February, 17 2015, 01:45pm EDT
Israel: Dangerous Ruling in Rachel Corrie Case
Appeal Court Said No Liability for Civilian Death
Jerusalem
The Israeli Supreme Court ruling in a suit seeking damages over Rachel Corrie's death sends a dangerous message to Israeli armed forces that they can escape accountability for wrongful actions, Human Rights Watch said today. Israel's Supreme Court on February 12, 2015, exempted the Israeli defense ministry from liability for actions by its forces that it deemed to be "wartime activity," but wrongly refused to assess whether those actions violated applicable laws of armed conflict, Human Rights Watch said.
Corrie, 23, was killed on March 16, 2003, while attempting to prevent an armored Israeli bulldozer from demolishing the home of a Palestinian family near Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip. She and other foreign nationals, wearing bright orange vests and using megaphones, shouted at and stood in front of bulldozers over the course of several hours to prevent them from destroying homes. Corrie climbed to the top of a mound of earth created by the front blade of a bulldozer, which continued forward, crushing her. The bulldozer operator claimed he didn't see her.
"This ruling has disturbing implications beyond the Corrie family's case, as it sends a message that Israeli forces have immunity even for deaths caused by alleged negligence," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director. "The ruling is a stark reminder that in some areas Israeli jurisprudence has veered completely off the track of international law."
The ruling came in a case brought by Corrie's family. The court president, Miriam Naor, joined by Justices Esther Hayot and Zvi Zilbertal, explicitly refused to apply international humanitarian law - the laws of war - or international human rights law to Corrie's case. Under Israeli jurisprudence, the ruling stated, "the rule is well known that an 'explicit statutory provision of the Knesset overrides the provisions of international law'." Because the provisions of Israeli law were "clear" that in this case the state had immunity from tort liability, the court ruled, "there is no place to require the state to provide compensation under international law."
The court based its ruling on an Israeli law in force at the time of Corrie's death that exempted Israel from liability for any act by its forces carried out during "wartime activity." The Civil Wrongs (Liability of the State) Law, as amended in 2002, defined wartime activity as "any action combating terror or insurrection," or "intended to prevent terror and hostile acts and insurrection, committed in circumstances of danger to life or limb."
The court accepted the military's claims that its forces killed Corrie while conducting "clearing" operations to uncover tunnels used by Palestinian armed groups in the area, and had come under fire from armed groups repeatedly during similar operations. Because Corrie was killed at "the scene of ongoing fighting between the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] and terrorist organizations," Israel is immune to liability "even if we accept the argument that the forces were not in danger from Rachel and her organization," the ruling said.
The ruling flies in the face of the laws of armed conflict, Human Rights Watch said. The ruling grants immunity in civil law to Israeli forces for harming civilians based merely on the determination that the forces were engaged in "wartime activity," without assessing whether that activity violated the laws of armed conflict, which require parties to the conflict at all times to take all feasible precautions to spare civilian life. Under the laws of armed conflict a state is required to make full reparation for the loss or injury caused by its violations of such laws.
Moreover, the law that the Supreme Court ruling upheld fails to distinguish between conduct of hostilities and law enforcement actions during armed conflict and occupation. In the context of military occupation, actions by Israeli forces are judged according to both the laws of armed conflict and international human rights law standards.
Israeli forces testified at earlier hearings before a lower court in Haifa that Palestinian armed groups had fired at them "every day" during the course of their "clearing operations" in Rafah, but provided no evidence that any shots were fired at the time of Corrie's death or during the two hours preceding it. The only relevant evidence the military submitted was a military log that recorded that a grenade had been thrown, without further information. The military argued in court that Palestinians threw a grenade at Israeli forces, but witnesses called by Corrie's lawyer testified that the only grenade they observed that day was a smoke grenade thrown at them by Israeli forces.
The Supreme Court ruling, which upheld a 2012 ruling by the Haifa District Court, also dismissed the Corrie family's petition for compensation for the harm caused to them by what they considered to be negligent investigations by the military into Corrie's death. The Supreme Court said the Corries could not prove the damage caused to them by any possible faults in the investigation.
