing to do with the shooting and had been a result of negligence by the British hospital. He even implied that the family had been complicit in Tom’s death. Another medical witness agreed – he claimed Tom’s death had not been caused by pneumonia, but by an overdose of morphine and that this was the fault of British doctors. It was so ludicrous that it strengthened the prosecution.
In June 2005, Taysir, a Bedouin sergeant, was convicted of manslaughter and, in August, was sentenced to eight years, the longest sentence an Israeli soldier has been given for killing a civilian since the start of the second intifada. “It was limited justice,” says Hurndall. “He did break the so-called rules of engagement. On the other hand, he was in a culture where there are very loose rules of engagement and their senior commanders turn a blind eye.” An Arab, Taysir could neither read nor write Hebrew, and had a learning disability. Although the Bedouins are marginalised in Israel, some do volunteer for the army, although they tend to be sent to the most dangerous zones and career progression is rare. “I was convinced that Tom was the victim of a victim,” Hurndall writes. “That it was the policy-makers who had put Taysir in this position, who should be on trial.” The family are hoping there will be further arrests up the chain of command and they have yet to receive a public apology.
But is it getting easier? “It is less mad, less chaotic, less muddled. There are fewer distractions. It feels like coming to the edge of a cliff. I went to Fred’s school to watch him playing football and I was in heaven. I don’t mean because Tom had been at the same school and also played football in the same way, had the same long legs. I mean that I’ve come to value those moments so much more. What happened really put a focus on every minute of life, so in some ways it has made our lives more vibrant. It seems terrible that it has taken that. But life matters even more than it did”.
The Occupation of Hebron : Legal Aspects
Call for papers: an international students’ competition from the ICRC
As a specialized journal in humanitarian law, the International Review of the Red Cross invites submissions of manuscripts on subjects relating to international humanitarian law, policy and action. All academic submissions related to these themes are welcome. This includes as well papers on the territories occupied by Israel, and in particular related to the jurisprudence of the Israeli High Court. The international student’s competition on legal aspects of the occupation of Hebron falls within the scope of these criteria, as many other manifestations related to international humanitarian law do in other contexts. No article has been recently published by the International Review on the Israeli and Palestinian context and only one article has dealt with “Judaism and the ethics of war” (by Rabbi Norman Salomon).
As all other articles submitted, the papers on this context have to fulfil several academic criteria. All articles are subjected to a peer-review and the decision whether or not to publish is taken by the editor-in-chief and the international board of editors of the journal. The involvement of the Review in the aforementioned international student’s competition is limited to this procedure. Selected articles reflect the view of the authors alone.
***********************
Further information:
The International Law Division at the Law School, the College of Management Academic Studies in Israel, in cooperation with the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and The International Review of the Red Cross announce the launching of an international competition for the “best international law paper” and invite the submission of papers focusing on legal aspects of the 40 year old Israeli occupation of Hebron.
* The competition is open to all law students world-wide.
* One paper, selected by the competition steering committee as the winning paper, will award its author a $500 prize (sponsored by the Law School, the College of Management Academic Studies).
* Up to three papers, selected by the competition committee, will be published in The International Review of the Red Cross, subject to the journal’s review procedures.
The winning papers will be announced by October 1 2007.
The competition is launched as part of a series of events surrounding the 40th anniversary of the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian Territories.
Hebron well epitomizes the nature of this occupation: Hebron is home to around 150,000 Palestinians, of whom approximately 35,000 reside in Area H-2, an area under full Israeli control and home to some 500 settlers. The latter are located in settlements in the old city. Israeli policies associated with these settlements have arguably been designed to generate the “de-Palestinization” of the area, and have actually achieved this result. The (il)legality of theses policies is the broad subject of the competition.
Subjects may include, but are not limited to, the following:
* The Hebron cases: the jurisprudence of the Israeli High Court of Justice
* Law enforcement in Hebron
* Israeli policy and actions in Hebron: Apartheid or Security?
* International Criminal Law aspects of the occupation of Hebron
* A legal analysis of specific events in Hebron
Papers (not exceeding 10,000 words) should be submitted no later than July 12 2007 to e-mail
Steering Committee
Dr. Orna Ben-Naftali, Head of the International Law Division, the Law School, the College of Management Academic Studies;
Toni Pfanner, Editor in chief, The International Review of the Red Cross
Adv. Limor Yehuda, The Association for Civil Rights in Israel.
Dr. Barak Medinah, Joseph H. and Belle R. Braun Senior Lectureship in Law
Competition Coordinator: Mr. Avi Berg e-mail