Tag: Settlement

Bedouin community declared ‘closed military area’ while residents attempted to build new poultry-house

13 October 2009

On Tuesday, 13 October 2009, Israeli soldiers and police prevented the residents of Umm al-Kheir, located in the South Hebron Hills, from finishing the construction of a new chicken house. The families are not allowed by the army to build houses and are therefore living in tents that are located just outside the gate to the illegal settlement of Carmel.

Umm al-Kheir

During the day one of the families started to build a small house, approximately 2,5 x 3m, using stones and cement, to house their chickens. When international and Israeli activists arrived at the scene, at around 5pm, one military jeep and one settlement security car was stationed in the middle of the Bedouin community, on the road outside the settlement gate. During the two following hours more and more soldiers and police arrived and different police men repeatedly inspected the chicken house and filmed both the house and the locals and activists that were observing the situation. At 6pm the local residents and one Israeli activist continued with the construction, while being filmed and closely watched by the police, army and settler security. At around 7pm the army brought documents showing that they had declared the whole community a ‘closed military area’, forbidding all internationals there. In the document they also included one Palestinian working for B’Tselem.

The following day the area was opened again, and the ground to the chicken house was still standing.

The residents of Umm al-Kheir, approximately 80 people in six extended families, are originally from Tel Arad inside Israel, but were forced to leave in 1948 and instead settled down east of the town of Yatta in the West Bank. In 1981 the Carmel illegal settlement was established on top of the same hill and since then the residents of Umm al-Kheir have suffered from numerous attacks and harassments from the settlers. During the last five years, the settlement has expanded significantly, steeling further land from Umm al-Kheir.

Activists occupy British supermarket in opposition to the sale of settlement produce

ISM London

11 October 2009

On 11th October 2009, a swarm of activists descended upon Sainsbury’s on Cromwell Street, West London to highlight the sale of Israeli and illegal Settlement produce by both Sainsbury’s and other major supermarket chains. Coming from a diverse range of campaign organisations, around 40 activists stood in solidarity with the Palestinian call for a global boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign.

Enterring the store, protestors held up an array of settlement and Israeli produce demanding that the supermarkets put a halt to their sale and reminding consumers of their capacity to effect change by not buying these goods.

Popping up a tent and claiming it to be an “Israeli Settlement”, the actions demonstrated the ridiculous ease at which Israeli Settlements pop up around the West Bank, protected by the military and evicting Palestinians from their land and homes.

They proceded to chant against the occupation and the sale of Israeli goods, following this they went on a tour of the store so that all staff and customers were made aware of Sainsbury’s role in supporting illegal settlements. Handing out leaflets and engaging with customers, many of which were supportive, the actions communicated the need for greater citizen action.

Management and security were keen to encourage the protestors to leave but with no success. After twenty minutes within the store, demonstrators left of their own accord, clapping hands and chanting “Free Free Palestine”, feeling that their efforts had been succesful in communicating to the store and the general public.

Police arrived soon after and despite a brief interaction with protestors there were no arrests and no signs of aggression.

Activists then left the scene and were followed for some time afterwards, however no further action by the police was taken.

———————–

This non-violent initiative seeks to challenge the economic and political infrastructure that supports the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Similar to the efforts against Apartheid South Africa, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Campaign hopes to undermine the apartheid in the West Bank and Gaza whereby checkpoints, Israel only roads and the Apartheid all segregate and impoverish Palestinians. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, over 60% of Palestinians live below the poverty line, and in Gaza the figure sits at 70%.

Illegal Israeli Settlement produce is on sale in most of the high street supermarket chains, including Tesco’s, Morrisons, Waitrose, Marks and Spencers, and Asda as well as Sainsbury’s. According to the 2004 judgement by the International Court of Justice, Settlements are illegal and in violation of the Fourth Geneva Conventions. Sale of produce from these Settlements reinforce their existence and financially contribute to Israel’s theft of Palestinian land and violent oppression of Palestinians themselves.

This mass action follows a number of smaller protests that have taken place across in London and across the UK which make explicit public opposition to the sale of Settlement goods in British stores. It also follows the September 2009 decision by the Trade Union Congress to commit to building a mass boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign.