The Israeli military opened an "operational debriefing" and a criminal inquiry into Corrie's death. Both concluded that the facts cleared Israeli forces of any wrongdoing.
Human Rights Watch documented that Israeli investigators failed to call any Palestinian witnesses, threatened to indict other foreign volunteers who witnessed Corrie's death while questioning them about the incident, and failed even to ask witnesses to draw a map of the area at the time of the incident. The initial military inquiry into her death even concluded that "no signs substantiate [the] assertion that Ms. Corrie was run over by a bulldozer," a conclusion that the military later reversed.
Human Rights Watch documented that from 2000 to 2004, Israeli forces in Rafah destroyed the homes of 16,000 Palestinians to clear a "buffer zone" along the Egyptian border. The military claimed its actions were intended to prevent the use of tunnels by Palestinian armed groups for military purposes, but the "pattern of destruction strongly suggests that Israeli forces demolished homes wholesale, regardless of whether they posed a specific threat, in violation of international law," in most cases without military necessity, Human Rights Watch concluded. (Egypt has more recently carried out mass demolitions of homes on its side of the Rafah border, which Human Rights Watch is investigating. Egypt is blocking media access to the area.) Human Rights Watch's findings raise the question, which the Supreme Court did not examine, of whether the operation that the bulldozer operator was participating in when it crushed Corrie can be considered a lawful military action.
Since Corrie's death, Israel has broadened the immunity to tort liability for wrongs committed by its armed forces. A July 2013 amendment to the Civil Wrongs law redefined the definition of "wartime actions" for which the state was immune from damages to include any actions by Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip - "whether or not," according to the law's explanatory notes, "they were carried out in circumstances of danger to life or limb." Israel commonly refuses to grant witnesses and victims from Gaza permission to enter Israel to participate in court hearings, claiming they may present security threats, and courts have required each Palestinian plaintiff in damages cases to pay prohibitively expensive "court guarantees" of up to 20,000 shekels (US $5,140) before accepting the case.
Human Rights Watch observed two of the Haifa court hearings and the arguments in the case before the Supreme Court.
The Court judgment, while dismissing the claims against the Israeli Defense Ministry regarding Corrie's death (case 6982/12), upheld a different appeal by Corrie's family (case 6968/12) regarding what it called the Israeli forensic authorities' "inappropriate" actions during Corrie's autopsy and demanding the repatriation to the US of all her remains, some of which remain in Israel. The court rejected a decision by the Nazareth district court on that issue and ordered the Nazareth magistrate's court to re-examine the family's claims.
"Israel's impunity laws slam the door on civilian victims in Gaza, and look like further evidence that Israel is not genuinely willing to hold its own forces accountable for serious violations," Whitson said.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
UK Voters Send 'Shout' for Change to Tories as Labour Sweeps in Local Elections
"We are probably looking at certainly one of the worst, if not the worst, Conservative performances in local government elections for the last 40 years," said one analyst.
May 03, 2024
Nearly two weeks after the British Conservative Party pushed through a proposal to deport asylum-seekers to Rwanda in what one lawyer called "performative cruelty" in the name of winning the general election expected later this year, the local election results announced throughout the day Friday made increasingly clear the ploy hadn't worked.
Elections expert John Curtice projected the Tories could ultimately lose up to 500 local council seats as vote counting continues into the weekend, following elections in which voters cast ballots for 2,661 seats.
The Conservatives have lost around half of the seats they are defending Curtice told BBC Radio.
"We are probably looking at certainly one of the worst, if not the worst, Conservative performances in local government elections for the last 40 years," the polling expert said.
Curtice added that if the results were replicated in a general election, Labour would likely win 34% of the vote, with the Tories winning 25%—five years after the right-wing party won in a landslide in the last nationwide contest.
Labour leader Keir Starmer said the results represented a decisive call for "change" from British voters, particularly applauding the results of a special election in Blackpool South, where Labour candidate Chris Webb won nearly 11,000 votes while Conservative David Jones came in a distant second with just over 3,200.
Webb's victory represented a 26% swing in favor of Labour.
"That's the fifth swing of over 20% to the Labour party in by elections in recent months and years. It is a fantastic result, a really first class result," Starmer said. "And here in Blackpool, a message has been sent directly to the prime minister, because this was a parliamentary vote, to say we're fed up with your decline, your chaos... your division and we want change. We want to go forward with Labour."
"That wasn't just a little message," he added. "That wasn't just a murmur. That was a shout from Blackpool. We want to change. And Blackpool speaks for the whole country in saying we've had enough now, after 14 years of failure, 14 years of decline."
The Conservatives also lost ground in the northern town of Hartlepool, where they lost six council seats. The region swung toward the Tories after the party led the push for Brexit, the U.K.'s exit from the European Union.
A similar result was recorded in York and North Yorkshire, which includes the area Conservative Prime Minister Rishi Sunak represented as a member of Parliament.
"Yorkshire voted for Brexit in 2016," wrote William Booth, London bureau chief for The Washington Post. "But long gone are the days when many Conservatives want to stand before the voters and extol the advantages of leaving the European Union, which has been, in most sectors, a flop."
Sunak, added Booth, is "betting that immigration is still an issue with resonance and has promised to 'stop the boats,' the daily spectacle of desperate migrants risking their lives on rubber rafts trying to cross the English Channel. Sunak's government plans to fly asylum seekers arriving by boat to Rwanda. No flights have taken off yet. But the Home Office last week began a self-proclaimed 'large scale' operation to detain asylum seekers destined for removal."
The Labour Party has called Sunak's Rwanda plan a "gimmick" and said it would reverse a Tory policy blocking refugees from applying for asylum.
Average wages in the U.K. last year were "back at the level during the 2008 financial crisis, after taking account of inflation," according toThe Guardian.
"This 15 years of lost wage growth is estimated by the Resolution Foundation thinktank to have cost the average work £10,700 ($13,426) a year," reported the newspaper in March. "The performance has been ranked as the worst period for pay growth since the Napoleonic wars ended in 1815."
Analysts noted one setback for Labour in Oldham, where the party lost some seats in areas with large numbers of Muslim voters to independent candidates, costing it overall control of the council.
Arooj Shah, the Labour leader of the Oldham Council, told the BBC that the party's support for Israel in its bombardment of Gaza was behind its losses.
"Gaza is clearly an issue for anyone with an ounce of humanity in them, but we've asked for an immediate cease-fire right from the start," said Shah. "We have a rise of independents because people think mainstream parties aren't the answer."
The losses "should be a wake-up call for the Starmer leadership: Every vote must be earned," said the socialist and anti-racist group Momentum. "That means calling for an immediate arms ban to Israel, calling out Israeli war crimes, and delivering real leadership on climate."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israel Briefs US on Plan for 'Ethnic Cleansing' of Rafah
"A military invasion in Rafah would be CATASTROPHIC... There can be no more 'evacuations.' There is no safe place to go," said Oxfam, calling for an immediate cease-fire.
May 03, 2024
Israeli officials have told the Biden administration and humanitarian organizations how they plan to start forcibly expelling Gazans from Rafah ahead of a likely ground invasion—a move critics have likened to the ethnic cleansing of Palestine's Arabs during the establishment of the modern state of Israel.
Politicoreported Friday that Israel Defense Forces (IDF) officials informed the U.S. government and aid agencies that a plan is in place to remove Palestinians from Rafah, where approximately 1.2 million refugees forcibly displaced from other parts of Gaza are precariously sheltering alongside around 280,000 local residents in the embattled strip's southernmost city.
According to an unnamed U.S. official and two other people familiar with the plan, Israel would "move people out of Rafah, the main humanitarian hub in the enclave, to al-Mawasi, a small strip of land on the southern Gaza coast." Politico also obtained a copy of a map containing some details of the plan.
The Wall Street Journalreported Friday that Israel has given Hamas until next week to submit to a cease-fire proposal or face an invasion of Rafah.
"Such an invasion could lead to horrific massacres and raise scenarios of a second Nakba," the Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights said recently. "After 200 days of horrific genocidal acts in Gaza, the real objectives of the attack are the continuation of the 76-year-long ongoing Nakba and the erasure and genocidal destruction of the Palestinian people in Gaza. Israel is laying the groundwork to fulfill its settler-colonial plan of colonizing Gaza."