Israel sees court rulings on Palestinian land as mere ‘recommendations’

Akiva Eldar | Ha’aretz

13 October 2009

So what if the Supreme Court rules? In Israel those decisions are just recommendations, especially if they deal with Palestinian land. In most enlightened democratic countries, saying that decisions of the courts obligate the state authorities is like stating that the sun rises in the east. But that may not be so for Israel.

Last week, Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch had to state that “rulings of this court are not mere recommendations, and the state is obliged to abide by them and to execute them with the necessary speed and efficiency, according to the circumstances of the matter.”

The head of the judicial system added: “In the case before us, the state took the law into its own hands.”

The case dates back to June 2006. The High Court of Justice at that time responded to a petition from Hamoked – the Center for the Defense of the Individual, and instructed the Defense Ministry to move the route of the separation fence near the villages of Azzun and Nabi Ilyas in the northern West Bank.

Aharon Barak, who was then president of the Supreme Court, stated in the ruling that “the petition points to an event that cannot be tolerated according to which the information that was supplied to the court did not reflect all of the considerations that were taken into account by the decision makers.”

He was referring to the fact that the Defense Ministry did not reveal to the court that the route of the fence was congruent with the map of the plan to expand the settlement of Tzufim at the expense of Palestinian lands. The prosecution promised that the fence would be dismantled within six months from the completion of the fence along the new route.

It can be assumed that the officials of the Defense Ministry understood that when the court ordered that the injustice toward the residents of the Palestinian villages be corrected “in the shortest time possible” it was not referring to three and a half years.

In any case, from Beinisch’s remarks about a ruling she handed down during a process of contempt of court, it was evident that this was not her interpretation of Barak’s ruling.

“It is not possible to put up with conduct of this kind,” she scolded the representatives of the prosecution and she ordered the state to pay the petitioners’ court costs of NIS 20,000. This sum was added to another NIS 50,000 which the taxpayers paid when the original ruling was handed down as well as the salaries of the lawyers from the prosecution who were sent to defend against the contempt of court ruling.

Before closing the case, Beinisch stated that in countries where there is a rule of law, a political and public storm would have arisen over this.

“In this case before us, the state took the law into its own hands,” she said.

And this is not the only case where the Defense Ministry has made a mockery of court decisions relating to the route of the fence. More than two years ago, the court ordered the state to consider an alternative to the fence’s route that was robbing the village of Bil’in of lands in favor of the settlement of Modi’in Ilit, and to do so “within a reasonable period of time.”

In the ruling that was handed down after 15 months, Beinisch wrote that the alternative that was chosen was not in accordance with the court decision and she ordered the state to abide by it “without further delay.”

Since then 10 months have elapsed, the residents of the village and their supporters have demonstrated, the police have used tear gas, and the fence is still in place.

Maskit Handel of the Association of Civil Rights In Israel recently documented no fewer than eight cases where the state was, or still is, in contempt of rulings handed down by the High Court of Justice since 2006. Among other things, she found two decisions relating to the fortification of schools in communities along the border with the Gaza Strip, three decisions instructing the state to build 245 classrooms in East Jerusalem, and a decision to stop making the granting of work permits for migrant workers dependent on their working for a single employer.

Enlightened rule

An affidavit submitted to the High Court of Justice a few weeks ago (in response to a petition) by the Defense Minister’s adviser on settlement affairs, Eitan Broshi, indicates that from Ehud Barak’s point of view, anything relating to Palestinian rights, and not only the high court’s rulings, are nothing more than a recommendation.

The affidavit states that the defense minister has decided, for the time being, to refrain from carrying out demolition orders against nine homes in Ofra that were built on private Palestinian land. The explanation no doubt convinced the Palestinians who lost their lands that they are living under an enlightened rule of occupation.

“There is no point in separating this individual case or any other without seeing the general picture and the system of circumstances under which the respondents are acting,” the affidavit stated.

And what is the general picture? Two dozen outposts and numerous illegal homes? And what does the phrase “the system of circumstances” mean? Fear of the settlers?

Daniel Ben Simon, the faction chairman of Barak’s party, Labor, declared during a tour of the outposts organized by Peace Now at the end of August, that if they are not vacated by the start of the winter session of the Knesset, “the Labor party will reconsider its continued membership of the government.”

No special excitement could be seen among the factions on the right when the winter session opened Monday. However informed sources promise that this time they are serious. The sources reveal that in return for the pass the prime minister received with regard to freezing settlement construction, the defense minister has promised the Americans that there will be a speedy evacuation of the outposts, and he has even shown them the schedule.

Israeli government prepared to return land annexed from Iraq Burin

2 October 2009

Iraq Burin has re-commenced its lively weekly demonstrations after a month-long Ramadan hiatus, with approximately 150 villagers and internationals joining forces on Friday, the 25th of September, to protest the occupation. The village’s return to form was welcomed by the Israeli Occupation Forces with standard fare “crowd dispersal” techniques. In the following week the village received a statement from the Israeli government that it was prepared to return an unspecified amount of contested farmland that lies between Iraq Burin and the illegal settlement of Bracha, signifying an important breakthrough in the ongoing battle across the West Bank against land annexation and settlement expansion.

Following the midday prayer, the protesters marched from the centre to the edge of the village where a public prayer was planned to take place on the contested farmland. Before the protesters were able to amass for the prayer the first sound bombs and tear gas canisters were released by IOF soldiers moving in from either side of the valley, surrounding the protest. Settlers observed from a hill top whilst the crowd dispersed, as a deluge of tear gas canisters were fired directly at protesters. Many suffered effects of suffocation due to gas inhalation and two Palestinian men were removed from the scene on stretchers by Red Crescent personnel for further medical treatment.

Much to the amusement of protesters Israeli soldiers themselves were forced to scatter during the protest as they suffered from plumes of their own tear gas fired by their comrades on the opposite hill top. The wind was not working in their favor as gas directed at the crowd engulfed soldiers due to a well timed breeze.

In the aftermath of the demonstration a checkpoint was established by the military at the main exit point to the village to track movement. Those who had come from surrounding regions to support Iraq Burin’s resistance were forced to climb down the mountainside in order to avoid the checkpoint security due to fear of arrest and reprisal.

Iraq Burin has aimed to take its place amongst Bil’in and Nil’in as examples peaceful resistance  and  rallying of regional and media support against the occupation. Has the first breakthrough already been made? An unprecedented declaration by the Israeli government to return some of the annexed land to the village was released in the wake of this latest demonstration, mounting faith in the power of protest for some, and skepticism in others. A secondary statement was issued by the government, expressing a wish to “lease” the land from the village. The mayor of  has responded that the land should be returned to the rightful owners for the village’s agricultural means. Should the declaration be withdrawn, or on undesirable terms, the weekly demonstrations will re-commence, no doubt gathering momentum and media attention.

Iraq Burin to demonstrate against the theft of their lands

24 September 2009

The village of Iraq Burin in the the southern region of Nablus will re-commence its weekly demonstrations this Friday, the 25th of September after a hiatus to observe the holy month of Ramadan. Over 100 dunums (100,000 sq metres) of farmers’ land has been annexed by the illegal settlement of Bracha and the village is subject to constant attacks from settlers and soldiers alike. Demonstrators will meet at 12:30 after the midday prayer, when international activists will march with residents to the edge of the village for a public prayer on the contested land.

West Bank villages such as Bil’in and Nil’in have proved what success peaceful protest can achieve to capture both public and media interest and draw attention to the detrimental effects of the Israeli occupation on rural life in Palestine. Iraq Burin is determined to follow their example and hopes its demonstrations can continue to host a growing presence of international activists.

Iraq Burin held three demonstrations in August, despite attacks from armed settlers and heavy-handed “crowd dispersal” techniques by the Israeli army: the ubiquitous use of sound bombs, tear gas, rubber-coated bullets and live ammunition. A journalist from Al-Jazeera was beaten by a settler and a local man sustained stomach injuries when hit by a tear gas canister. Over the month of Ramadan, the village has been holding workshops in place of protests, exploring philosophies and methods of non-violent resistance in history.

Come and give your support to the villagers of Iraq Burin, and show them they are not alone in their struggle!