Human rights defenders have warned that Israel may ultimately seek to ethnically cleanse as many Palestinians as possible from Gaza.
The situation in Rafah is already dire. Water and other necessities are in desperately short supply. According to James Elder, the global spokesperson for the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), there is approximately one toilet for every 850 people in Rafah and one shower for every 3,500 people.
On Friday, Jens Laerke, a spokesperson for the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, told reporters in Geneva that an Israeli ground invasion of Rafah would put hundreds of thousands of Palestinians "at imminent risk of death."
"Any ground operation would mean more suffering and death," Laerke said, warning of not only "a slaughter of civilians, but also at the same time an incredible blow to the humanitarian operation in the entire strip, because it is run primarily out of Rafah."
Around 5% of Gazans have been killed, maimed, or left missing by Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza, according to a report published Wednesday by the U.N. Development Program and the U.N. Economic Commission for Western Asia. That's more than 120,000 people, the vast majority of whom are innocent civilians, according to Palestinian officials and international human rights groups.
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Rep. Henry Cuellar and Wife Indicted on Bribery Charges
"In exchange for the bribe payments to Imelda Cuellar, Henry Cuellar agreed to perform official acts in his capacity as a member of Congress," the indictment states.
May 03, 2024
The U.S. Department of Justice confirmed Friday that Democratic Texas Congressman Henry Cuellar and his wife, Imelda Cuellar, were indicted last week for allegedly "participating in two schemes involving bribery, unlawful foreign influence, and money laundering."
According to the indictment, between at least December 2014 and November 2021, the Cuellars allegedly took approximately $600,000 in bribes from a fossil fuel company owned by the Azerbaijani government and an unnamed bank headquartered in Mexico City. The congressman, who has served on Capitol Hill for nearly two decades and is seeking reelection, previously co-chaired the Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus.
"The bribe payments were laundered, pursuant to sham consulting contracts, through a series of front companies and middlemen into shell companies owned by Imelda Cuellar," the document states. "In exchange for the bribe payments to Imelda Cuellar, Henry Cuellar agreed to perform official acts in his capacity as a member of Congress, to commit acts in violation of his official duties, and to act as an agent of the government of Azerbaijan and [the foreign bank]."
NBC News first reported early Friday that the Justice Department was expected to release the indictment, which came more than two years after a Federal Bureau of Investigation raid of the couple's Laredo home. Before the document was unsealed, the congressman claimed in a statement that his actions were "consistent with the actions of many of my colleagues and in the interest of the American people."
"I want to be clear that both my wife and I are innocent of these allegations," Cuellar said Friday. "Before I took any action, I proactively sought legal advice from the House Ethics Committee, who gave me more than one written opinion, along with an additional opinion from a national law firm."
The Cuellars "made their initial court appearance today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Dena Palermo in Houston," the Justice Departmnet said Friday. If convicted of all the charges, the 68-year-old congressman and his 67-year-old wife could face decades in prison.
Congressional Democratic leadership last year endorsed Cuellar for reelection in November, despite his opposition to abortion rights—a key issue for this cycle at all levels of politics. During the 2022 cycle, after nearly losing to progressive primary challenger Jessica Cisneros, he beat the Republican nominee, Cassy Garcia, 57% to 43%.
A spokesperson for U.S. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), Christie Stephenson, saidin a Friday statement that "Henry Cuellar has admirably devoted his career to public service and is a valued member of the House Democratic Caucus. Like any American, Congressman Cuellar is entitled to his day in court and the presumption of innocence throughout the legal process."
"Pursuant to House Democratic Caucus Rule 24, Congressman Cuellar will take leave as ranking member of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee while this matter is ongoing," Stephenson added.
Cuellar isn't the only Democrat in Congress battling allegations of corruption and bribery charges. Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and his wife, Nadine Menendez, were indicted last September and accused of accepting bribes in the form of "cash, gold, payments toward a home mortgage, compensation for a low-or-no-show job, a luxury vehicle, and other things of value."
The following month, the Justice Department accused the senator of acting as an unregistered agent for the government of Egypt. Menendez has denied wrongdoing and refused to resign. Although he is not seeking reelection as a Democrat, he has teased a possible independent run if he is exonerated.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular