ABOUT THIS REPORT.............................................................................................................

4
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 5
ISRAELI VIOLATIONS OF PALESTINIAN HUMAN RIGHTS ......................................... 10
THE ISRAELI POLICY OF CLOSURE IN THE WEST BANK AND GAZA STRIP .................................. 10
Closure Update ................................................................................................................... 10
IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS ON THE FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT INSIDE THE GAZA STRIP................. 13
TORTURE AND ILL-TREATMENT OF PALESTINIAN PRISONERS IN ISRAEL .................................... 14
Deaths of Detainees in Israeli Prisons................................................................................ 16
Administrative Detention .................................................................................................... 17
Legal Aid Provided by PCHR for the Detainees in Israeli Jails ......................................... 18
Humanitarian Aid for Detainees ........................................................................................ 18
Poster for the Detainees...................................................................................................... 18
Press Releases Issued by PCHR about Palestinian and Arab Prisoners Held in Israeli
Occupation Prisons ............................................................................................................ 19
THE SETTLEMENTS, THE SETTLERS’ PRACTICES, AND THE SETTLERS’ PROTECTION BY THE
OCCUPATION FORCES IN THE GAZA STRIP ................................................................................ 26
Settlement Activities in the Gaza Strip in 1998 ................................................................... 27
Palestinians Murdered by Israeli Settlers in 1998 .............................................................. 30
Press Releases about Settlements and Settler Activities in the Gaza Strip .......................... 31
THE EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE AND EXTRA-JUDICIAL KILLINGS ............................................... 33
Palestinians Killed by the Israeli Occupation Forces in Gaza in 1998 ....................... 34
Palestinians Killed by Israeli Forces in the West Bank in 1998 ............................... 35
Press Releases by PCHR on the Excessive Use of Force by Israeli Forces ........................ 36
THE PRACTICES OF THE ISRAELI NAVY AGAINST PALESTINIAN FISHERMEN ............................... 39
Shooting Fishermen and Their Boats ................................................................................ 40
Arresting Fishermen at Sea ................................................................................................ 41
Capturing Palestinian Fishing Boats ................................................................................. 42
Attacking Palestinian Fishing Wharfs ............................................................................... 42
Cutting Nets and Damaging Fishing Equipment ............................................................... 42
Arbitrary Orders to Leave the Sea ...................................................................................... 43
PROMOTING THE RULE OF LAW AND DEMOCRACY IN AREAS UNDER THE
JURISDICTION OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY .................................................... 44
PALESTINIAN SECURITY FORCES CONTINUE ILLEGAL ARRESTS OF CITIZENS............................. 44
Torture and Ill-treatment of Detainees by the Palestinian Authority ................................. 48
Legal Aid for the Detainees ................................................................................................ 49
Press Releases Issued by the Centre Regarding the PA’s Detainees .................................. 49
INDIVIDUAL SECURITY SERVICE PERSONNEL SHOOTING AND KILLING CIVILIANS ..................... 62
Press Releases Issued by PCHR on Security Service Personnel Shooting and Killing
Civilians.............................................................................................................................. 64
DEATH(S) IN SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES .............................................................................. 66
Press Releases about the Death of Hussein Abu Ghali ...................................................... 66
THE CONTINUING WORK OF THE STATE SECURITY COURT ....................................................... 68
THE NON-IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COURTS’ DECISIONS ........................................................ 69
Press Releases from the Centre about the Non-implementation of Court Decisions .......... 69
THE RETIREMENT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE .................................................................................. 71
Press Release Issued by the Centre about the Retirement of the Chief
Justice................................................................................................................................. 72
THE RESIGNATION OF THE PALESTINIAN ATTORNEY GENERAL ................................................. 72
A Press Release about the Resignation of the Attorney General ........................................ 73
THE PALESTINIAN LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ................................................................................ 74
PCHR’s Report on the Palestinian Legislative Council ..................................................... 75
The Failure to Hold a By-election in Gaza Constituency ................................................... 78
Press Releases about the By-elections for the PLC............................................................. 78

1
 Beatings of Members of the Legislative Council ................................................................ 80
PCHR’s Critical Comments on the Draft Law of Charitable Associations and Community
Organizations ..................................................................................................................... 81
THE FAILURE TO HOLD LOCAL ELECTIONS ............................................................................... 83
CONTINUED RESTRICTIONS ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND PUBLICATION ........................... 83
Restrictions on Journalists’ Work ...................................................................................... 84
Closing Licensed Press Offices ........................................................................................... 86
Press Releases on the Continued Restrictions Placed on the Press and Freedom of
Expression .......................................................................................................................... 87
ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, AND CULTURAL RIGHTS UNIT .................................................................. 95
Study on the Right to Health Services in the Gaza Strip .................................................... 95
Legal Assistance Provided by the Centre Regarding Economic, Social, and Cultural
Rights ................................................................................................................................. 98
Press Releases about Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights ............................................ 98
A Letter to the Minister of Higher Education................................................................... 100
WOMEN’S RIGHTS UNIT ......................................................................................................... 104
Legal Assistance Program for Women and Women’s Organizations ............................... 104
Research and Legal Awareness for Women ..................................................................... 107
THE CENTRE’S RELATIONSHIP WITH LOCAL SOCIETY .......................................... 113
STRENGTHENING RELATIONS WITH THE LOCAL COMMUNITY AND EXPANDING THE NUMBER OF
BENEFICIARIES ...................................................................................................................... 113
Legal Aid for Victims of Human Rights Violations .......................................................... 113
Raising Public Awareness on Human Rights and Democracy: Developing a Training
Program............................................................................................................................ 114
BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER PALESTINIAN NGOS AND CIVIL SOCIETY .................. 115
PARTICIPATION IN WORKSHOPS AND LOCAL CONFERENCES ................................................... 116
THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE CENTRE WITH PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY INSTITUTIONS ................ 118
THE ACTIVITIES OF THE CENTRE AT THE REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL
LEVEL .................................................................................................................................... 120
THE WORK OF THE CENTRE TO SECURE THE DE JURE APPLICATION OF THE FOURTH GENEVA
CONVENTION IN THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES ................................................... 120
PCHR Memorandum on the UN Recommendation for HCPs to Convene ....................... 122
A Consultation Meeting on the Fourth Geneva Convention ............................................ 124
Advisory Expert Meeting on the Fourth Geneva Convention, Gaza ................................. 126
A Series of Meetings to Explain and Act on the Results of the Advisory Expert Meeting 128
A Memorandum on the Convening of a Meeting of Experts ............................................ 129
A Press Release about the Stance of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights...... 132
Publication of a Book about the Fourth Geneva Convention ........................................... 133
PCHR’S INTERVENTIONS BEFORE UN BODIES ........................................................................ 133
UN Commission on Human Rights .................................................................................. 133
Committee Against Torture .............................................................................................. 134
Human Rights Committee ................................................................................................ 135
The UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of
the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories ............................... 136
The UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights ........................................ 138
PRESS RELEASES ISSUED BY THE CENTRE ON SPECIAL OCCASIONS ......................................... 138
Press Release on the Events Marking the 50th Anniversary of Al-Nakhba ....................... 139
Press Release on the European Commission Recommendation to Ban the Importing of
Settlement Products to EU Countries ............................................................................... 140
Press Release on the Eve of the Signing of the Wye River Memorandum ........................ 140
Press Release on the Eve of President Bill Clinton’s Visit to Gaza .................................. 142
PARTICIPATION IN REGIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEETINGS AND CONFERENCES ................ 145
COOPERATION AND COORDINATION BETWEEN THE CENTRE AND OTHER REGIONAL AND
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS .......................................................................................... 153
International Commission of Jurists - Geneva ................................................................. 153

2
 The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)................................................ 156
The Arab Organization for Human Rights ....................................................................... 156
A Press Release by the Centre Expressing Its Support for the Egyptian Organization for
Human Rights .................................................................................................................. 156
MEETINGS IN GAZA BETWEEN THE CENTRE AND POLITICIANS, DIPLOMATS, UN
REPRESENTATIVES, AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL NGOS ........................................................ 157
RECEIVING VISITING DELEGATIONS AT PCHR ....................................................................... 163
INTERVIEWS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF LOCAL AND INTERNATIONAL MEDIA ....................... 165
PARTICIPATION IN TRAINING SESSIONS TO UPGRADE CENTRE STAFF EXPERTISE..................... 167
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 169
FINANCIAL REPORT ........................................................................................................... 170

3
 ABOUT THIS REPORT

We introduce to the reader the 1998 Annual Report for the Palestinian
Centre for Human Rights (PCHR). Contained within is a narrative and
financial report for the period from January 1-December 31, 1998. The
report will attempt to provide a general picture of the human rights
situation in the Gaza Strip. Considering that most activities of PCHR are
geographically limited to the Gaza Strip, this report will not provide a
comprehensive picture of the human rights situation throughout the
Occupied Territories. This is not to suggest, however, that there is any
separation between the Occupied Palestinian Territories, which legally
remain an integrated zone. Rather, it reflects the Palestinian reality as being
the result of a prolonged closure and restrictions imposed on the freedom of
movement by the Israeli occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Accordingly, the information we introduce in this report for the West Bank
is not comprehensive and has been used only to highlight specific human
rights violations. We take this opportunity to express our appreciation and
thanks to all the human rights organizations in the West Bank, including
Jerusalem, that have a professional relationship with the Centre and are
exchanging information with the Centre about the Palestinian human rights
situation.

We hope that this report will contribute to the promotion of human rights in
Palestine while serving as an indicator of the progress achieved by PCHR.
An indicator document such as this one will assist us in further developing
our work and programs over the coming years.

The report also includes the financial report for the same time period.
Publishing the financial report reflects our deep belief and fundamental
policy of maintaining the transparency of the PCHR as a non-
governmental, non-profit organization that provides free services to the
community.

4
 INTRODUCTION

This year is not only the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights of 1948, but it is also the 50 th anniversary of “Al-Nakhba”
(the Palestinian Catastrophe) in which Palestinians reflect on long years of
suffering and dispersion. These 50 years have brought a continuous
violation of Palestinian rights. Although previous years have witnessed a
high degree of violation of Palestinian human rights, this year was
exceptional for the high level of violations of Palestinian human rights.

The year witnessed a dangerous escalation in the Israeli occupation

authority’s use of excessive force against Palestinian civilians in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip. In circumstances that posed no threat to the lives of
Israelis, the occupation forces killed 23 Palestinians. One woman and one
child were included in this number. Seven of those killed were from the
Gaza Strip while the other 16 were from the West Bank. In addition,
hundreds of Palestinian civilians were injured as a result of live and rubber
bullets. In most of the cases, the victims were injured above the waist,
which proves that the shooting was done with the aim to kill. In three
different events, four Palestinians were extra-judicially killed after they
were accused by Israel of being members of Izz Eddin Al-Qassam, the
military wing of Hamas.

Israeli settlers killed 11 Palestinian civilians in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip during 1998 and injured scores of others as a result of beatings,
stabbings, and shootings. The Israeli occupation forces also continued their
settlement activities in the Occupied Territories. Such activities include
building new housing units within the established settlements, expanding
them, or building new settlements. Within this context, the occupation
forces intensified their stealing and confiscating of Palestinian land for
settlement purposes and for bypass roads to connect the settlements with
Israeli land. Such activities came within the context of the Israeli
government’s attempts to create new facts on the ground and to disrupt the
geographic unity of Palestinian land, thus creating a Palestinian ghetto
surrounded by settlements as a means to prevent the establishment of a
Palestinian state.

The occupation forces continue implementing collective punishment

against Palestinian civilians in clear violation of international law. Israel
continues in imposing the policy of closure on the West Bank and Gaza
Strip – a policy that has led to disastrous results for the basic rights and
freedoms of Palestinians, particularly the economic, social, and cultural
rights of Palestinian civilians. The restrictions on the trading activities of
the West Bank and Gaza Strip remain. Also, restrictions on Palestinian
freedom of movement between the Palestinian areas or to foreign countries
remain. These restrictions include travel limitations on laborers, students,
and medical patients. In addition, an internal closure was imposed on a

5
 number of cities and villages. The year witnessed the death of two citizens
at Israeli military checkpoints in the West Bank as a result of the Israeli
policy of closure and the blocking of patients needing access to hospitals.

By the end of 1998 almost 2,500 Palestinian detainees were still in Israeli
prisons. Among them, 100 detainees were administratively arrested without
trial. Those detainees are subjected to inhuman living circumstances and
are suffering from medical neglect. During 1998, four Palestinian prisoners
died in Israeli prisons, two of them as a result of Israeli medical negligence;
a third was said by the Israeli occupation forces to have committed suicide.
There is evidence that the fourth detainee died as a result of torture. Torture
is a regular outcome of Israeli policy against detainees, especially after the
legalization of torture by the Israeli executive, judicial, and legislative
authorities. Israel is regarded as the only state in the world that has
legalized torture.

More than five years after signing the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of

Principles on September 13, 1993, and more than four years after the May
4, 1994 Interim Agreement between Israel and the PLO, there are clear
indicators that Palestinian human rights have been sacrificed for “peace”
and “security.” By the end of 1998, neither peace nor security had been
achieved and the human rights situation had deteriorated. The Israeli
measures against the Palestinian people and their land led to a complete
blocking of the peace process. The government of Israeli Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu worked at killing the peace process and neglected its
international commitments resulting from the Interim Agreement. This was
clear through the following:

1. The refusal to re-deploy from the West Bank;

2. The escalation of settlement activities and confiscation of Palestinian
land;
3. The continuing adoption of measures aimed at isolating East Jerusalem
from the rest of the occupied land and the pursuit of ethnic cleansing
policies;
4. The continuing imposition of closure and the refusal to open safe
passages between the West Bank and Gaza Strip; and
5. The insistence on refusing to release Palestinian detainees and indeed
using them as a means of political blackmail.

Within this context, the Israeli government, with the support of the United
States, continued to pressure the Palestinian Authority (PA) to violate
human rights standards through forcing it to carry out illegal arresting
waves of Palestinian opposition members.

On October 23, 1998, the Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, the Israeli
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and the American President Bill
Clinton signed the Wye River Memorandum after intensive efforts by the

6
American administration to push forward the peace process. What
particularly concerns PCHR is that this Memorandum once again neglected
the importance of human rights in securing meaningful peace and security.
In a dangerous development, the United States will play a fundamental role
in implementing the security aspects of the Memorandum through its direct
participation in a bi-lateral committee with the PA and a tri-lateral
committee with both the PA and Israel to monitor the necessary steps to be
taken by the PA to combat violence.

According to the Memorandum, a timetable of three months was agreed to

in order to implement the second phase of re-deploying Israeli forces in the
West Bank according to the Interim Agreement signed on September 28,
1995. Palestinian official sources mentioned that the PA would control,
according to the agreement, about 44 percent of the West Bank, but it was
clear that this amount would not only include the areas under Palestinian
civil and security jurisdiction (Area A), but would include the areas under
PA civil jurisdiction and Israeli security jurisdiction (Area B). According to
the first phase of the re-deployment process, which began at the beginning
of October 1995, the size of the area subject to PA civil and security
control is three percent of the West Bank. According to the new agreement,
14.2 percent will be added to it from Area B and one percent from Area C
(full Israeli control). In addition, about 12 percent will be transferred from
Area C to Area B. Accordingly, by the completion of the second phase of
the Israeli occupation forces’ re-deployment, the size of the area under full
Palestinian security and civil control (Area A) will be approximately 18.2
percent while approximately 81.8 percent will be under Israeli security
control. A minority share of this area of 81.2 percent will be under
Palestinian civil control (Area B). In regard to the Gaza Strip, nothing will
change. The Israeli occupation forces will continue to control 40 percent of
the Gaza Strip, including the military installations, the settlements, the
bypass roads, and the yellow areas (those areas subjected to Israeli security
control) as set forth in the Interim Agreement of 1994.

The Israeli government is using the partial re-deployment process from the
West Bank and Gaza Strip as a means to justify its illegal stand refusing to
implement the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of
Civilian Persons in Time of War of 1949. In this context, Israel claims that
more than 90 percent of the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip
are under PA control. This matter violates the Fourth Geneva Convention
and does not free Israel from implementing its commitment as one of the
High Contracting Parties (HCPs) to the Convention. The year witnessed
intensive activities carried out by the Swiss government to prepare for a
conference of the HCPs to discuss possible means of implementing the
Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Territories. In doing so,
Switzerland claimed to be implementing the UN General Assembly
recommendation to it as the depository of the Geneva Conventions. The
steps currently being taken, however, contradict the UN General Assembly

7
resolutions. The PLO participated in the meeting despite the Centre
warning not to take part.

Soon after the signing of the Wye River Memorandum, the PA adopted
additional measures against the opposition forces. Such measures included
the carrying out of illegal waves of arrests against them and added
restrictions on the right of freedom of expression and the right of peaceful
assembly. Despite the PA’s adoption of these heavy-handed measures, the
Israeli government quickly refused to re-deploy from the areas agreed at
Wye. The year ended with the peace process suffering from clinical death
and waiting for an early Israeli election in May 1999.

The essential defect in PA practices is its inability (and outright lack of

enthusiasm) to balance between its commitment in the Interim Agreement
to Israel and its commitment to Palestinian society. Although the PA met
its commitments in the peace process, internal structural defects emerged,
particularly as regards the rule of law, respect for human rights, and the
need to create a political system that is based on the concept of the
separation of powers as the necessary foundation for establishing a
democratic Palestinian state. During 1998 the defective aspects in PA
practices remained and were exacerbated. There was a dangerous
deterioration in the rule of law and justice. The High State Security Court is
still working without the minimum standards for holding fair trials. In
February 1998 the PA retired the Chief Justice, who is the President of the
High Court of Justice. The position was still unfilled at the beginning of
1999. Also, in May 1998, the Attorney General resigned from his position
in protest over the non-implementation of his orders. His position remained
unfilled at the beginning of 1999 as well. The year also witnessed the
failure of the Executive Authority to follow court decisions, including those
of the High Court. All of these matters contributed to a deteriorating
judicial system in the Occupied Territories.

The Palestinian security forces continued carrying out illegal arresting

waves against the opposition due to their political opinions. In a new
qualitative escalation, the PA imposed a house arrest on Sheikh Ahmed
Yassin, the founder and spiritual leader of the Islamic Resistance
Movement (Hamas). The year ended without releasing scores of citizens
who were arrested without legal procedures being brought against them. A
number of these detainees have been detained for approximately three
years. In addition, 1998 recorded a number of cases in which detainees
were subjected to different kinds of torture and inhuman treatment by
Palestinian interrogators.

During the year, there was also a decrease in the practice of freedom of
expression and publication. The PA imposed additional restrictions on the
work of journalists and arrested and beat a number of them who were

8
merely carrying out their work. A number of press agency offices were
closed without any legal justification.

Finally, 1998 witnessed clear shortcomings in the Palestinian Legislative

Council (PLC). The PLC did not meet expectations of its role, especially in
legislation, monitoring, and accountability. It was clear that the Executive
Authority was working at marginalizing the Council. In turn, the Council
failed to adopt serious measures to counter the Executive Authority’s
efforts. The situation worsened with the beating of PLC members by the
security forces of the Executive Authority on August 26, 1998 during their
participation in popular protest against the house arrest of the Imad
Awadallah family after Imad escaped from the Jericho jail on August 15,
1998. The year ended without the Executive Authority approving the Basic
Law, which had already been approved by the Legislative Council in its
third draft on October 2, 1997. Furthermore, no election had been held for
Local Councils by the end of the year. Instead, it was deferred to an
uncertain date.

9
 ISRAELI VIOLATIONS OF PALESTINIAN HUMAN RIGHTS

The Israeli Policy of Closure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip

Throughout 1998 Israel continued to implement its policy of closure in the

Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), although limited easing measures
were implemented concerning the movement of individuals and trade into
Israeli territory. The year witnessed a decrease to 21 total closure days from
54 days in 1997. On the remaining days of the year, however, a partial
closure was imposed. During a total closure, Israel completely closes all the
crossing points between the Gaza Strip and Israeli territory to individuals.
Frequently, importing and exporting activities are also forbidden.

When closure is eased to partial closure status, Israel gradually allows

imports and exports, as well as allowing a limited number of Palestinian
workers and traders into Israel. In addition, a limited number of citizens are
allowed to leave the country via Ben Gurion Airport while closure is in
effect.

Closure Update

On October 8, 1998, PCHR published its 22nd update on the policy of

closure imposed on the Gaza Strip. The first issue was published in March
1996. The October publication documents the effects of the closure on all
aspects of life in the Gaza Strip. On September 11, 1998, Israel announced
its tightening of closure measures and canceled all the partial easing
measures it had previously announced. This came after Israel killed the
brothers Imad and Adel Awadallah in Hebron on September 10, 1998. The
brothers had been accused by Israeli security forces of belonging to the
military wing of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) and of
participating in military operations against Israel. According to Israel, its
new closure measures are vital for security purposes in order to prevent any
revenge attacks against Israel.

PCHR restated in the publication its rejection of the Israeli reasoning for
closure as this measure had never prevented military operations in the past.
PCHR considers the policy of closure to be a form of collective punishment
against the Palestinian people in the OPT. Such collective punishment is
prohibited by international law as it constitutes a dangerous violation of
social and economic rights and leads to a continuous deterioration in the
standard of living. PCHR expressed its concern about the failure of the
international community to put a limit on Israel’s use of illegal measures in
the OPT, including the policy of closure which has been used continually
over the last five years. According to Closure Update 22 and other
documentation by PCHR, closure has several major implications on the
lives of Palestinians. These implications are detailed below.

10
1. Prevention of Palestinian Laborers from Working in Israel

The laborers are facing very difficult living and economic conditions as a
result of denying them access to their workplaces in Israel. Depression and
uncertainty dominate the lives of the workers due to constant uncertainty
about their economic futures. On September 11, 1998, Israel once again
prevented Palestinian workers from entering Israel and canceled all the
permits that were valid before that day. At that time, there were 50,000
workers in Israel, half of whom were from Gaza and the other half of
whom were from the West Bank, compared with 150,000 workers before
the policy of closure was implemented in the early 1990s.

The Number of Gazan Workers Issued Permits in 1998

Month Number of Permits Issued

January 23,639
February 23,422
March 23,604
April 23,742
May 23,587
June 24,825
July 25,208
August 25,477
September 25,647
October 25,647
November 23,350
December 25,647

With the tightening of the closure on September 11, Israel announced that it
was canceling all permits and that Palestinian laborers would be unable to
reach their workplaces in Israel. After three days, Israel announced gradual
easing measures and issued new permits to the workers. However, on
September 18, Israel tightened its measures once again and prevented
Palestinians from entering Israel, including those who had been issued new
permits in the last few days. Therefore, once again there were no laborers at
all who were allowed to reach their workplaces. This situation prevailed
until September 22 when those workers with valid permits were allowed to
enter Israeli territory. On October 3, measures were tightened yet again and
this situation continued until the morning of October 14. After this date,
workers were gradually allowed to enter Israel, but by the end of the year
their total number had only reached 48,000, of which 25,647 were from the
Gaza Strip. These details highlight the uncertain future for many
Palestinian families dependent on the salaries of relatives working in Israel.

11
 2. Hardships Faced by Gazan Students in West Bank Universities

For more than 30 months, the Gazan students enrolled in universities and
higher education institutions in the West Bank have suffered as a result of
their inability to enter the West Bank. From February 25 when the strict
closure was imposed until now, Israel has not allowed 1,200 students to go
to the West Bank to study.

On March 12, 1996, Israel announced a military order calling for the
expulsion of all Gazan students from the West Bank back to the Gaza Strip.
On March 28, 1996, Israel launched a wave of arrests of Gazan students
and sent them back to Gaza. Until the end of 1998, the situation remained
the same and the students derived no benefits from the easing measures of
the closure. Although some students did manage to return to the West Bank
without permission, Israel considers the presence of these students illegal
and constantly pursues and harasses them. As a result, these students have
been living in insecure and uncertain circumstances, and are totally cut off
from their families in the Gaza Strip.

3. The Prevention of Gazan Citizens from Receiving Medical Services outside

the Gaza Strip

The Gaza Strip lacks sufficient medical facilities to be able to depend on

itself, due to the fact that the PA inherited a destroyed health infrastructure
as a result of the Israeli negligence over the last three decades. In those
cases that cannot be treated in the Gaza Strip, most Gazans go to
Palestinian hospitals in the West Bank which are considered relatively
more developed, including Jerusalem hospitals, or hospitals in neighboring
Arab countries such as Egypt and Jordan, and even Israeli hospitals. Due to
the policy of closure, strict measures are imposed on the movement of
patients through Israel. In some cases the patients are not allowed to cross
through Israel. This can sometimes lead to fatal medical consequences.
Many patients have died as a result of long delays at checkpoints or
because of Israel’s refusal to issue them permits.1

By introducing some easing measures Israel allows some patients to pass

after granting them the necessary permission, although security
considerations, rather than the state of health of the patient, remain the
basic criteria in deciding whether to accept a request for a permit.
Therefore, a large number of people are denied the right to receive
necessary treatment for unexplained security reasons.
1
See the previous issues of the Closure Update, which include complete documentation of these
cases in the Gaza Strip. In the West Bank, two people died in 1998 as a result of the closure:
1. Qusai Haddad (3 months old from Hebron) died on August 23, 1998 after his mother and
he were denied access to a hospital at a military checkpoint.
2. Houreya Abu Hmaid (40 years old from Hebron) died on September 10, 1998 after she
was denied access to a hospital at a military checkpoint despite the fact that she was giving
birth.

12
The lives of the patients who go to neighboring Arab countries (especially
Jordan) to receive medical treatment are often put at risk, since their
transfer to these countries requires complicated arrangements imposed by
Israel. After getting the necessary permission to pass through Israel, joint
Israeli, Palestinian, and Jordanian coordination is required. Firstly, the
patient is transferred by a Palestinian ambulance containing all the
necessary medical equipment and is accompanied by a doctor and nurse to
Beit Hanoun (Erez) checkpoint, where the patient and his companions are
subjected to a search that can take many hours. Then the ambulance
continues to Al-Karama border crossing to Jordan. Here a new problem
emerges as the Israeli soldiers force the patient to wait in the ambulance,
claiming that the Jordanian ambulance has not yet arrived or that there is no
coordination. After a delay of up to four hours the patient is eventually
allowed to cross the border and enter the Jordanian ambulance.

After the patient receives treatment, the process of bringing him or her back
to Gaza also requires the same Palestinian, Jordanian, and Israeli
coordination. Israeli manipulation emerges again. The Israeli soldiers
normally claim that the Palestinian ambulance has not arrived or they claim
that the necessary coordination between the two sides has not taken place.
The patient must therefore wait long hours. Such delays endanger lives as
most patients receiving medical treatment in Jordan have heart diseases.
After long hours of waiting, some patients are allowed to pass, although
others are required to wait until the following day.

Imposing Restrictions on the Freedom of Movement inside the Gaza

Strip

Although Israeli forces re-deployed from the Gaza Strip in May 1994 as
required by the Interim Agreements, Israel still controls 40 percent of
Gazan land. In addition to Israeli settlements 2, military installations, and
the so-called yellow areas which are under Israeli security control, the
Israeli soldiers are found on the main roads in the Gaza Strip and they
control the movement of citizens in different areas. Citizens are subjected
daily to searches and are stopped for many hours at Tufah and Al-Sultan
checkpoints. These checkpoints are located at the entrance to Rafah and
Khan Younis agricultural areas, which are under Israeli control. In many
cases, these two checkpoints are closed and citizens are not allowed to
pass, including approximately 3,000 students, some of whom are in
elementary school. This leaves them unable to go to school or, on other
occasions, to return home from school.

From time to time, Israel closes main roads, especially in areas located near
the settlements, such as the coast road connecting the north and south of the
Gaza Strip. This restricts the movement of citizens considerably and forces

2
The settlement activities and settler practices will be discussed on pages 26-33 of this report.

13
them to use difficult minor and unpaved roads. These measures violate
international agreements that guarantee freedom of movement for citizens
and violate the Interim Agreement which asserted the right of Palestinian
citizens to use these roads. On many occasions, the closures have led to
clashes between Palestinians and Israeli soldiers and settlers. For example,
on July 2, 1998, Israeli military vehicles blocked the road for
approximately 40 Palestinian cars carrying about 100 citizens, including
the Minister of Supply, Abdel Aziz Shaheen. This incident occurred in
front of the beach area of Gush Katif settlement which is situated beside the
coast road. The Israeli military vehicles prevented the Minister’s car from
heading toward Gaza City. Additional Israeli troops arrived and tried to
force the Palestinian cars to turn back and pass through the nearest route,
which was approximately 700 meters away. The Israeli soldiers asked them
to take another more difficult route which was approximately three
kilometers longer. The Palestinian citizens gathered in a peaceful sit-in,
insisting that they be allowed to pass. Challenging this, the Israelis
cordoned off part of the road and denied access to citizens and journalists.
Negotiations took place between the Palestinian and Israeli officials to
reach an agreement to open the road to traffic. Israel refused. As a result, a
number of citizens went to the main north-south road and made a barrier of
lorries at the entrances and exits to the settlements, which prevented settlers
from using the roads. The areas affected were the entrance to Gush Katif,
the exit of Kosevim, the exit of Netzarim, and the exit of Moraj settlement.
As a result, Israel sent a large number of soldiers and military vehicles in
an attempt to open the blocked areas. A great deal of tension resulted. Israel
imposed a comprehensive closure on the Gaza Strip, closing all entrances
to Israel and the Rafah border. This tense situation continued until 3:30 the
next day (July 3, 1998) when the problem was solved and the situation
returned to “normal.” Nevertheless, the north-south road remained closed
for a few days.

Torture and Ill-treatment of Palestinian Prisoners in Israel

Despite the relatively peaceful atmosphere that has dominated the area
since the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles in
September 1993, there are still almost 2,500 Palestinian detainees in Israeli
jails and detention centers. This number is not final due to the constant
waves of arrests in areas under Israeli jurisdiction, at the Israeli Ben Gurion
Airport, at border crossings with Egypt and Jordan (as Israel still controls
security there), and on the borders between Palestine and Israel.

The Palestinian citizens living in PA-controlled areas are not exempt from
arrest by the Israeli authorities. In a dangerous development, the Israeli
military command issued two military orders in 1997 in which the
responsibility for non-compliance with Israeli military orders in PA-
controlled areas was granted to the Israeli military court.

14
In 1998 Israel arrested more than 500 citizens from the Gaza Strip,
compared to 400 in 1997.3 This number includes 100 Gazans who were
arrested at the border crossings with Jordan and Egypt, at Ben Gurion
Airport, at Erez checkpoint in Gaza, and in the areas close to the Israeli
settlements in Gaza. The other detainees were arrested inside Israel for not
having permits.4

Table Indicating the Number and Place of Arrest of Detainees

from the Gaza Strip in 19985

Number of Detainees Area of Arrest

39 Rafah border entrance
3 Al-Karama border entrance
11 Ben Gurion Airport
19 Near Gaza settlements
29 Erez checkpoint (despite having permission)

Israel’s imprisonment of Palestinians in jails and detention centers inside

its territory is a clear violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.
In addition to the inhumane living conditions in prisons, many Palestinian
detainees are subjected to torture and ill-treatment by Israel. Indeed, Israel
is the only state in the world to have legalized torture. In 1998 four
Palestinian detainees died in Israeli jails as a result of the terrible
conditions and lack of medical care. It is believed that one of these deaths
was a result of torture.6 Palestinian detainees are banned from receiving
regular family visits. In addition, Israel does not allow Gazan lawyers to
visit the detainees in order to provide them with legal assistance.

In 1998 Israel failed once again to implement the legal commitments that it
agreed to in the Interim Agreement concerning the release of detainees.
From the 250 political detainees that should have been released in the first
stage of Wye River, Israel released on November 20, 1998 approximately
100 Palestinian political detainees, 17 of whom were from the Gaza Strip.
The majority of them had almost completed their jail sentences. In addition,
Israel released 150 Palestinian detainees who were arrested as a result of
criminal, rather than political issues. This matter has exacerbated the
3
Israel does not announce the number of arrests it makes, although this number can be determined
through the documentation of the Israeli military court in the Gaza Strip. Up until December 7,
1998, there were 544 trials in the files from the start of the year. In many cases, the same file
includes more than one detainee. The more than 500 citizens arrested include only the cases that
were documented by PCHR’s Field Work Unit. Most of these cases were followed up by the Legal
Unit in the Centre.
4
These detainees were brought before the Israeli military court and their punishments ranged from
fines to jail sentences of three months. It is clear, however, that this very fact undermines the
Israeli official pretext that the closure of the Occupied Territories was imposed to prevent suicide
operations against Israelis. Bearing in mind that hundreds of ordinary Palestinian citizens have
been able to infiltrate to Israel to seek employment, it is illogical to believe that closure deters
individuals committed to suicide bombings in Israel.
5
This number does not include the detainees who were arrested inside Israel for having no permit.
6
For more details about this case, see page 6 of this report.

15
 feeling of depression among the Palestinian people, which led to
confrontations between the Palestinians and the Israeli forces. Four
Palestinian civilians were killed and hundreds more injured, some
seriously. On the evening of December 5, 1998, Palestinian detainees
announced an open hunger strike in protest of their ongoing arrest.

Deaths of Detainees in Israeli Prisons

During 1998 four Palestinian detainees died in Israeli jails, three of them
from the Gaza Strip and the fourth from the West Bank. In two of these
cases, there is evidence of medical negligence as the reason for death. In
the other two cases, Israel claims the detainees committed suicide. PCHR is
still following up one of these supposed suicides but has yet to receive the
pathologist’s report. In the other case, it is thought that the victim was
subjected to torture as the pathologist who examined the body found no
signs of suicide.

1. Nidal Zekaria Abu Surur (19 years old from Bethlehem)

He died on January 29, 1998 in Hadassah Hospital (in Ein Karem,
Jerusalem), after being moved from Maskubia Detention Center in
Jerusalem. He had been arrested on January 6, 1996, and it is thought that
he was subjected to torture that severely damaged his health, although the
Israeli authorities claimed he slipped on a bar of soap in the shower. When
his family visited him in the hospital he was unconscious until he died. The
Israeli authorities claimed that he hanged himself. The Palestinian
pathologist rejected this and stated that there was no evidence that the
detainee tried to hang himself.

2. Yusef Diab El-Areer (60 years old from Gaza City)

He died on June 21, 1998 in the hospital of El-Ramleh prison where he had
been moved from Tel-Hashomer Hospital in Israel after heart surgery.
PCHR believes there is strong reason to believe that he died due to
negligence in El-Ramleh prison hospital. An investigation of his death
from a neutral party was requested by PCHR. This has not occurred as of
yet.7

3. Jamal Hassan Al-Khamisi (33 years old from El-Maghazi refugee

camp in the Gaza Strip)
He died on July 26, 1998 in Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza, five days after his
release from prison as a result of a deterioration in his health. PCHR had
asked for the provision of the necessary medical treatment as well as for his
release on humanitarian grounds many times in the past. Al-Khamisi had
been suffering from cancer of the liver.8

7
For complete details about this incident, see pages 21-22 of this report.
8
For more details, see page 23 of this report.

16
4. Ahmed Fayez Asfour (23 years old from Khan Younis in the Gaza
Strip)
He died in Soroka Hospital in Israel on October 4, 1998 after being moved
from Beersheva jail. The Israeli authorities claimed that he tried to commit
suicide and that they moved him to the hospital after discovering this.
PCHR held Israel responsible for his death as a result of his ongoing
incarceration beyond the length of his sentence. PCHR asked for an
investigation into his death as it is suspicious of Israeli claims. PCHR,
representing the family of the deceased, has not yet received the
pathologist’s report.9

Administrative Detention

Administrative detention is the mechanism that has been used by the Israeli
forces in the last 30 years to arrest any member of the public without
charge or trial. The arrest order is issued by the Israeli District Military
Commander in Palestinian controlled areas in the Gaza Strip and the West
Bank, excluding Jerusalem, where the orders are issued through the Israeli
Defense Minister, as in other areas over which it considers itself to have
sovereignty. Administrative detention measures do not follow correct
judicial procedures, which are asserted by international agreement. In a
clear violation of human rights the detainee is barred from his right to a fair
trial, from knowing what he is accused of, and from his right to have
suitable defense.

Administrative detention violates the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949

which asserts that this kind of arrest must not be used as a means of
punishment, but only in exceptional cases as a last resort (Article 78). The
Israeli forces, however, use administrative detention in a routine way as
thousands of Palestinian citizens are subjected to this punishment for
periods of up to four years. Currently, there are about 100 administrative
detainees, including Osama Burhum, who has been detained since
September 1994. His detention is continually renewed. Like other
detainees, administrative detainees are in prisons in Israeli areas. This is
another violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention as it prohibits an
occupying country from moving detainees from the OPT.

In 1998 Israel issued administrative detention orders to two citizens in the

Gaza Strip living in PA-controlled areas.10 This very fact infringes on
Palestinian control of security in areas under the jurisdiction of the PA.

9
For more details, see PCHR’s press release on page 24 of this report.
10
See the details about these two detainees in PCHR’s press releases on pages 19-20 and page 24
of this report.

17
 Legal Aid Provided by PCHR for the Detainees in Israeli Jails

The Legal Aid Unit has continued its work of providing legal services for
detainees. Four lawyers are working in this unit and handle daily
complaints from the families of the detainees. The Legal Aid Unit provides
them with legal consultations. Moreover, the unit intervenes before Israeli
courts on behalf of detainees. However, Israel refuses to allow Palestinian
lawyers from the Gaza Strip to visit the prisons and detention centers or to
defend their clients in Israeli courts. Therefore, the unit depends on Israeli
lawyers to follow up tens of files. The unit also coordinates its work
through cooperation with various human rights organizations in Israel.

During 1998 the number of detainees in Israeli prisons that were followed
up by the unit in the Centre reached 62 cases. The total service of the unit
in 1998 can be summarized as follows:

• The place of arrest for all the detainees was determined and their
families were informed.
• Israeli lawyers at the request of PCHR visited all the detainees.
• In nine cases, lawyers went to court to object to the ill-treatment and
use of torture directed against detainees during interrogation.
• Lawyers went to court to raise objections to the renewal of the
period of custody of four detainees.
• Forty detainees were defended in Israeli military courts.
• Objections were raised regarding preventing detainees’ families
from attending the trials in two cases.
• Objections were raised regarding preventing the lawyers from
visiting clients in four cases.
• Twenty-three detainees whose cases were followed by PCHR have
been released.
• Four detainees whose cases have been followed by PCHR have been
released on bail.
• Seventeen detainees whose cases have been followed by PCHR have
been put on trial.

Humanitarian Aid for Detainees

The Centre provides small financial assistance to a number of detainees in

Israeli prisons to cover personal expenditures (pocket money) in prison. As
a result of limited financial resources, this aid is limited to those in urgent
need of such funding.

Poster for the Detainees

Among its support activities for detainees, PCHR prepared a special poster
reflecting their suffering, their hopes, and their dreams of freedom. This
poster was distributed locally and internationally on the anniversary of

18
Palestinian Prisoners’ Day on April 17. The poster was drawn by a
Palestinian artist and was aimed at gathering local and international support
for the detainees’ request for freedom and to raise awareness of their just
cause.

Press Releases Issued by PCHR about Palestinian and Arab Prisoners Held in
Israeli Occupation Prisons

January 13, 1998

The Centre published a press release about the permission given to the
interrogators in the General Security Service (Shabak) by the Israeli High
Court to use torture methods against Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons.
The Israeli High Court convened on January 12, 1998 and discussed the
appeal to stop torture against the detainee Abdel Rahman Ghunimat from
Surif village in Hebron. Ghunimat was accused of being a member of
Hamas’ military wing, Izz Eddin Al-Qassam. Unexpectedly, the court
convened a meeting with a commission made up of nine judges to consider
the request to stop torture against the detainees. After discussion, the court
issued its decision allowing the General Security Service officers to
continue using torture against Ghunimat. The decision of the commission
was five in favor and four against the use of torture. The decision allowed
the officers to use methods of torture, such as shabeh (keeping the
detainees in the same position for long periods of time), sleep deprivation,
continuously subjecting them to loud music, and putting dirty bags on
detainees’ heads. In addition, they are allowed to use the method of violent
shaking that led to the death of Abdel Samad Horayzat on April 25, 1995.

The press release considered the approval of the Israeli High Court to
legalize torture once again to be a shameful action. It proves that the
cooperation between the different Israeli authorities makes the law and
those responsible for executing it in the service of the intelligence
department to be without any ethics. The press release mentioned that
Israel is the only country in the world that legitimizes torture and provides
it with the veneer of legality. Moreover, the press release considers the
decision of the High Court to be a clear violation of human rights principles
and norms.

January 13, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the Israeli government’s renewed
policy of administrative detention for the citizens of Gaza. On October 2,
1997, Israeli security forces arrested Ashraf Ata Ahmed Qandil at Rafah
border as he was leaving for Egypt where he is studying for a degree in
history. On November 19, 1997, after interrogating him, and after it was
proven that there was nothing against him, he was detained for six months.

19
The press release asserted that administrative detention carried out by
Israeli security services contradicts the Fourth Geneva Convention
regarding the protection of civilians in times of war. Article 78 from the
Convention asserts that administrative detention must not be used in any
case as an instrument of punishment, save in exceptional cases with
specific reasons. Moreover, anyone arrested by Israeli occupation forces
must not be moved to a prison in the land of the occupying country. The
Fourth Geneva Convention gives particular concern to the treatment that
detainees must enjoy in comparison with normal detainees, especially when
the exceptional reasons for their arrests are taken into consideration.

The press release asserted that the Israeli forces failed to fulfill the above-
mentioned criteria since administrative detention is practiced as a form of
collective punishment. The number of detainees throughout the years of
occupation, especially in the Intifada, proved that this was a routine
measure and a form of collective punishment. In addition, the press release
asserted that what was done was illegal and that the correct legal
procedures had not been followed.

The press release also introduced the circumstances surrounding the

administrative detainees as they were deprived of their right to receive
family visits. They were further subjected to the use of illegal force from
the soldiers. This treatment accompanied the prisoners deteriorating health
and their inferior diet. It can be said with full confidence that the minimum
criteria for operating a prison that were adopted by the United Nations in
1955 are not being respected.

The press release further explained that the arrest of Ashraf Qandil
exacerbated a dangerous and serious situation since he is living in an area
within the PA’s legal jurisdiction which means that only the PA has the
right to judge him. Therefore, if there is any reason to arrest him, the PA
should arrest him, not the Israeli government, as he has not done anything
to harm Israel or its citizens, and he has not been proven guilty of any
actions, even by an Israeli court. Israel’s actions were carried out in a
manner giving it extra-territorial jurisdiction as it assumed the right to
arrest whomever it wanted, whenever, and wherever.

The press release condemned the administrative detention of Ashraf Qandil

and asked the Israeli government to release him and all the administrative
detainees immediately as their arrests were illegal. These arrests have to be
followed up judicially. Moreover, the press release renews the Centre’s
appeal for the international community, through the countries that signed
the Fourth Geneva Convention, to work on the release of all the
administrative detainees and to implement its commitments to international
law through respect for the Fourth Geneva Convention articles.

20
March 15, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the decision of the Israeli military court
in Erez to release Ashraf Nasrallah on bail. Nasrallah was born in 1972 and
finished his studies in Syria in 1997. He was arrested at the Rafah border
while he was returning to Gaza after graduating in law. The Centre
received details of this issue and asked an Israeli lawyer to follow up this
issue. The lawyer asked for his release on bail due to lack of evidence
against him. The military prosecutor had forwarded his list against
Nasrallah and accused him of belonging to an illegal organization and
providing services for it. The decision to release him on bail was issued by
the military court in Erez.

The press release explained that the Israeli authorities since April 8, 1996
have been prohibiting 500 Gazan lawyers from visiting prisons and
detention centers to see their clients.

April 17, 1998

PCHR issued a press release on Palestinian Prisoners’ Day. The press

release presented the circumstances of arrest faced by almost 2,500
detainees in occupation prisons and detention centers. Among these nearly
2,500 detainees, approximately 200 detainees are under 18 years old and
more than 500 of the total suffer from various diseases. The detainees are
living in very difficult circumstances as a result of the policy adopted by
the Israeli prison administration. Israel’s harsh practices increased after the
signing of the peace agreement between the Israeli government and the
PLO. Such practices constitute a clear violation of international law at a
time in which an atmosphere of peace should prevail. The release of
detainees must be implemented as an obligation of the peace process. The
government of Israel has not only denied what it has signed but also is
trying to destroy humanitarian values by adopting extremely harsh and
unimaginable measures in a clear violation of prisoners’ rights in a way
that turns them into little more than bargaining chips.

The press release appealed to the international community, especially the

High Contracting Parties (HCPs) to the Fourth Geneva Convention and the
sponsors of the peace process, to put pressure on the Israeli government to
commit itself to human rights. In particular, the press release called for the
immediate release of Palestinian and Arab detainees so that they can
participate in building their state. The “peace process” has become
meaningless as long as Palestinian and Arab detainees are still in prison. It
is not possible that the Israeli violations of international law, the failure to
implement what was agreed, and the Israeli refusal to commit itself to the
peace process could continue without the ongoing international silence.

21
 June 22, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the death of Palestinian prisoner Yusef
El-Areer on June 21, 1998 at Ramleh prison hospital in Israel, 10 hours
after being transferred from the hospital where he had undergone bypass
surgery a month earlier. PCHR concluded that there were strong reasons to
believe that his death resulted from negligence on the part of the staff in
Ramleh prison hospital and demanded an investigation.

Yusef El-Areer was born in Gaza in 1938, was arrested three times by
Israeli authorities, first in 1968, at which time he was sentenced to five
years in prison, second in 1974, at which time he was sentenced to 14 years
in prison, and again in 1978, at which time he was sentenced to 12 years in
prison. El-Areer was afflicted by heart disease and was transferred from
Ashkelon prison to Tel-Hashomer Hospital near Tel Aviv where he
underwent heart surgery on May 18 without the knowledge of his family.

According to family sources, the family was informed of the surgery only
on June 4, at which time El-Areer was in intensive care. His family visited
him after intervention from the International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC). His wife was able to visit him on June 21 due to the intervention
of ICRC. El-Areer’s wife informed PCHR that she spoke with her husband
for more than an hour and that he was stable and in good health. However,
on the same day he was transferred at 11 a.m. to Ramleh prison hospital,
where he died approximately 10 hours after his arrival. PCHR issued the
following comments on the El-Areer case:

1. Dr. Salim Haji Yehyia, the surgeon who performed the surgery
informed PCHR that the patient was in stable condition, but that he had
to remain in the hospital until his condition improved. Dr. Yehyia
expressed anger when he was informed about the death of his patient.
2. His wife and family were informed of the operation only two weeks
later. His wife was not allowed to visit him until ICRC intervened.
Despite the humanitarian nature of the circumstances and the medical
condition of El-Areer, his wife was not allowed to pay him regular
visits. These Israeli practices should be condemned worldwide. PCHR
reiterates its warning and the warnings of all human rights
organizations regarding the rights of prisoners and patients, such as the
right to receive regular family visits.
3. Human rights organizations have been focusing on ill-treatment and the
lack of medical care in prisons and hospitals which has led to the death of
many prisoners. The death of El-Areer raises questions about the
circumstances and cause of his death, especially in light of the information
released by his doctor at Tel-Hashomer Hospital.

Consequently, PCHR demands urgent intervention from the international

community and demands the formation of an international committee to

22
investigate the circumstances of deaths and living conditions of prisoners in
Israel, especially medical patients.

July 15, 1998

PCHR issued a press release protesting the continued detention of Jamal

Hassan Al-Khamisi, a resident of El-Maghazi who had been detained since
September 1989 and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. PCHR demanded
his immediate release due to his very critical condition. The press release
stated that Al-Khamisi suffers from liver cancer and that according to his
doctor he is expected to live for only four more months.

Two months ago, Al-Khamisi was transferred from the central prison, Abu
Kabir, to Ramleh prison hospital after he was diagnosed with cancer.
PCHR demanded his immediate release with Israeli guarantees to provide
him with proper medical treatment and freedom of movement to receive
medical attention in Israeli hospitals. Furthermore, PCHR holds the Israeli
prison administration responsible for the deterioration of Al-Khamisi’s
health due to its failure to detect his condition earlier. This situation is
reminiscent of the case of Yusef El-Areer, who died on June 21, 1998 at
Ramleh prison hospital in circumstances also resulting from medical
negligence.

July 27, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about Jamal Al-Khamisi’s death just four days
after his release on July 21 from the military hospital in Ramleh prison due
to his deterioration in health. Al-Khamisi was originally detained on
September 25, 1989 and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. PCHR had
previously criticized the continued detention of Al-Khamisi because of the
deterioration in his health. The Centre condemned the practice of detaining
sick prisoners and reaffirmed the necessity of the immediate release of all
of them. PCHR condemned the fact that Palestinian prisoners are often
used as political bargaining chips.

In the press release, PCHR held the Israeli prison authorities and medical
administration responsible for the death of Al-Khamisi due to their delay in
diagnosing and treating him. This is the second case of death in just over
one month. Yusef El-Areer died on June 21, 1998 as a result of medical
negligence. PCHR asked for an independent international committee to
investigate these two deaths. It also asked the international committee to
pressure Israel to release all prisoners, especially those who are ill, to
pressure Israel to discontinue its negligence in the case of the Palestinian
detainees, and to pressure Israel to cease using them as bargaining chips.
Such treatment has harmful ramifications that can lead to the mental and
physical deterioration of prisoners and is in violation of the provisions of
the Fourth Geneva Convention and other relevant instruments.

23
September 15, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about a military order placing citizens from
the Gaza Strip under administrative detention. On August 31, a military
order was issued by Yom Tov Samya, the Israeli Military Commander of
the Gaza Strip placing Salah Mustapha Shehada, 45 years old, resident of
Beit Hanoun, and father of six children, under administrative detention for
a period of six months starting on September 1. Shehada had been serving a
10-year sentence that was due to finish on the final day of August 1998.
The administrative detention order was issued against him a few days
before the expiration of his term of imprisonment. It is noteworthy that this
is the second military order to be issued against Gazans in 1998. On April
23, 1998, Moeyn Abu Fannouneh, arrested at Rafah border on December
30, 1997 was placed under administrative detention for six months just
after he had finished a term of four months in prison. He was released on
July 1 after an appeal by attorney Tamar Peleg. Another military order was
issued against Ashraf Qandil, a resident of Gaza who had been detained on
October 2, 1998 while leaving Gaza through the Rafah crossing point.
Qandil served a six-month term of administrative detention between
November 1997 and April 1998. After a period of interrogation and torture
by the security services, there was no proven accusation against him, yet
his detention period was renewed on November 19, 1997.

October 5, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the death of Palestinian prisoner,

Ahmed Asfour, in an Israeli jail. Asfour was reported dead on October 4,
1998 at Soroka Hospital in Israel. On September 28, his family received a
call from a prisoner at Beersheva prison who told them that Asfour had
attempted suicide and was transferred to the hospital. On October 1, an
ICRC representative visited him in hospital and said he found him
unconscious. On October 4, ICRC communicated that he had died.

Asfour was a resident in Yemen and came on a visit permit to Gaza in

October 1995 and did not leave the area in due time. On December 9, 1997,
he was detained by Israeli authorities while attempting to enter Israel
without a permit in order to work. He was sentenced to six months in jail.
This period should have finished on June 16, 1998, but since then he has
remained in prison. PCHR considers Israeli authorities responsible for this
death as after June 16 he remained in prison illegally. Taking into
consideration similar cases, PCHR does not accept the suicide of Ahmed
Asfour as the cause of death and thus urges an immediate investigation of
the case.

24
October 5, 1998

PCHR issued a press release appealing to the international community to

put pressure on Israel to release prisoner Yasser El-Muazzen. In its press
release, PCHR expressed its deep concern about the ongoing imprisonment
of the 25-year-old resident of El-Yarmouk camp in Syria. He was arrested
in Lebanon in 1989 by Israel and was sentenced to 25 years in prison.

A few years ago, El-Muazzen was suffering from severe pain and was
checked by the doctor and given medication for blood pressure problems.
On August 2, 1998, he was transferred to Barzeli Hospital in Israel after his
condition deteriorated to the extent that his life was in danger. He was
diagnosed as having malfunctioning kidneys and was given blood
transfusions three times per week. In spite of this treatment, the prisoner’s
condition did not improve and he remained in urgent need of a kidney
transplant. Despite the fact that many of his fellow prisoners and members
of his family were willing to be donors, Israel refused to allow him to have
this vital surgery or to release him. He is now at Ramleh prison hospital on
a permanent basis due to his life-threatening condition. In addition to this,
he is completely disconnected from his family and unable to receive visits
from them.

The press release stated that keeping El-Muazzen in prison without

allowing him vital treatment is in fact sentencing him to death. The press
release demanded that the Israeli government immediately allow this life-
saving surgery to be carried out and that he be released from prison.
Moreover, PCHR expressed deep concern about the lack of health
treatment given to Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons. This negligence
has in the past resulted in the death of many Palestinians in Israeli prisons.

Accordingly, PCHR appealed to the international community and to

international human rights organizations to pressure the Israeli government
to allow El-Muazzen’s surgery and his immediate release. 11

December 6, 1998

PCHR issued a press release expressing its solidarity with Palestinian and
Arab prisoners participating in an open hunger strike. On December 5,
1998, Palestinian and Arab prisoners in Israeli prisons began the hunger
strike. This is the only choice left to almost 2,500 Palestinian and Arab
detainees following the continuation of their imprisonment and the Israeli
refusal to release them. Although a peaceful atmosphere should prevail in
the area, the Israeli government is putting the entire region in danger as a
result of its policies. These policies are contrary to the spirit of peace and
violate the basic rules of international law. The press release maintained
that the release of the prisoners should be one of the main outcomes of the
11
Although the health of the detainee has deteriorated, he is still under arrest.

25
peace process. As a result of the end of the state of war between Israel and
the PLO, there is no justification for the continued incarceration of
Palestinian prisoners. The entire file of Palestinian political prisoners
should be closed forever if there is to be any chance of real peace.
Moreover, the press release asserted that the lives of the prisoners are at
risk as many of them are already gravely ill. The Israeli policy of refusing
to release them from prison means that Israel will keep them as hostages
for political bargaining. The press release asserted its full support for the
just demands of Arab and Palestinian political prisoners and added that
they should be immediately released without being subjected to any further
bargaining. In addition, it held the Israeli government fully responsible for
all consequences related to the ongoing hunger strike. At the same time, it
demanded that the U.S. government, if it wants to be effective in pushing
the peace process forward, should endeavor to ensure the full and
immediate release of Arab and Palestinian prisoners.

The Settlements, the Settlers’ Practices, and the Settlers’ Protection

by the Occupation Forces in the Gaza Strip

The number of Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip is 18. Some of these
settlements have no more than 10 people in them. The total number of
settlers in the Gaza Strip is 5,000 and most of the settlements are situated in
strategic locations such as those having areas with water resources and
fertile land. The existence of the Israeli settlements in the Occupied
Territories is an illegal one imposed by Israel through its control of the area
in the last three decades. In addition to manipulative Israeli practices to
control Palestinian private property and to control the property of citizens
who were outside the OPT before 1967 or who were forced to leave the
country after that day (this land became known as absentees’ property and
is subject to control by Israeli forces), Israeli forces allocated public land
for settlements instead of making it available to serve Palestinian civilians
in the OPT. No one can argue either at a local or international level that
these are illegal measures and constitute a challenge to UN resolutions and
international law with regard to the settlements.

In fact, the Israeli settlement activities and the blocking of these activities
in the OPT was one of the basic requests for the continuation of the peace
process that took place in Madrid in 1991. According to Article 31 of the
Interim Israeli-Palestinian Agreement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip
signed in Washington on September 28, 1995, neither party can take
unilateral action that may influence the status of the West Bank and Gaza
Strip in the interim period until that status is decided in the final status
negotiations. Israel did manage to protect its own prior unilateral and
illegal settlement activities by having the Agreement stipulate that
settlements would not be a subject for discussion until the final status
negotiations. Consequently, more than 150 settlements in the Occupied
Territories were kept off the negotiating table. It was thought to be

26
 understood, however, that no new settlement activities would be carried out
in the Occupied Territories.

The Israeli authorities have never committed themselves to freezing the

settlements. In August 1996, the Likud government, one that is still in
power, decided to cancel the decision to freeze settlements which had been
taken by the Labor government in June 1992 under international pressure. 12

The government of Israel continued expanding settlements and establishing

new ones and establishing bypass roads to connect the settlements to Israeli
land, claiming that such bypass roads were necessary within the context of
the Israeli redeployment process. For this purpose the Israeli forces
continue to confiscate and steal Palestinian land.

In the last few years the Israeli settlement activities led to many clashes
with Palestinians in various areas who reject settlement policy. In addition,
the peace process reached an impasse on many occasions before the two
sides returned to the negotiating table after interventions from the
American administration. In all the agreements reached, the two sides
agreed that no one would take any unilateral measures that might influence
the final status negotiations. Important affirmations regarding unilateral
measures were made in the Wye River Memorandum that was signed in the
White House by PA President Yasser Arafat, Israeli Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu, and American President Bill Clinton on October 23,
1998. Yet before the ink was dry, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Foreign
Minister Ariel Sharon renewed their commitment to settlement activities.
The bulldozers did not stop bulldozing in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Settlement Activities in the Gaza Strip in 1998

The Centre continued to follow up and document the settlements and the
settlers’ activities in 1998. Also documented were the soldiers’ activities
against Palestinian lands and Palestinian citizens in the Gaza Strip. The
most prominent of these measures were the following:

1. On January 3, 1998, two settlers sprayed chemicals on olive trees

within the jurisdiction of Rafah municipality at the border between Israel
and Sufa entrance. The owner of the land is Abdullah Geroun. This is not
the first time that this sort of action has occurred.
2. On January 5, 1998, a number of settlers from Neve Dekalim settlement
under strict protection from Israeli soldiers bulldozed 325 dunums of land
beside Khan Younis agricultural area, owned by the brothers Mohammed
and Mustapha Al-Farra. This sort of action is a first step to exercising
control over the land and annexing it to the Neve Dekalim settlement on the

12
Even the Labor government that made the decision did not commit itself to it. In this regard, see
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, A Comprehensive Survey of Settlement Activity in the Gaza
Strip, Gaza Strip, 1996.

27
 west side. On February 12, 1998, a number of settlers from this settlement,
with strict protection from the soldiers, tried to surround the area with
barbed wire. On May 3, 1998, Israeli bulldozers from Neve Dekalim
settlement bulldozed the same land for four days in order to control it.
3. On January 21, 1998, a settler under strict protection from Israeli
soldiers bulldozed public lands to the west of Khan Younis, beside Neve
Dekalim settlement, as a step to control it.
4. On February 11, 1998, and under strict protection, an Israeli bulldozer
destroyed a wall (24x16 meters) in the agricultural area in Rafah that is
owned by Mohammed El-Nada.
5. On February 20, 1998, an expansion in Tel Gatif settlement took place.
In addition, bulldozing occurred on the internal road of the settlement.
Moreover, the arrival of military support to Gush Katif settlement was
noticed.
6. On February 20, 1998, olive trees were damaged as a result of being
sprayed with unknown chemicals by settlers on the Israeli border.
7. On March 14, 1998, one of the settlers living in Netzer Hezani
settlement attacked a citizen, Mohammed Saied Dahmas, age 17 from Deir
El-Baleh. He beat him and stole one of his lambs.
8. On March 19, 1998, the Israeli soldiers uprooted olive trees planted on
Tel Zorub lands. This land is under the threat of confiscation and
approximately 50 trees have been affected.
9. On May 1, 1998, a car driven by a settler in a very fast manner crashed
into citizen Hani Salah Abu Hajaj (18 years old from Khan Younis City),
while he was walking alongside the road that is used by the settlers. He was
killed in the accident.
10. On May 5, 1998, Israeli military cars and bulldozers destroyed plants
and the watering network owned by Suleiman Adil Zorab, 58 years old.
This land comprises six dunums and is planted with sweet potatoes at the
Rafah seaside. The losses totaled 30,000 NIS.
11. On May 11, 1998 and under the justification of removing garbage,
Israeli bulldozers bulldozed the land beside Kfar Darom settlement in the
first step to annexing it to the settlement. The bulldozed land is considered
to be public land.
12. On May 11, 1998, settlers and military bulldozers opened a road
parallel to the main road between Khan Younis and the agricultural area of
Mawasi. The settlers removed the barbed wire from around Neve Dekalim
settlement as a primary step to annexing the land.
13. On May 14, 1998, Israeli bulldozers bulldozed 15 dunums of land
beside Moraj settlement and transferred it to a military installation. These
15 dunums are owned by Rafah resident Hamdan Sultan Munir.
14. On May 18, 1998, Israeli forces informed Abdullah (75 years old),
Faiq (49 years old), and Mohammed Hamed Al Najjar (45 years old) that
their land is Israeli state property and they have no right to act upon it. This
land is located in Khan Younis agricultural area (Mawasi).
15. On May 30, 1998, Israeli forces prohibited Naim El-Qidreh, 57 years
old, living to the west of Kfar Darom, from building on his land near the

28
 settlement. The soldiers threatened that anything built on the land would be
demolished.
16. On June 16, 1998, Israel prohibited the Public Works Ministry workers
from building a 600-meter-long wall for the protection of the boats at
Rafah beach.
17. On July 7, 1998, Israeli bulldozers from Neve Dekalim settlement,
under the protection of five soldiers, bulldozed five dunums in Khan
Younis agricultural area. The land is owned by the inheritors of Abdullah
Al-Najjar and was bulldozed as a primary step to annex and control it.
18. On November 12, 1998, the settlers of Kfar Darom, located on a public
road (Salah Eddin Street), bulldozed in order to establish a new water line
along the roundabout road that leads to their greenhouses, located about 1.5
kilometers from the settlement. The water line passes through a yellow
area, with a length of 160 meters under jurisdiction of the PA. The Israeli
side has not coordinated with the Palestinian side on this issue.
19. On November 17, 1998, an Israeli military car prevented Yusef
Othman Sumeiri from improving agricultural land owned by him of 29
dunums in El-Qarara area, along the way to Kossivim inside the green line,
claiming that land located within 75 meters of the road is under Israeli
security control.
20. On November 19, 1998, a number of Israeli soldiers in a military
installation near Tel Zorub removed some apple and guava trees from five
dunums of land inside the yellow area alongside the Israeli-Egyptian
border. The soldiers also damaged a portion of the water pipes in an area
owned by Hamdi Maadi.
21. On November 26, 1998, an Israeli bulldozer, under the protection of
Israeli soldiers, bulldozed lands under Israeli jurisdiction, according to the
Oslo Accord. This land runs for 50 meters alongside Netzer Hazani
settlement. This action is considered as a primary step in opening a new
road of one kilometer in length to connect El-Qarara junction and the
Palestinian Grinding Companies. This road should be an alternative for the
bulldozers that go to and from the Grinding Companies through the
Grinders junction leading to Gush Katif settlement.
22. The occupation bulldozers continued their widespread activities,
including on approximately 350 dunums of land number 92/5 from lands in
Khan Younis alongside Neve Dekalim settlement. These bulldozing
activities started on January 5, 1998. After PCHR intervention with the
Israeli High Court of Justice the bulldozing activities stopped temporarily.
The bulldozing began again on October 29 and continued for the rest of the
year.
23. On December 2, 1998, the occupation bulldozers began new
bulldozing work and activity on 150 dunums of land located in Rafah
Mawasi alongside the north side of Peat Sadeh settlement. This action is a
preliminary step for confiscating and controlling the site.
24. On December 6, 1998, the occupation bulldozers undertook bulldozing
alongside the road connecting the Gush Katif settlement and the west of

29
 Bedolah settlement (Rafah Mawasi) in an area of approximately 30 dunums
located in Rafah Mawasi.
25. On December 6, 1998, an Israeli bulldozer bulldozed land of about five
dunums planted with fruit-bearing trees and located alongside the border
with Egypt in Tel Zorub area (Rafah).
26. On December 19, 1998, sewage coming from three Israeli settlements
(Peat Sadeh, Gan-Or, and Bedolah) flooded 25 dunums of Palestinian
agricultural land. The sewage from the Israeli settlements is a major
environmental issue in the Gaza Strip. Sewage sites are deliberately placed
in close proximity to Palestinian communities and agricultural land. The
sites jeopardize the health conditions in these locations.
27. Throughout the year, Israeli occupation authorities continued stealing
sand from Mawasi Rafah. During the last two months of the year an
abnormally high level of vehicles was noted transferring sand from Gaza to
inside Israel through the settlements of Bedolah and Beni Adsunah that are
located to the west of Rafah and Khan Younis cities. In addition to its
influence in changing the geographical aspects of the land, this undertaking
is considered to be part of the organized process of stealing Palestinian
natural resources by the Israeli occupation authorities.

Palestinians Murdered by Israeli Settlers in 1998

During 1998 Israeli settlers killed 11 Palestinian civilians in the West Bank
and Gaza Strip. In four of these cases, the settlers shot at the civilians while
four of the other civilians were stabbed by settlers. Two more Palestinians
were killed after they were hit by cars driven by settlers at high speed.
Another Palestinian was killed after a settler struck him on the head using a
metal instrument.

1. Hani Salah Abu Hajaj (18 years old from Khan Younis)
On May 1, 1998, he was hit by an Israeli settler’s car on a road used by
settlers.
2. Ahmed Allan Hamed (26 years old from Karyot village to the east of
Nablus)
On May 6, 1998, a settler, after an argument with the above-mentioned
Palestinian citizen, shot and killed him while the citizen was looking for his
sheep near Allala settlement in Nablus area.
3. Khairi Mousa Alqam (51 years old from Jerusalem)
On May 13, 1998, he was stabbed to death by a settler in Jerusalem.
4. Anwar Ibrahim Ali (26 years old from Shufat refugee camp in
Jerusalem)
On June 10, 1998, he was stabbed to death by a settler in Jerusalem.
5. Abdul Majid Abu Turki (48 years old from Hebron)
On June 16, 1998, he was attacked by three settlers from the settlement of
Hagai near Hebron. He was killed during the attack by a metal bar. He
was using a bypass road to return home from work when he was attacked.
6. Eyad Rauhi Karabsa (18 years old from Bitonia)

30
 On September 17, 1998, a settler from inside his car shot the above-
mentioned citizen while he was leaving his school and walking to his
home.
7. Lina Abu Araam (5 years old from Yatta in Hebron area)
She was hit by a settler who was driving his car at a high rate of speed on a
road leading to settlements in Yatta area on October 20, 1998.
8. Khalil Ibrahim Akhshimat (44 years old from Anata in Jerusalem)
On October 26, 1998, he was stabbed to death by a settler in Jerusalem.
9. Muhammad Suleiman Zalmot (70 years old from Nablus)
On October 27, 1998, a settler from Itimar settlement near Nablus shot him
while he was picking olives on his land located beside the settlement.
10. Osama Mousa El-Natsheh (40 years old from Jerusalem)
On December 2, 1998, he was assassinated by an Israeli settler with a
knife while he was leaving his house in the morning in Atauri camp in
Jerusalem.
11. Nasser Erekat (17 years old from Jerusalem)
On December 7, 1998, a settler shot him during a demonstration organized
by Palestinian youth supporting the Palestinian detainees in the Israeli
jails. He was in the hospital for two days on life support before his death.

Press Releases about Settlements and Settler Activities in the Gaza Strip

January 24, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the stepped up rate of settlement
activity in the Gaza Strip. Late at night on January 21, 1998, in a serious
escalation of tensions, Israeli bulldozers accompanied by Israeli troops
bulldozed land in the west of Khan Younis refugee camp close to the
eastern part of Neve Dekalim settlement. Bulldozing is the first step before
confiscating the land and annexing it to the settlement. On January 5,
1998, Israeli troops also bulldozed land in El-Mawasi area in Khan
Younis, again to the east of Neve Dekalim.

Later, expressing their denunciation of the bulldozings, many people

gathered in the area. Clashes soon erupted between the people and Israeli
soldiers at around 1:30 p.m. on January 22, 1998. The Israeli soldiers
opened fire on the demonstrators. They used rubber bullets, live
ammunition, tear gas, and noise bombs. The confrontation, lasted until 4
p.m., and resulted in the injury of three Palestinians by rubber bullets, as
well as another injury by an exploding noise bomb. In the afternoon of
January 23, 1998, a clash between the Israeli occupation forces and
Palestinians began again. The Palestinians held a demonstration in order to
convey that they would not passively let their land be stolen. The Israeli
occupation forces used force against the Palestinians. Five Palestinians
were injured. One, Ismail Fathi Salama Wadi, who was only 17 years old,
was seriously injured when a bullet penetrated his stomach. His pancreas
and liver were badly damaged. Wadi was transferred to Shifa Hospital,

31
where surgery was immediately performed. At the time of the press release
he was still being treated in the hospital.

The press release stated that bulldozing of new land in Khan Younis, in
order to expand the existing settlements, is a grave violation of
international law and will undoubtedly increase tension in the area.
Moreover, the Israeli occupation forces have used force excessively
against Palestinian civilians. Nine Palestinians were injured in the two
days of confrontation, two of which were serious cases, and five of which
were children. The shooting took place when the lives of the soldiers were
not in serious danger, and when the demonstrators were but two meters
away from the soldiers. This escalation – the bulldozing of new Palestinian
land and the attack against Palestinian civilians – reaffirmed that human
rights in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are being flagrantly violated by
Israel. Therefore, the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights demanded that
the international community take firmer measures against the Israeli
government. Such measures should compel Israel’s obedience to
international law and principles. They should guarantee protection of
Palestinian civilians and their property.

February 4, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the recent development regarding
its attempt to stop the bulldozing activities that were carried out by the
Israeli occupation forces in Khan Younis City. The Centre asked Israeli
lawyer Andre Rosenthal to appeal for the Israeli government properties
representative to stop the work of bulldozing and confiscating and to get
out from land that is owned by Al-Farra family in the agricultural area in
Khan Younis City beside Neve Dekalim settlement. The appeal was based
on documents that proved the ownership of Al-Farra family of the land and
disproved the Israeli claim that the land lacked ownership and was a
government property. The Palestinian Centre at an earlier time had
appealed to the Israeli legal advisor of the Gaza Strip and to the
interrogation units of the Israeli High Court asking for a cessation to the
bulldozing activities. These bulldozing activities came within the context of
a series of steps being carried out by the occupation authorities to step up
the confiscation waves of Palestinian land and to intensify the settlement
activities in it. Accompanying this wave of land confiscation was an angry
reaction from the Palestinian people who organized demonstrations to
protest the bulldozing and confiscating of land. Clashes between the Israeli
occupation forces and Palestinian civilians took place.

December 12, 1998

32
The Centre issued a press release stating that the Israeli occupation forces
have stepped up their activity concerning the settlements in the Gaza Strip.
Wide-scale bulldozing can be witnessed in various areas of the Gaza Strip,
especially close to the settlements in the agricultural areas (Khan Younis
and Rafah City) and the area of Tel Zorub, which lies close to the Egyptian
border. There are 18 Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip, in which
approximately 5,000 settlers live. It is clear that Israeli settlement activity
has taken on a new life, especially after the signing of the Wye River
Memorandum on October 23, 1998. The Palestinian Centre for Human
Rights has been following up this activity and its observations have been
mentioned above.

In the press release, PCHR expressed its deep concern about the stepping
up of settlement activity in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and called
upon the international community to take immediate measures to stop
these illegal Israeli practices. Five years have passed since the start of the
peace process and Israel still has control of approximately 40 percent of
the land in the Gaza Strip and approximately 90 percent of the land in the
West Bank. Israel attempts daily to change the geography of these two
areas and to guarantee its control of them. The policies of land
confiscation and settlement expansion are considered the most dangerous
of Israeli practices and its starkest violations of international law and the
Fourth Geneva Convention. The overall aim of these policies is to prevent
the Palestinians from obtaining the right to decide their own future, from
controlling their land, and from building their state.

The Excessive Use of Force and Extra-judicial Killings

The year witnessed a notable increase in the excessive use of force by the
occupation forces against Palestinian civilians in all areas of the Occupied
Territories. In circumstances that posed no threat to their lives, the
occupation soldiers shot live ammunition toward civilians participating,
most of the time, in peaceful demonstrations against Israeli practices and
measures. Sometimes the shots were fired toward civilians in peaceful and
quiet circumstances. For example, on March 10, 1998, the occupation
forces killed three Palestinian workers and injured five of them after
shooting live ammunition toward a Ford van that the workers were driving
home in after their day’s work in Israel. Among the cases of shootings,
there is one case in which the musta’ribeen (Israelis disguised as Arabs)
killed two people being followed by the Israeli soldiers. The brothers Imad
and Adel Awadallah were killed in this way on September 10, 1998.

The event witnessed on May 14, 1998 on the 50 th anniversary of Al-

Nakhba, in addition to the events that were witnessed in the West Bank in
December 1998 on the 11th anniversary of the Intifada were two of the
most prominent examples of the increase in the excessive use of force in
the Occupied Territories. On the 50th anniversary of Al-Nakhba,

33
 Palestinians organized peaceful demonstrations that were transformed into
bloody clashes after the occupation forces intervened and fired on the
participants. As a result, five of the Palestinian civilians were killed and
more than 300 were injured, some severely. 13 In December events, the
occupation forces killed civilians and injured more than 500. Some of the
injuries were very severe.

As a result of shootings by the Israeli occupation forces toward Palestinian

civilians, the number of people killed increased to reach 23 people in 1998.
Seven of them were from the Gaza Strip (among these seven citizens were
an Egyptian citizen and a girl who died after being critically shot in her
head ten years ago). Sixteen citizens from the West Bank were killed,
including a 13-year-old child and a 45-year-old woman.14

Palestinians Killed by the Israeli Occupation Forces in Gaza in 1998

1. Eid Hassan Al-Manie’ (33 years old from Al-Sheikh Zwiad in

Egypt)
On March 6, 1998, a soldier in an Israeli military car shot the mentioned
citizen and his three companions near the border with Egypt while they
were trying to cross the border. Eid was killed in this incident.
2. Ashraf Sabri Abu Arram (20 years old from Rafah)
The Israeli soldiers shot him in the head near Moraj settlement while he
was participating in a popular demonstration in memory of Al-Nakhba on
May 14, 1998.
3. Zamil Sattam El-Waheidi (53 years old from Jabaliya and a father
of 14 children)
He was fatally shot in his chest by Israeli soldiers while doing his work of
helping and serving the injured people in Erez area during the events of Al-
Nakhba day on May 14, 1998.
4. Samir Issa Fayyad (35 years old from Beni Suheilah and the father
of 10 children)
He was fatally shot in his head near an Israeli military installation at the
road conjunction that leads to Gush Katif settlement to the north of Khan
Younis. The mentioned citizen was participating in a demonstration in
memory of Al-Nakhba on May 14, 1998.
5. Mohamed Arafat Juneid (20 years old from Jabaliya)
He was shot from inside Netzarim settlement in the north of the Gaza Strip.
He was fatally shot in the throat while participating in a popular
demonstration on May 14, 1998 marking Al-Nakhba.
6. Rafat Mohamed Al-Bardawil (23 years old from Khan Younis)
On June 1, 1998, the Israeli soldiers shot the mentioned citizen with live
ammunition and fatally injured him in his chest. According to Al-Shifa
Hospital’s medical report the bullet was of the explosive kind and led to
13
For more information, see the Centre’s press release on pages 36-37 of this report.
14
This number does not include the number of citizens who were killed by settlers. In this regard,
see pages 30-31.

34
 fragmentation in his left lung, heart, and intestines. The incident took place
near Moraj settlement, close to Rafah City.
7. Lulu Abu-Dahi (16 years old from Rafah)
On December 2, 1998, she died after suffering for nearly 10 years from a
bullet injury to the head by the Israeli occupation forces on February 25,
1989. The wound rendered her unconscious and the medical report stated
that she had a “right frontal bone fracture with a bullet, localized, in the left
fronto-pariental region with extensive brain injury. She was admitted to the
pediatric intensive care unit for six weeks, during which time she
underwent two craniotomies for the extraction of the bullet. A brain CT-
Scan done later on the 13.07.1989 showed a diffuse hypodensity of the
right hemisphere, and of the fronto-parieto-temporal lobes of the left
hemisphere. She was discharged home on the 02.12.1989.” Lulu then
suffered from spastic quadriplegia with deformity of both upper and lower
limbs, was aphasic, disoriented, and able to communicate only with her
eyes. She needed to be under supervision and nursing care 24 hours per day
until her death on December 2.

Palestinians Killed by Israeli Forces in the West Bank in 1998

1. Adnan Jibril Abu-Zidneid (34 years old from Hebron)

On March 5, 1998, the Israeli occupation soldiers opened fire against a
Ford transit vehicle transferring Palestinian workers while they were
returning from their work in Israel. The incident took place at a checkpoint
for the occupation forces to the west of Tarqumiya village. In the incident,
three Palestinian workers were killed, including the citizen Abu-Zidneid,
and five were injured. The Israeli soldiers were temporarily held and then
released.
2. Ghalib Moussa Rajoub (35 years old from Hebron)
He was killed in the above-mentioned incident.
3. Muhammad Shahda El-Shrawna (26 years old from Hebron)
He was killed in the above-mentioned incident.
4. Samer Bassam Karameh (13 years old from Hebron)
On March 10, 1998, he was fatally shot by the Israeli soldiers in his head
while returning to his house from school at Bab Elzawia in Hebron. The
area had witnessed clashes between the occupation forces and civilians in
protest over the killing of civilians in the above-mentioned incident to the
west of Tarqumiya village. Samer was moved to El-Ahli Hospital in
Hebron and put on life support until his death on March 17, 1998.
5. Mohie Eddin Al-Sharif (32 years old from Beit Hanina in Jerusalem)
On March 29, 1998, he was found dead near a car that blew up in the
industrial zone in Ramallah. Al-Sharif was the number one wanted man by
the Israeli authorities as he was accused of being the leader of the military
wing of Hamas. Hamas leadership accused the Israeli intelligence service
of his assassination.
6. Bilal Muhammad Naji (25 years old from Beit Hanina in
Jerusalem)

35
 On April 6, 1998, Israeli soldiers shot him dead while he was driving his car near
Qalandia refugee camp.
7. Ismail Shehada (22 years old from Qalandia refugee camp)
He was shot and killed by a bullet to the head during a demonstration in
memory of Al-Nakhba on May 15, 1998.
8. Kamila Muhammad El-Nazer (45 years old from Shufat refugee
camp in Jerusalem)
On September 10, 1998, this citizen died as a result of a shooting by a
bullet to her throat, after a group of young men threw stones at Israeli
occupation forces near Shufat camp.
9. Adel Awadallah (31 years old from El-Bireh)
Special units from the occupation forces killed him and his brother after
these units closed and surrounded the house in which he and his brother
were staying in Hebron area.
10. Imad Awadallah (29 years old from El-Bireh)
He was killed in the above-mentioned incident.
11. Zahran Zahran (35 years old from Ramallah)
On September 17, 1998, the car which he was driving with two
companions was blown up by spies associated with Israeli intelligence
forces.
12. Amjad Jamal El-Natsheh (21 years old from Hebron)
He was shot by the Israeli occupation forces on October 8, 1998 during a
demonstration which took place in Hebron.
13. Jihad Ayyad (17 years old from Silwad)
He was shot by the Israeli occupation forces on December 9, 1998, the 11 th
anniversary of the Intifada.
14. Muhammad Ismail Amr (18 years old from Qalqilya)
He was shot and killed by the Israeli soldiers on December 11, 1998. He
was shot in the head during his participation in a demonstration supporting
the Palestinian detainees in Israeli jails.
15. Kamal Mansour Adwan (21 years old from Qalqilya)
He was shot in the head during the above-mentioned incident.
16. Muhammad Dawood (19 years old from Beit Daqqo in Ramallah)
He was shot by the Israeli occupation forces on December 17 during a
demonstration in Al-Baluah area to the north of El-Bireh.

Press Releases by PCHR on the Excessive Use of Force by Israeli Forces

May 14, 1998

PCHR issued a press release during the bloody events witnessed in the
Occupied Territories commemorating the 50 th anniversary of Al-Nakhba.
The press release mentioned that the Israeli soldiers shot dead five
Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip and injured 52 others, some severely.
The Israeli forces used excessive force against peaceful Palestinian
demonstrators in different areas of the Gaza Strip.

36
In the press release, PCHR condemned the Israeli reaction to the peaceful
demonstrations and maintained that Israeli forces bear complete
responsibility for this situation and for the arbitrary use of excessive and
deadly force against Palestinian civilians – force which led to the death of
five citizens, including one person from a medical team.

May 16, 1998

PCHR issued a press release updating the Israeli use of excessive force
during the 50th anniversary of Al-Nakhba. According to the press release,
four Palestinian civilians were killed in the Gaza Strip by the bullets of the
Israeli occupation forces during confrontations which erupted Thursday,
May 14, 1998 throughout the Occupied Territories in commemoration of
Al-Nakhba – the uprooting of the Palestinian people from their homeland in
1948. During these confrontations, 71 Palestinians in Gaza were injured
(46 by live ammunition, 25 by rubber-coated metal bullets), among them
five from the Palestinian security forces. Many of the injuries were critical
and 17 injured remained in hospitals at the time of the press release,
including three in the intensive care unit in Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza.
Scores of citizens were treated in the field for injuries related to inhalation
of tear gas; 20 were transferred to hospitals.

According to the press release, the injury totals were as follows:

1. Number of injuries in the upper body: 52

2. Number of injured under 18 years of age: 29

The field workers of PCHR reported snipers from the Israeli army shooting
at civilian demonstrators and causing four deaths, a clear sign of the
excessive use of force with the intention to kill. This was also made clear
by the deadly shooting of a member of the medical personnel, in his formal
uniform, carrying out his work.

May 19, 1998

PCHR issued a press release in response to an announcement from an

Israeli military spokesman stating that the Israeli occupation forces used
snipers against demonstrators, during a popular demonstration in
commemoration of Al-Nakhba, who constituted a danger to Israeli soldiers.
The press release concludes that this statement confirms the information
provided in press releases from PCHR on May 14 and 16 stating that the
Israeli occupation forces used lethal and random force against Palestinian
civilians, resulting in the death of five Palestinians, four from Gaza and one
from the West Bank, and the injury of more than 300 Palestinians.

In addition to this, the press release affirmed that the use of snipers by the
Israeli occupation forces constituted official license for the willful killing

37
of Palestinian demonstrators. The Israeli soldiers opened fire with the intent
to kill, leading to the death of five Palestinian civilians. Such willful killing
of unarmed civilians is in direct violation of the provisions of the Fourth
Geneva Convention of 1949 Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War. This Convention absolutely prohibits willful killing,
considering it a grave breach amounting to war crimes, and requiring the
international community to bring the perpetrators and their superiors to
trial. Moreover, the Israeli occupation forces clearly endeavored to kill as
many civilian Palestinians as possible, as evidenced by the fact that 52 out
of 71 Palestinians injured in Gaza were shot in the upper part of the body.

June 10, 1998

PCHR issued a press release titled: “Israeli Soldiers Kill a Palestinian

Civilian in the Gaza Strip.” The press release mentioned that at
approximately 9:00 p.m., Tuesday, June 9, 1998, an Israeli soldier shot
dead Ra’fat Mohamed Al-Bardawil, 23 years old, from Khan Younis, near
Moraj settlement to the north of Rafah.

PCHR’s field workers reported that an Israeli soldier fired at Al-Bardawil

in the chest, resulting in his immediate death according to Al-Shifa
Hospital in Gaza, where the body of the dead man was later sent. Al-
Bardawil was shot in the left part of the chest by an explosive bullet that
wounded both his heart and left lung.

In fact, this incident was reported by PCHR to be part of a systematic

escalation of the use of force by Israeli soldiers and settlers against
Palestinian civilians. Another civilian, Akram Khalil Abu Armana, age 21
from Rafah, was injured in his left thigh on June 3, 1998 when a settler
fired at him near Etsmona settlement in the Rafah area.

In the press release, PCHR strongly condemned the excessive use of force
by Israeli soldiers and settlers against Palestinian civilians while rejecting
all security justifications mentioned by the Israeli authorities. According to
PCHR’s information, Al-Bardawil was unarmed and did not pose any
threat whatsoever to the lives of Israeli soldiers who shot at him with the
intention to kill. The death of Al-Bardawil, with one bullet to the chest, is
clear evidence of this intent to kill.

In the press release, PCHR expressed its strong belief that the very
existence of Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories, supported by a
heavy presence of Israeli forces, is a major and direct threat to the lives and
personal safety of Palestinian civilians, especially in the areas surrounding
settlements.

In addition, the press release reiterated PCHR’s call for international

intervention to protect the lives of Palestinian civilians in the Occupied

38
Territories and to put an end to the illegal practices perpetrated by Israeli
soldiers and settlers against Palestinian civilians.

December 5, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the death of a child due to injuries
inflicted by the Israeli army during the Intifada. The press release
mentioned that on December 2, 1998, Lulu Abu-Dahi, a 16-year-old from
Rafah, died following almost 10 years of struggling for survival after she
was injured by a gunshot wound to the head by Israeli soldiers. Lulu, then
seven years old, was injured in the head on February 25, 1989, while she
was standing close to her house in Rafah. She was immediately rendered
unconscious and the medical report stated that she had a “right frontal bone
fracture with a bullet, localized, in the left fronto-pariental region with
extensive brain injury. She was admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit
for six weeks, during which time she underwent two craniotomies for the
extraction of the bullet. A brain CT-Scan done later on the 13.07.1989
showed a diffuse hypodensity of the right hemisphere, and of the fronto-
parieto-temporal lobes of the left hemisphere. She was discharged home on
the 02.12.1989.” Lulu then suffered from spastic quadriplegia with
deformity of both upper and lower limbs, was aphasic, disoriented, and
able to communicate only with her eyes. She needed to be under
supervision and nursing care 24 hours per day until her death on December
2, 1998.

The press release added that the tragic story of Lulu reminds us of the
heinous crimes perpetrated by the Israeli army during the Intifada, and
indeed, today. This once again proves the excessive and indiscriminate use
of force by Israeli soldiers against Palestinian civilians, even in cases
posing no threat to the life of those soldiers. This was certainly the case
with Lulu Abu-Dahi, a small child, posing no threat to anyone.

The Practices of the Israeli Navy against Palestinian Fishermen

During 1998 the Israeli Navy continued its violations of the rights of
Palestinian fishermen, thus depriving them of their basic right to work.
Approximately 2,500 Palestinians earn their livelihood through fishing or
maintaining the equipment associated with fishing. These 2,500 fishermen
are distributed in different areas throughout the Gaza Ship and use
approximately 750 fishing boats. Fishing as a livelihood feeds
approximately 4,000 families in the Gaza Strip.

According to Palestinian-Israeli Interim Agreements signed in May 1994

and September 1995, the Palestinian fishermen have the right to go to sea
toward the west for a distance of 20 nautical miles. The Israeli government
in a decision violating this right decreased the distance and imposed a sea
closure on March 8, 1996. On March 11, 1996, the Israeli authorities

39
 announced an easing of the closure and allowed the fishermen to go to sea
up to only six nautical miles. This number increased to 12 nautical miles on
March 22, 1996. From that date, the Palestinian fishermen have not been
allowed to go along the sea as was agreed between the Palestinian and
Israeli side. Therefore, they are barred from their right to fish deeper and
more abundant fishing locations. Moreover, the Palestinian fishermen are
subjected to significant rights violations by the Israeli forces. These Israeli
violations stem from the desire to keep all the boats and equipment of
Palestinian fishermen hemmed in along the coast. Israel has stolen
Palestinian equipment and even gone so far as to fire on Palestinian
fishermen. This, of course, has significant economic implications.

During 1998 most of the Israeli violations were concentrated in Khan

Younis and Rafah as the beach of these two areas is located within the
yellow area that is regarded as being under Israeli security control. In
addition, the coastal borders of Rafah City extend to Area M which extends
in width for one mile from the Egyptian border toward the north. Fishing in
this area is absolutely prohibited.

Shooting Fishermen and Their Boats

PCHR documented four cases of Israeli shootings directed at Palestinian

fishing vessels during 1998. These four cases did not result in any injuries
to fishermen. The Centre believes that the shootings were carried out in
order to frighten the fishermen and force them out of the sea. In all four of
the cases the fishing boat was fishing within the 12-mile area determined
by the Israeli occupation authorities.

1. On January 12, 1998, the Israeli Navy shot at Abdel Hadi Al-Kun and
his son, Ahmad, from Rafah, while they were in their boat in the area that
is allowed for fishing. The two fishermen escaped to the harbor, but the
Israeli Navy followed them and attacked Mahmoud Al-Kun and his mother
who were waiting for their relatives Abdel Hadi and Ahmad.

2. On January 22, 1998, the Israeli Navy shot toward fishermen Ibrahim
Al-Bardawil and Ayman Al-Bardawil while they were in their boats in an
area allowed for fishing at the Khan Younis beach. The two fishermen
attempted to escape but the Israelis continued to fire on them even after
they arrived at the beach. The two fishermen were arrested and held in a
joint Palestinian-Israeli military installation.

3. On April 10, 1998, an Israeli Navy ship stopped Palestinian fisherman,

Jamal Hamed Basaleh, in front of Rafah beach. After examining his
license, the Israeli Navy allowed him to leave. After 30 minutes, another
Israeli Navy ship asked him to show his license for fishing. Once the
Palestinian fisherman told the Israeli Navy crew that the crew of another

40
 ship had already examined his license, the Navy began firing heavily at the
Palestinian fisherman’s boat (causing damage to it).

4. On September 8, 1998, shots were fired at fishermen Hassan Al-

Habeel, Rami Abed El-Muti Al-Habeel, Muhammad Al-Habeel, and Jamil
and Zakharia Bakr while they were at their boat close to the north border of
the Gaza Strip, within the area that is allowed for fishing. They escaped to
the harbor.

Arresting Fishermen at Sea

The Israeli Navy continues to arrest Palestinian fishermen at sea and move
them to Ashdod Harbor inside Israel. Normally, these fishermen are
subjected to interrogation before the intervention of the joint Palestinian-
Israeli forces. During 1998 the Centre documented six cases in which 13
fishermen from the Gaza Strip were arrested.

1. On January 12, 1998, the fishermen Salah Abu Rialah and Mahdi Abu
Rialah from Rafah were arrested and had their boat moved to Ashdod
Harbor in Israel.

2. On January 13, 1998, the fisherman Fouad Al-Habeel from Gaza was
arrested and his boat was moved to Ashdod Harbor.

3. On January 18, 1998, two fishermen, Khalil Al-Bardawil and his son
Mahmoud Al-Bardawil, were arrested in front of the Khan Younis beach
and their boat was moved to Ashdod Harbor. The two fishermen were
released on the same day, but only after they had been interrogated and
beaten. The boat was held by Israel until February 25, 1998.

4. On January 19, 1998, the fisherman Sae’d Al-Habeel was arrested after
shots were fired at him.

5. On May 1, 1998, an Israeli Navy vessel came very close to a

Palestinian boat which carried a group of Palestinian fishermen. After
examining the fishing license of the boat, the Israeli Navy vessel ordered
the fishermen Jamal Basaleh, Issam Al-Nada, and Rizq Al-Balawi to get
into the Israeli ship. They were then arrested.

6. On May 27, 1998, an Israeli vessel at a distance of 10 miles from the

beach of Khan Younis fired at two Palestinian fishing boats holding the
fishermen Abed Isaa’ Olwan, his brother Shukri, his son Eyad, and his
cousin Khamees Muhammad Olwan. The Palestinian boats were then
connected to the Israeli ship and taken into Israel. In front of Ashkelon
beach Israeli vessels ordered the fishermen to get in the Israeli ship. They
then proceeded to beat them. The Israelis then sank the two boats.

41
 Capturing Palestinian Fishing Boats

During 1998 the Centre documented three cases of capturing Palestinian

boats by Israeli Navy vessels.

1. On January 2, 1998, the boat of the fishermen Salah Abu Rialah and
Mehdi Abu Rialah was captured and moved to Ashdod Harbor.

2. On January 3, 1998, the boat of the fisherman Fouad Al-Habeel was

captured from Gaza and moved to Ashdod Harbor.

3. On January 18, 1998, the boat of the fisherman Khalil Al-Bardawil was
captured and moved to Ashdod Harbor until February 25, 1998.

Attacking Palestinian Fishing Wharfs

The year witnessed six cases of attacks on fishing wharfs. In some of these
cases the attacks involved the beating of the fishermen.

1. On January 12, 1998, an Israeli sea force attacked the Rafah fishing
wharf after following fishermen Abdel Hadi Al-Kun and his son
Muhammad. The attack involved beating Mahmoud Al-Kun and his mother
who were waiting on the shore for the other two. Mahmoud was suffering
from a psychiatric problem at the time.

2. On January 18, 1998, five Israeli military vehicles descended on Rafah

wharf. The Israeli soldiers tried to arrest fishermen Ismail and Ali Al-
Bardawil, but the intervention from the Palestinian side of the joint Israeli-
Palestinian forces prevented their arrest.

3. On January 18, 1998, the Rafah wharf was raided by the Israeli
occupation forces. The Israeli soldiers attacked and beat the fishermen
Musalem Abu-Shalouf and Muhammad Abdel Hadi Al-Kun.

4. On January 19, 1998, the wharf was raided once again by the Israeli
occupation forces, and the soldiers tried to arrest fishermen Jamal and
Mohammed Basaleh, but the intervention of the joint Israeli-Palestinian
Committee prevented their arrest.

5. On January 22, 1998, the Israeli soldiers attacked Rafah wharf and fired
at the buildings of the fishermen.

6. On January 30, 1998, Israeli soldiers attacked Rafah wharf and beat
fishermen Ibrahim and Ayman Al-Bardawil.

Cutting Nets and Damaging Fishing Equipment

42
1. On January 16, 1998, the nets of the fishermen Omar and Wael Al-
Bardawil from Rafah were cut and confiscated. The Ministry of Agriculture
estimated the losses to be 2,000 NIS.

2. On January 18, 1998, the net of fisherman Jamal Basaleh from Rafah
was cut by the Israeli occupation soldiers. The Ministry of Agriculture
estimated the losses to be 600 NIS.

3. On August 2, 1998, the nets of fishermen Musalem and Husam Abu

Shalouf from Rafah were cut.

Arbitrary Orders to Leave the Sea

1. On March 14, 1998, a boat owned by Jamal Basaleh was stopped and
ordered by the crew of the Israeli ship to be attached to the Israeli vessel. It
was then towed inside Israel. The Palestinian boat was held from 4 p.m. to
8 p.m. The Israelis then ordered the fishermen to take the boat back to
Gaza.

2. On April 16, 1998, an Israeli ship blocked the boat of the fisherman
Mazen Basaleh close to Rafah beach and asked the fishermen on it to show
their licenses. After that, the Israeli ship ordered the Palestinians to leave
the sea without clarifying why. The boat was denied access to the sea for
two weeks.

43
 PROMOTING THE RULE OF LAW AND DEMOCRACY IN
AREAS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE PALESTINIAN
AUTHORITY

Palestinian Security Forces Continue Illegal Arrests of Citizens

The Palestinian security forces continued during 1998 to arrest citizens for
political reasons. On numerous occasions these arrests were carried out
because of pressure from the United States and Israel as part of the
measures that had to be adopted by the PA to fight “terrorism.” These
arrest processes normally take the shape of waves in which many citizens
are arrested at the same time based on a list of names. At other times, a
number of citizens are arrested because of their political opinion or because
of their criticism of the PA. Most of the arresting waves in 1998 were
aimed at the leadership and supporters of the Islamic movements that
oppose the peace process and interim agreements. In addition, these arrest
processes were aimed at political activists and at supporters of the
nationalist secular groups and parties that oppose the peace process and
Interim Agreements as part of their political perspective. On more than one
occasion the Palestinian security forces arrested journalists and held them
for a few hours.

During 1998 the Centre followed up on the cases of the PA detainees’ files.
More than 400 citizens were arrested in the Gaza Strip with periods of
arrest ranging between a few days and an unlimited time period. In some
cases the same person was arrested more than one time.15 The Palestinian
security forces do not hesitate to arrest entire families as a kind of pressure
against one of the family’s wanted sons in order to force him to turn
himself in to the security forces.16

15
For example, on April 7, 1998, the Palestinian police arrested Abdullah Ahmed Al-Shami (41
years old from Gaza who is considered to be a leader of Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip). Al-Shami
was arrested in relation to the assassination of Mohie Eddin Al-Sharif and because of his speech
on the day of Eid Mubarak about corruption in the PA. He was released on April 13, 1998. On
August 18, 1998, he was arrested once again through the police department’s office of criminal
investigations as a result of publishing an article in the weekly newspaper Al-Istiqlal in which he
criticized the PA and the new governmental reform going on at that time. He was put in solitary
confinement and his family and lawyer were not allowed to visit him. He was released on
September 27, 1998. On December 14, 1998, he was arrested again, this time as a result of his
statements against President Bill Clinton during the latter’s visit to the region. As of December 31,
1998, he remained under arrest.
16
On March 27, 1998, the General Intelligence Services arrested five members of the Abu Jabr
family in Al-Nusiraat refugee camp and arrested another person from the same family on April 2,
1998, as a form of pressure against the family’s wanted son to turn himself in. After the wanted
person turned himself in on April 21, 1998, the rest of the family members were released.

On September 26, 1998, the Preventive Security Forces arrested five members from the Fayyad
family in El-Qarara, including a 70-year-old man, until the family’s wanted son turned himself in.
Four of the detainees were released on September 30, 1998, while the fifth detainee was released
one month later.

44
 Most of the waves of arrests are considered to be illegal since they took
place without warrants from the Attorney General’s office. The detainees
were not allowed access to the judiciary for official renewal or extension of
their period of arrest, and they were not confronted with any clear charges.
In addition, the detainees are barred from their right to have a defense
lawyer and a fair trial. In a few cases the arrest of the individual continues
although there is a judicial decision from the highest judicial court to
release the detainees. This in itself is considered a dangerous challenge for
the rule of law and judicial independence. 17 By the end of 1998 there were
approximately 90 detainees in the prisons and arresting centers that are
related to the security forces department of the PA. Some of these detainees
were arrested in March 1996 and still have not been brought to trial.

The arresting waves that have been carried out by the PA security forces
took a new direction after the signing of the Wye River Memorandum on
October 23, 1998. A house arrest was imposed on the spiritual leader of the
Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), 18 Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. New
waves of arrests were carried out against the Islamic and secular opposition
due to their criticism of the Wye River Memorandum.

The most important arrest waves that were carried out by the security
forces in 1998 were as follows:

1. In the period between January 21-23, 1998, the Intelligence Security

Forces arrested 15 persons from the supporters of the Hamas Movement in
Al-Shati refugee camp. Thirteen of them were students. These 15 citizens
were gradually released in the period between January 30 and February 18,
1998.

2. On April 2, 1998, the Internal Investigation Office arrested six citizens

from the supporters of the Islamic Jihad Movement in Jabaliya refugee
camp. Five of them were students at the secondary school level. These
arrests were the result of their writing graffiti on a wall. Four of them were
released on April 30, 1998, while the other two detainees were released on
May 28, 1998, without being brought to trial.

3. On April 13, 1998, the Criminal Investigation Office arrested five

supporters of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) from
Rafah and Nusiraat for distributing a press release for the PFLP. They were

See also the press release of PCHR on pages 60-62 of this report regarding measures taken by
Palestinian security forces against the Al-Ghoul family after a family member escaped from prison
in Gaza.
17
For example, see pages 49-50 and 53-56 for information on the case of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-
Rantisi who was arrested on April 17, 1998.
18
The house arrest was imposed on Sheikh Ahmed Yassin on October 30, 1998 and was removed
on December 23, 1998.

45
 released the next day. The same persons were arrested on April 17 and
released the following day.

4. In the period between April 9-27, 1998, the Palestinian security forces
carried out an arresting wave in different areas of the Gaza Strip as a result
of Mohie Eddin Al-Sharif’s assassination.19 The arresting waves included
60 citizens from the supporters of Hamas and Islamic Jihad and included
Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi and Dr. Ibrahim Al-Maqadma20 who are
considered prominent leaders of Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Also, the wave
included all nine members of the Student Council in the Islamic University
as a result of their organizing a festival inside the University in which a
press release of Izz Eddin Al-Qassam (the armed wing of Hamas) was
distributed. All of them were gradually released except Dr. Al-Rantisi and
Dr. Al-Maqadma. The arrests ranged in length from a few days to seven
weeks.

5. During May 1998, the Palestinian security forces arrested nine persons
from the supporters of Hamas from different areas of the Gaza Strip due to
their affiliation to Hamas and their distributing a press release for it. All of
the detainees were released after a period of arrest ranging between a few
days and four months.

6. In the period between June 3-18, 1998, the Palestinian security forces
arrested 10 citizens due to their affiliation to Hamas and Islamic Jihad. All
of the detainees were released after an arrest period ranging between a few
days and three months.

7. In the period between July 7-9, 1998, three citizens were arrested for
belonging to Hamas and Islamic Jihad. At the end of 1998 two of them
were still under arrest in the Preventive Security Department and Military
Intelligence Department.

8. Between August 6-30, 1998, the Palestinian Security Forces arrested

five supporters from Hamas and Islamic Jihad for a period ranging between
three and six weeks.

9. Between September 12-19, 1998, the Palestinian security forces

arrested 11 supporters of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Nine of these 11 were
arrested due to their participation in a peaceful demonstration organized by
the families of detainees in Palestinian prisons in front of the Palestinian
Legislative Council building in Gaza. All of the 11 detainees have been
19
Mohie Eddin Al-Sharif, who is considered one of the most prominent leaders of Izz Eddin Al-
Qassam, the military wing of Hamas, was assassinated in Ramallah on March 29, 1998.
Palestinian leaders declared that their investigation of the case proved that the death of Al-Sharif
came as a result of internal competition and fighting between members of Al-Qassam groups.
Hamas rejected this and announced its intention to make a private investigation of the issue.
20
For more details about the case of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi and Dr. Ibrahim Al-Maqadma, see
pages 49-50 and 53-56.

46
 released except one who remains under arrest. For the others, the arrest
periods ranged between a few days and four weeks.

10. Between September 25-26, 1998, the Preventive Security Forces

arrested 10 citizens. Six of these citizens are from the same family. Some
of these 10 were arrested because they had attempted to enter into Israel.
Four of these 10 detainees remain under arrest and have yet to be brought
to trial.21

11. On October 18, 1998, forces of the General Intelligence Services

entered the houses of six citizens and arrested four of them while the other
two citizens turned themselves in later. At the end of 1998 two of them
remained under arrest.

12. In the period between October 19-24, 1998, the security forces arrested
five citizens from the supporters of the Islamic Jihad movement due to their
organizing a festival to commemorate the death of Fathi Shiqaqi, the
General Secretary for the movement. One of them was released after six
days and the other four were released after three weeks.

13. In the period between October 27-31, 1998, the General Intelligence
Services arrested seven citizens from Jabaliya camp due to their
distributing a press release for Islamic Jihad. They were released on
November 16, 1998.

14. In the period between October 29 and November 2, 1998, the

Palestinian security forces carried out an arrest wave of 200 supporters and
members of Hamas as a result of a suicide operation at Gush Katif
settlement conjunction in Gaza. Most of the detainees were gradually
released, but by the end of the year more than 30 of them were still under
arrest.

15. In the period between November 6-8, 1998, the Palestinian security
forces arrested nine citizens from the supporters of the Democratic Front
for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) and the Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) due to a popular conference held in
Jabaliya on November 6 that criticized the Wye River Memorandum. Most
of the detainees were released after a period of arrest ranging between one
and four days.

16. On November 23, 1998, forces from the Intelligence Department

entered the house of Dr. Nezar Rayan, a lecturer in the Islamic University,
and arrested him and his 15-year-old son. In addition, they arrested 10

21
Among these detainees was Sheikh Nafez Azzam, one of the most prominent leaders of Islamic
Jihad. He was arrested at his house by the Criminal Investigation Office on October 24, 1998, and
was released on October 30, 1998.

47
 students who were in his house to use his private library. All the detainees
were released between November 24-28, 1998.

17. On December 11, 1998, the Palestinian security forces carried out an
arrest wave aimed at the Islamic opposition in the Gaza Strip before the
visit of President Bill Clinton to the region. The wave included 40
supporters of Hamas and Islamic Jihad located in different areas throughout
the Gaza Strip. The wave focused on Jabaliya and Rafah area. In addition, a
number of letters were sent to supporters summoning them to the
Preventive Security Department and General Intelligence Services.

18. On December 18, 1998, the Palestinian police arrested four leaders of
the PFLP and eight journalists, including the Deputy Secretary General of
the Palestinian Journalists’ Association. The arrests of the journalists came
after they covered a peaceful demonstration condemning the American-
British attacks on Iraq. The detainees were released after a few hours,
except one who was held until the next day.

Torture and Ill-treatment of Detainees by the Palestinian Authority

A limited number of the political prisoners are subjected to different

methods of torture in some detention centers of the Palestinian security
forces. The majority of prisoners, however, are not subjected to torture,
especially those who are detained in the arrest waves and held without
charge or questioning. PCHR reported a decline in the use of torture
leading to death in 1998, especially in Gaza where no single death resulting
from torture was reported.22 Nonetheless, PCHR received several
testimonies from released prisoners that they were subjected to torture.
During the interrogation these detainees said they were held in small rooms
(2 meters by 1 meter). Among the torture methods mentioned in the
testimonies were beatings with plastic wires, beatings with truncheons,
hitting with the open hand, beating the bottom of the feet with plastic wires
22
During 1998 two cases of detainees’ deaths in West Bank prisons were documented. On
February 2, 1998, the citizen Nasser Hussein Al-Harub (28 years old from Dora village in Hebron)
died less than six hours after his arrest in the evening of February 2, 1998 in the Criminal
Investigation Office in Hebron. Human rights organizations in the West Bank reported that the
death was the result of torture and added that they were not allowed by the PA to look at the
pathologist’s report. On August 9, 1998, the citizen Walid Mahmoud Al-Qawasmi (48 years old
from Hebron) died while he was being moved by ambulance from the governmental hospital of
Jericho to one of the hospitals in Nablus. Al-Qawasmi was arrested by the Palestinian General
Intelligence Services in Jericho on July 26. PA sources reported that he was unconscious as a
result of a heat wave. This was also mentioned in the pathologist’s report issued by the
governmental hospital of Jericho. In addition, the sources mentioned that an investigation
committee had been formed to examine the body of the citizen. The PA accepted that the family of
the deceased could decide on which doctor would examine the body. In a sworn statement
delivered by Nidal Al-Qawasmi, the son of the deceased, he asserted that he was allowed to visit
his father on August 7, 1998, at which point his father informed him that he was very tired from
the interrogation and torture to which he had been subjected. The son added that it was clear that
the health of his father was in a very precarious state and that the signs of torture were clear on his
face. Until now, the result of the examination of the body has not been published.

48
or truncheons, forcing detainees to sit on very small chairs for a long time,
depriving them from sleeping, and other methods. The detainees mentioned
that they were subjected to cursing and the hair on their heads was shaved.

Legal Aid for the Detainees

The Legal Unit provides help to detainees and their families. Within this
context, legal counseling is provided and the unit intervenes on behalf of
detainees before the Palestinian authorities, including interventions with the
office of the Attorney General. During 1998 the lawyers of the unit
followed up 67 different files for the detainees in Palestinian prisons
compared to 44 files in 1997. During 1998 the Centre’s lawyers visited 27
detainees while they were not allowed to visit the other 40 detainees.

The lawyers of the unit sent 104 messages to the Palestinian Attorney
General, as compared with 36 messages in 1997, asking him to explain the
reasons for holding and arresting these detainees. The letters asked for
permission to visit them and asked for their release. The Centre has
received only one response from the office of the Attorney General during
the whole year. The response was in regard to the case of Dr. Abdel Aziz
Al-Rantisi in which the Attorney General allowed the lawyers of the Centre
to visit Dr. Al-Rantisi. The order, however, was not respected by the police,
who continued to reject the efforts of the lawyers to visit him. 23

As they represent a number of the detainees, the lawyers of the Centre

applied to the High Court of Justice for 10 detainees to be released because
of the absence of any legal foundation for their arrest. In one case only, the
court decided to release Dr. Al-Rantisi, but the decision was not
implemented by the Palestinian police. In three other cases, the court
rejected the applications and decided not to hold a trial after it heard the
answer of the Attorney General that these people were being held by the
State Security Court. In one case, the appeal was rejected even after the
prisoner had been released. There were still five cases under investigation
by the court at the end of the year.

Press Releases Issued by the Centre Regarding the PA’s Detainees

April 13, 1998

PCHR issued a press release criticizing the refusal of Palestinian police to

grant access to clients Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi and Dr. Ibrahim Al-
Maqadma. In the press release the Centre asserted that for the second
consecutive day the police denied access to PCHR lawyers Raji Sourani
and Iyad Al-Alami to visit their clients despite a special permission issued
by the Palestinian Attorney General to visit them.

23
For more details, see the case of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi on pages 49-50 and 53-56 of this
report.

49
In the press release, PCHR expressed its deep concern over the unjustified
denial to visit Dr. Al-Rantisi and Dr. Al-Maqadma, and added that it would
continue its efforts to ensure that the lawyers could visit their clients. At the
time of the press release, neither of them had been brought before a judge,
nor had their file been brought to the Attorney General’s Office as required
by Palestinian law.

Moreover, PCHR demanded the immediate release of Dr. Al-Rantisi and

Dr. Al-Maqadma for the illegal procedures involved in their detention.
PCHR called for Palestinian law to be applied correctly.

Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi (51 years old from Khan Younis) is a
pediatrician and a lecturer at the Islamic University. He is considered one
of the most prominent leaders of the Islamic movement in Palestine. He
was released by the Israeli occupation authorities in April 1997 after an
arrest of more than four years. Also, he was one of the more than 400
Palestinians deported to Lebanon in 1992 by the Israeli occupation
authorities (they were sent to the Lebanon border at Marj Al-Zohour). Dr.
Ibrahim Al-Maqadma (46 years old from El-Bureij camp) is a doctor
working in El-Nasser Hospital in Gaza. He is also considered one of the
most prominent Islamic leaders in Palestine.

The press release stated that the arrest of the two came within the context
of an arrest wave carried out by the Palestinian security forces that included
scores of citizens in the West Bank and Gaza Strip including Abdullah El-
Shami, one of the most prominent Islamic leaders in Palestine. He was
arrested on April 7, 1998, and released on April 12, 1998. This arrest wave
combined with other steps carried out by Palestinian security forces after
the Mohie Eddin Al-Sharif killing. Al-Sharif was regarded as being one of
the most prominent Hamas activists of the Izz Eddin Al-Qassam, the
military wing of the Islamic Resistance Movement. He was killed in
Ramallah on April 29, 1998. Palestinian Authority representatives
announced that the investigation proved that the assassination of Al-Sharif
was the result of an internal fight and competition within the Al-Qassam
group. The claim was rejected by Hamas and its supporters. Hamas
declared its intention to carry out a private investigation to find out the
facts surrounding the case, although it is known that the Palestinian
Attorney General is the only one with the authority to investigate such
matters.

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights expressed its deep concern
because of the deterioration in the situation in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip. The situation’s deterioration created an extremely dangerous
situation. Therefore, PCHR asked the Attorney General to carry out his role
since he is considered to be the only authority with the right to investigate
and to deliver statements in such ambiguous cases as the Al-Sharif case. In

50
addition, the press release asserted that the Palestinian judiciary is
considered the best institution for mediating issues such as this one and any
other institution, no matter its importance, lacks the right to decide on such
issues. Finally, the press release asked for the release of all the Palestinian
political detainees in the Palestinian prisons, asked for implementing the
rule of law, and asked to ensure that all the measures that are the
responsibility of the PA be implemented within the context of the law.

April 14, 1998

PCHR issued a press release stating that for the second consecutive day,
Palestinian police denied Raji Sourani and Iyad Al-Alami, lawyers of the
Centre, access to visit their clients Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi and Dr.
Ibrahim Al-Maqadma at the Police Headquarters in Gaza, despite the
special visitation permission issued to them by the Palestinian Attorney
General.

While PCHR expressed its deep concern over the unjustifiable denial to
visit Dr. Al-Rantisi and Dr. Al-Maqadma, it will continue its efforts to
ensure that his lawyers can visit their client. At the time of the press
release, neither of them had been brought before a judge, nor had their file
been brought to the Attorney General’s office as required by Palestinian
law.

Therefore, PCHR demands the immediate release of Dr. Al-Rantisi and Dr.
Al-Maqadma for the illegal procedures involved in their detention.

April 15, 1998

The Palestinian Centre issued a press release regarding a new escalation in

the internal situation resulting from the Palestinian security forces arresting
members of the Student Council at the Islamic University in Gaza.

The press release stated that in the most recent escalation of the situation in
the Occupied Territories, Palestinian security forces carried out a wave of
collective arrests directed against all members of the Student Council at the
Islamic University in Gaza. On the afternoon of Monday, April 13, 1998,
forces of the General Intelligence raided houses throughout the Gaza Strip
and arrested nine members of the Student Council at the Islamic
University. They are being detained at Al-Mashdal Detention Center,
connected to General Intelligence.

The press release asserted that the arrests were carried out in response to a
student gathering held at the Islamic University on April 12 from 5 p.m.-10
p.m. At the gathering, a communiqué signed by Kata’ib Al-Qassam, the
armed wing of the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, was distributed.
On Wednesday, April 15, the national and Islamic student blocs at the

51
university issued a joint press release condemning the arrests and calling
for a suspension of study and a sit-in at the university to be held the
following Saturday.

PCHR regarded the campaign of arrests as being another escalation in the

already deteriorating situation in the West Bank and Gaza since the March
29 assassination of Mohie Eddin Al-Sharif, one of the leaders of Kata’ib
Al-Qassam. The Centre also considered the arrests to be a violation of
academic freedom and demanded the immediate release of all members of
the Student Council.

April 29, 1998

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights issued a press release about the
Palestinian High Court of Justice meeting of April 29, 1998. The court met
to review applications submitted by advocates Raji Sourani and Iyad Al-
Alami of PCHR. The court issued orders for the Attorney General to
present reasons for the arrest and continued detention of the two defendants
(Al-Rantisi and Al-Maqadma) and granted the Attorney General eight days
to respond. At the same time, the court decided to allow the two PCHR
lawyers to visit Al-Rantisi and Al-Maqadma until a final decision was
reached.

May 21, 1998

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights issued a press release about the
deterioration in health of three Palestinian detainees in the central prison of
Gaza as a result of their hunger strike. These three detainees are Ali Khalil
Abu Nikira from Rafah, arrested on October 18, 1995, and given a life
sentence; Alaa Abdel Hamid Aql, from Rafah, arrested on December 11,
1995, and given a life sentence; Samir Ali Al-Jiddi, from Gaza, arrested on
March 4, 1995, and given a sentence of 15 years.

A military court in Gaza City was issued an order on March 10, 1996 to
hang Abu Nikira and Aql after they were accused of killing a Palestinian
policeman (the order was reduced to jail for life). Notwithstanding the
strong rejection by the lawyers of the two that they not be charged in
military court, since they are civilians and not soldiers, the military court
insisted on its stance of charging them. One of the defendant’s lawyers was
interrogated while doing his work in the military court. The lawyer was
also isolated and he was not able to continue the defense until the Lawyers’
Association intervened on his behalf with the military court.

Meanwhile, the third detainee was jailed for 15 years by the State Security
Court after he was accused of organizing some young people to execute a
suicide operation inside of Israel. The three detainees were moved to the

52
hospital as a result of their hunger strike and the consequent deterioration
in their health.

In its press release, PCHR asked for canceling all the military trials that did
not guarantee the minimum level needed for a just trial. PCHR asked to re-
try the mentioned three detainees in a civil judicial institution with the right
to have a suitable legal defense.

May 27, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the Palestinian High Court’s decision to
grant the Attorney General eight days to present reasons for the continued
detention of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi.

The Palestinian High Court of Justice convened on May 27, 1998, to

consider an appeal presented by lawyers of the Palestinian Centre for
Human Rights on behalf of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi who was arrested on
April 9, 1998. In their appeal, the lawyers of PCHR demanded that the
Palestinian Attorney General present a reason for the continued detention
of their defendant and demanded also that he should be released
immediately due to the lack of due process in his arrest. The court granted
the Attorney General eight days to respond.

During the hearing, the representative of the Attorney General asked the
court to extend the period ordered by the court on April 29 to present the
reason for the arrest of Dr. Al-Rantisi. The representative justified this
demand by saying that the Attorney General did not know about the arrest
of Dr. Al-Rantisi, and that he had addressed the concerned bodies to give
him reasons for the arrest, but had received no response until then.

PCHR lawyers expressed their surprise before the court with regard to the
statement of the Attorney General’s representative. Firstly, his written
demand to extend the period ordered by the court was signed by the
Attorney General, while his post had been vacant since the resignation of
former Attorney General, Mr. Fayez Abu Rahmeh in early May. Secondly,
the statement provided evidence supporting the Centre’s appeal that Dr. Al-
Rantisi had been detained illegally as the Attorney General knew nothing
about his file.

According to Palestinian law, detainees shall be brought before a judge

within 48 hours of their arrest. The law dictates also that the judge may
extend the detention of a person up to 15 days, and that no person may be
detained for a period of more than 30 days without a written application to
the court signed by the Attorney General.

PCHR reiterated its demand for the immediate release of Dr. Al-Rantisi
and all prisoners held illegally and in defiance of the rule of law.

53
June 4, 1998

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights issued a press release about the
Palestinian High Court of Justice decision to order the release of Dr. Abdel
Aziz Al-Rantisi.

The press release mentioned that the High Court of Justice had considered
an appeal submitted by lawyers from PCHR against the Attorney General’s
office to clarify reasons for the continued detention of Dr. Ibrahim Al-
Maqadma. Headed by Counselor Fayez Al-Qidra with membership of
Counselors Hamdan El-Abadlah and Saada Al-Dajani, the court granted the
Attorney General’s office a final period until June 20, 1998 to provide
reasons for the continued arrest.

In the press release, PCHR asserted that it would continue its efforts to
ensure the implementation of the court’s decision to release Dr. Abdel Aziz
Al-Rantisi and would continue working to ensure the release of Dr. Ibrahim
Al-Maqadma, both of whom are held illegally by the Palestinian police.
PCHR will also continue its work to ensure the release of all Palestinian
prisoners held illegally.

June 22, 1998

The Palestinian Centre issued a press release about the Palestinian High
Court of Justice decision to dismiss an appeal to release Dr. Ibrahim Al-
Maqadma.

On June 20, the Palestinian High Court of Justice (HCJ) dismissed an

appeal brought before it by lawyers of the Palestinian Centre for Human
Rights against the Palestinian Attorney General’s office for failing to
provide reasons for the continued illegal detention of Dr. Ibrahim Al-
Maqadma. The appeal had also demanded Al-Maqadma’s release.

Dr. Al-Maqadma, a prominent figure of the Islamic Resistance Movement

in Gaza, was subjected to arbitrary detention by Palestinian police on April
10, 1998, and has not been granted due process before the law. In its
session on June 4, 1998, the HCJ granted the Attorney General’s office
until June 20 to provide reasons for his detention. In a previous ruling, the
HCJ granted permission to lawyers from PCHR, who represent Al-
Maqadma, to visit him in prison. However, the Director General of the
Palestinian police denied prison access to the lawyers despite the HCJ
decision.

During the most recent session of the HCJ on June 20 the representative of
the Attorney General’s office claimed that the detention of Al-Maqadma
was carried out in accordance with legal procedures and that Al-Maqadma

54
is charged with incitement and conspiracy against the PA. The
representative also claimed that Al-Maqadma’s detention was extended by
the State Security Court. The representative called on the HCJ to dismiss
the appeal, charging that the HCJ had no jurisdiction over this case which
had already been reviewed by the State Security Court.

PCHR expressed its surprise over the recent statements of the Attorney
General’s office. For the more than two months of Dr. Al-Maqadma’s
detention, PCHR has continually attempted to elicit the reasons for his
illegal detention without any response from the Attorney General’s office.
Moreover, during this period, the Attorney General’s office was unable to
provide the reasons for his detention and had also failed to oblige the
Palestinian police to provide access for Al-Maqadma’s lawyers to visit him.

Since the early days of his detention, the Attorney General’s office was not
informed of the reasons behind the detention of Al-Maqadma, which
prompted PCHR to appeal to the jurisdiction of the HCJ. PCHR is
surprised also that the detention of Dr. Al-Maqadma was extended by the
State Security Court without the request or the knowledge of the Attorney
General’s office. PCHR will continue its work to ensure the release of Dr.
Al-Maqadma and to continue the inquiry into the legality of his arrest.

July 13, 1998

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights issued a press release under the
heading that nobody has extra-judicial jurisdiction.

In the press release, PCHR strongly condemned the continued illegal

detention of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi by Palestinian police, despite a
ruling of the Palestinian High Court of Justice more than a month ago to
release him. In its session of June 4, 1998 to review an appeal brought by
lawyers of PCHR on behalf of Dr. Al-Rantisi against the Palestinian
Attorney General, the Palestinian High Court of Justice ordered the
immediate release of Dr. Al-Rantisi after the representative of the Attorney
General failed to provide the court with reasons for his arrest. Until now he
has not been released as the police continue to defy the decision of the
court and to operate in an extra-judicial manner without accountability.

On July 1, General Ghazi Al-Jabali, Director General of the Police

Department, informed the daily newspaper, Al-Quds, that Dr. Al-Rantisi
had been arrested in an affair related to public order, in accordance with
“laws of crime prevention,” because he had breached a prior commitment
not to incite or cause public disorder. Al-Jabali added that Al-Rantisi was
arrested in accordance with administrative measures and that the case was
therefore not subject to the jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice,
denying any need to release him based upon the High Court’s ruling. On
the other hand, Abdul Rachman Abu El-Nasser, head of the Palestinian Bar

55
 Association, rejected Al-Jabali’s reasoning not to apply the court decision
and stated that it had no legal basis. He further said that the authority of the
Director General of the Police Department in this matter was restricted to
receiving orders from the head of the Palestinian Authority and from the
Attorney General.

In another development, General Al-Jabali was quoted in Al-Quds on July

7, 1998 as responding to the statement of the head of the Bar Association as
follows:

1) “It is well known that the detention of Dr. Al-Rantisi is basically an

administrative one. Should we open his file, we believe that Article 26 of
the Penalty Law is sufficient by itself to charge him.
2) All important security issues are discussed in the Higher Security
Council, headed by the President, who is the supreme authority in the
country.
3) Original jurisdiction to arrest, investigate, detain, release, and search
lies with the police department according to the law but this jurisdiction
was transferred to the Attorney General by Decree 473 of 1956. Therefore,
coordination between the Attorney General and the police is restricted to
these areas only, but the jurisdiction of the Director of the Police remains
as is, where he does not receive orders from the Attorney General he has
complete jurisdiction to take proper measures to preserve public order,
public security, and to protect public morals.”

Comments of PCHR:
1) The Palestinian High Court of Justice ruled that measures taken to
arrest Dr. Al-Rantisi were null and void. No other authority is empowered
to supercede the decision of the court which is the highest judicial body.
All governmental institutions are obliged to obey this ruling in accordance
with the principle of the rule of law.
2) The Palestinian Attorney General is the guardian of the public case and
the legal body responsible for the arrest in this case. However, the
representative of the Attorney General never mentioned that Dr. Al-Rantisi
was under administrative detention and the Attorney General failed to
provide reasons for his continued illegal detention.
3) Administrative detention is only authorized by the 1945 defense
regulations and later by Israeli military orders. For these defense
regulations to be instated, the President must authorize the Palestinian
Legislative Council to officially pronounce a state of emergency, to publish
its decision, and to legislate the regulation of the emergency laws. Until
now, to the best of our knowledge, the PA had not taken any of these steps
to implement the defense regulations (Emergency Regulations).
Furthermore, we do not expect that the PA would apply relevant Israeli
military orders.

56
4) The jurisdiction of the Higher Security Council does not supercede that
of the High Court of Justice which is the only body authorized to veto
administrative decisions which it does not believe are correct.
5) Decree number 473 of 1956 regarding the jurisdiction of the Attorney
General has therefore canceled all prior relevant laws, including the law of
crime prevention, number 48 of 1933, which General Al-Jabali relies upon
to justify the continued detention of Dr. Al-Rantisi.
6) According to Palestinian law the jurisdiction to investigate and arrest is
restricted to representatives of the Attorney General. Furthermore, no one
may be detained for more than 30 days without written permission from the
Attorney General.
7) Neither Dr. Al-Rantisi nor his attorney were ever informed that he is
being administratively detained and were unaware of this situation until Al-
Jabali’s statement. Dr. Al-Rantisi was never brought before a judge
according to PCHR’s sources. Furthermore, his lawyer was never permitted
to visit him despite a permit from the Attorney General on April 13 and an
order from the High Court of Justice on April 29.
8) By these statements and by his blatant disregard for the law, General
Al-Jabali provides a very dangerous precedent as the head of the law
enforcement agency whose job it is to enforce and respect the law, and to
implement decisions of the court.
9) This statement of Al-Jabali shows that the police department is acting
outside the Attorney General’s jurisdiction and outside the law. It clearly
undermines the rule of law and the jurisdiction of both the Palestinian
Attorney General and the judiciary.
10) PCHR has always demanded that the PA implement rulings of
Palestinian courts and restates its demand to immediately release Dr. Al-
Rantisi. We agree with the head of the Bar Association that Al-Jabali’s
statements have no legal basis.
11) The continued illegal arrest in defiance of the court’s decision is a
breach of the 1936 Penalty Law and should be punished.
12) PCHR calls upon the Palestinian Minister of Justice, Freih Abu
Medein, to break his silence and to condemn this very dangerous affair
which undermines the office of the Attorney General and the rule of law.

October 19, 1998

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights issued a press release about the
decision of the Palestinian High Court to ask the Attorney General to
explain the reason for the continued holding of citizen Wael Ali Darwish
and the prevention of his release. The decision of the High Court took place
in the court meeting on October 19 to check the opinions that were
forwarded by the lawyers about their held client, Darwish. The news
release mentioned the three other decisions issued by the court when it was
held on October 17-18. According to the demand of the Centre lawyers and
a representative for the clients Mahmoud Abu Watfa, Muhammad Auda,
and Harb Al-Daqis, who were held by the Palestinian security forces for the

57
past two years, the High Court granted the Attorney General an extended
period of eight days to explain the reason for holding the mentioned
citizens. The press release explained its satisfaction with the decision of the
court, particularly that the Centre achieved this result despite the fact that
all other legal options had been exhausted.

October 30, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the massive wave of arrests of the
Islamic opposition groups.

The press release stated that on the afternoon of October 29, 1998, the
Palestinian security apparatus began a massive wave of arrests which
included tens of leaders, members, and supporters of the Islamic Resistance
Movement and the Islamic Salvation Party in the Gaza Strip. In addition to
this, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas, was
placed under house arrest and his telephone lines were cut, disconnecting
him from the outside world.

This wave of arrests came just a few hours after a suicide bomb attack, in
which an Israeli soldier was killed on the road leading to the Gush Katif
chain of settlements in the Gaza Strip.

Patrols of the security apparatus went to arrest scores of leaders and

members of Hamas and the Islamic Salvation Party whose names were on
the lists of targeted people. Those who were not at their homes were issued
a summons to come immediately to the headquarters of the security forces,
where all those arrested were being held. At the time this press release was
issued, PCHR knew of scores of people who had been arrested. This
included the house arrest of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. The state of house
arrest is according to the emergency regulations of 1945, which were
issued during the British Mandate of Palestine. The Mandate issued this
law at that time to suppress the Palestinian national movement. It is known
as one of the most aggressive laws and was widely used by the Israeli
occupation.

Among the most prominent prisoners were:

1. Dr. Mahmoud Al-Zahar (prominent Islamic activist)
2. Sheikh Ahmed Bahar (the head of the Shura Council of the National
Salvation Party)
3. Engineer Ismail Abu Shanab (Chairman of the Engineering
Association and Hamas leader)
4. Dr. Muhammad Shehab (member of the National Salvation Party)
5. Faraj Al-Awl (Advocate, member of the National Salvation Party)
6. Dr. Atallah Abu Al Sidah (member of the Shura Council of the
National Salvation Party)

58
 7. Sheikh Ahmed Nimr Hamdan (one of the most prominent Islamic
activists)
8. Dr. Maher El-Ghazaly (Chairman of “Mabarrit Al-Rahman”
Association)
9. Dr. Younis El-Astal (Lecturer at the Islamic University)
10. Dr. Ibrahim El-Yazouri (one of the most prominent Islamic activists)
11. Dr. Soleiman El-Deya (Lecturer at the Islamic University)
12. Ismail Hanniyah (one of the most prominent Islamic activists)

While PCHR understands the Palestinian Authority’s commitment vis-à-vis

the security of Israel resulting from the Oslo Agreements, the Centre
highlighted the following:

1. PCHR expressed its deep concern regarding this latest massive wave of
arrests by the Palestinian security forces. Moreover, PCHR calls on the
Palestinian Authority (PA) to stop this arbitrary campaign of arrests on the
Islamic opposition and calls for the PA to act according to the rule of law.
2. The Centre expressed its concern about the possibility of bringing many
of those arrested to the State Security Courts, which were established with
the blessing and support of the current U.S. administration.
3. PCHR viewed these arrests as a critical breach of human rights,
especially civil and political rights and the right of freedom of expression.
4. The Centre found the U.S. administration responsible as a full partner
for any human rights violations in the Occupied Territories (including PA
areas), especially in implementing the Security Plan, which is part of the
Wye Plantation Memorandum.

November 8, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the PA’s arrests of a number of
supporters of the secular opposition in Gaza.

The press release mentioned that after launching a massive wave of arrests
of around 200 persons from the Islamic opposition in the Gaza Strip, the
Palestinian Authority (PA) extended these arrests to supporters of the
secular opposition. By the evening of Friday, November 6, the Palestinian
police had arrested seven supporters of the Popular Front for the Liberation
of Palestine (PFLP) and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of
Palestine (DFLP). These arrests were carried out against the background of
a rally organized in Jabaliya refugee camp by the two groups, PFLP and
DFLP, on the afternoon of November 6. During this rally, the Wye River
Memorandum that was signed by President Yasser Arafat, Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu, and President Clinton in the White House on
October 23 was condemned. During the rally, both American and Israeli
flags were burned.

59
On November 7, the Palestinian police released three of the detained men,
while the other four remained in custody at the time the press release was
issued. The names of the four remaining in custody are:

1. Fayez Abu Sharekh

2. Lo’ai El-Za’aneen
3. Nasser Nasser
4. Ramez Okasha

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights expressed its deep concern about
this campaign of arrests, whereby the PA is arresting its opponents for their
political views. Indeed, the arrests are this time being extended to
supporters of secular factions which are part of the Palestine Liberation
Organization and which are legally present in areas under PA jurisdiction,
despite their opposition to the Interim Agreements. PCHR believes that the
continuation of the arrest campaign in the aftermath of the signing of the
Wye River Memorandum constitutes a major threat to freedom of
expression and political pluralism. Moreover, it undermines all efforts to
establish a democratic system in Palestine.

December 13, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about an arrest wave carried out by the
Palestinian security forces against the Islamic opposition in the Gaza Strip
on the eve of President Clinton’s visit to the region. The press release
mentioned that on the evening of Friday, December 11, 1998, the
Palestinian security forces carried out an arrest wave against more than 40
citizens from the supporters of Hamas and Islamic Jihad in different areas
of the Gaza Strip. Particularly targeted were Jabaliya and Rafah areas. In
addition, a summons was sent to a number of other supporters through the
Preventive Security Department and the General Intelligence Department.
In the press release, PCHR expressed its deep concern about the continuing
arrest waves by the Palestinian security forces against the opposition. These
arrests increased after the signing of the Wye River Memorandum between
the PA, Israel, and the United States on October 23, 1998. In the press
release, PCHR encouraged the Palestinian Authority to respect human
rights, democracy, and the rule of law, and demanded that it stop arresting
citizens due to their political stances and opinions.

December 30, 1998

The Centre issued a press release stating that for the 20 th consecutive day
the General Intelligence Forces imposed a house arrest on the family of the
escaped detainee, Yehya Mahmoud Al-Ghoul (also known as Adnan).
Specifically, his wife, Wafa, was prevented from leaving the house. The
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights called upon the Palestinian Authority

60
(PA) to intervene in order to stop the suffering of the Al-Ghoul family and
to stop the collective punishment imposed against it.

Yehya Mahmoud Al-Ghoul (38 years old from Al-Mugraqa) was held in
El-Saria prison in Gaza for political reasons related to his affiliation with
Hamas. In the morning of Friday, December 11, 1998, he escaped from his
prison after he cut through the bars of his prison cell.

At 9:30 a.m. of the same day, the General Intelligence Forces approached
the houses of Yehya Mahmoud Al-Ghoul and his brother Omar Al-Ghoul
(currently under arrest in an Israeli prison) in Al-Mugraqa area close to
Gaza Valley. The forces arrested Wafa, her sister Suhair (who is also the
wife of Omar), and the son of Omar and Suhair. In the middle of the night,
Suhair and her son were released while Wafa stayed under arrest until the
next day and was only released after a mediation session between her
family and the General Intelligence Forces. Her release was conditioned on
her not returning to her home and her agreement to stay in the house of her
father located in Al-Shati refugee camp. Following this agreement, Wafa
was released and returned to the home of her father until the General
Intelligence Forces allowed her to return to her house in Al-Mugraqa on
December 18, 1998.

On December 12, 1998, the General Intelligence Forces summoned several

relatives of the escaped detainee. Six of them were arrested, while the
seventh one did not turn himself in and is still wanted by the General
Intelligence Forces. Three of these six detainees were released after 10
days, while the other three remained under arrest at the time of the press
release.

Starting on December 11, 1998, the General Intelligence Forces stayed in

front of the two houses of the families for 24 hours daily and prevented
Wafa and Suhair from leaving their houses. There are 14 children living in
the two houses and they were prohibited from leaving the houses or going
to school on December 12. An 11-year-old child is now doing the shopping
for the families.

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights regarded with deep concern the
measures being taken by the General Intelligence Forces toward the Al-
Ghoul family. PCHR saw these measures as a collective punishment
against the family in clear violation of Palestinian and international laws
prohibiting such punishments. PCHR was reminded of similar measures
taken in the West Bank following the escape of the detainee Imad
Awadallah from his prison in Jericho on August 15, 1998. At that point, the
Palestinian Security Forces put his family under house arrest in Al-Bireh
for many days.

61
 The Centre called on the PA and all popular organizations to intervene to
stop the suffering of the Al-Ghoul family.

Individual Security Service Personnel Shooting and Killing Civilians

During 1998 the Centre documented a number of cases in which

individuals within the Palestinian security forces shot and killed citizens.
All of these cases were individual cases outside the formal framework of
the job of the individual who did the killing. In some cases, the PA took
strict measures against the individual who did the shooting. On several
occasions the PA ordered the man who did the killing to be killed by a
firing squad. The executions were carried out on two occasions after quick
trials that did not meet the criteria and conditions of a fair trial. The Centre
believes these cases result from the weakness of the rules that organize the
use of weapons by security forces. The Centre believes that solving these
cases cannot be done through hanging orders and that these orders are not a
deterrent. During 1998 three citizens from the Gaza Strip were killed and
three others were injured.24

The following are the cases of personnel killings:

1. On April 28, 1998, the student Kamilia Ibrahim Al-Mughir from Al-
Azhar University was injured by a bullet shot by a gun owned by a student
working in the General Intelligence Services. The incident took place while
the student was passing on a street next to the university. She was shot in
the side. The police held the student who shot her.
2. On May 1, 1998, two people working in the security forces shot at taxi
driver Fouad Kamal Abu Sultan (44 years old from Jabaliya camp) with the
aim of killing him and stealing his car. They were arrested and brought
before a military court through which they were jailed for life at hard labor.
Needless to say they were fired from their jobs.
3. On July 17, 1998, Mahmoud Ali Al-Shambari (26 years old from Beit
Hanoun) died after he was injured in the chest as a result of shots fired at
him by one of his family members who was working as an officer in the
Preventive Security Services. The incident took place in Beit Hanoun on
July 3, 1998, as a result of a family dispute. The criminal was arrested and
he is still being held by the Military Intelligence Department. He has still
not been brought to trial.
4. On August 27, 1998, two Palestinian brothers in Al-Nusiraat area were
killed by personnel working in the Palestinian security forces. The incident
took place due to family tension between the Al-Khaldi and Abu Sultan
families in the area of Aien Jaloot Buildings in Nusiraat. Several people
from Abu Sultan family shot at Mohammed Ibrahim Al-Khaldi (30 years
old) working in Force 17 (security of the president). He was killed by a
bullet wound in the chest. Shots were also fired at his brother Majdi
Ibrahim Al-Khaldi (32 years old), an official in the General Intelligence

24
According to Palestinian Centre for Human Rights reports, five Palestinian citizens were shot
dead in 1997 by personnel from the Palestinian security forces.

62
 Services and a member of the district committee of Fateh movement in the
middle areas of the Gaza Strip. He was injured by two bullets in his chest
and died before his arrival at Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza at about 3:00 a.m.
in the morning. Also, a third brother, Abdel Al-Adeem Al-Khaldi (34 years
old) was hit by a bullet in his right thigh and in his left leg.

This incident was received with popular outrage. As a result, President

Arafat ordered the formation of a military court to decide on the
accusations against the individuals who killed the two brothers. This
court was headed by the previous Attorney General Khalid Al-Qidreh.
The court was held on August 28-29. Three of the accused persons were
sentenced to death by firing squad. These three were all from Palestinian
security forces. Two others were jailed. The trial was very quick and its
decisions were not allowed any appeals. Normally, implementing the
death penalty decision requires the approval of President Arafat. The
president approved the court decision toward Rai’d and Muhammad
Kamal Abu Sultan while he decreased the death penalty sentence against
Faris Kamal Abu Sultan to a life sentence at hard labor. The death
penalty took place against the accused persons at approximately 2:30
p.m. on Sunday, August 30, 1998, although the Revolutionary Penalty
Law of 1979, by which the court tried the accused, prevents the
implementation of the death penalty on Fridays, Sundays, and on
national holidays under article 36.
5. On November 12, 1998, personnel from the Palestinian police shot at a
private car and injured the citizen Hiyam Ali Al-Amawi (30 years old from
El-Qarara in Khan Younis). Mrs. Al-Amawi stated that the incident took
place around 10:30 a.m. after traveling in a car with her 10-year-old son to
her work in a school that is located only 800 meters from her house. In the
middle of the route a police car passed the car in which Mrs. Al-Amawi
was a passenger. After passing, she heard some of the police shouting for
her vehicle to stop. They then shot many bullets toward the car. Mrs. Al-
Amawi underwent an operation in order to take out a bullet from her
intestines. The perpetrator was arrested and remains under arrest without
having been brought to trial as of yet.
6. On December 27, 1998, an officer of Force 17 shot at his cousin Khalid
Abu Shuaib (35 years old from Deir El-Baleh) and injured him in the
abdomen. The incident took place as a result of a family dispute. An
observer stated that the perpetrator entered the building of Deir El-Baleh
Society for the Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons and shot many times at a
distance of two meters toward his cousin. The victim was moved to Al-
Shifa Hospital where his health stabilized after an operation. The accused
turned himself in to Force 17 leadership in Deir El-Baleh. At this point it is
unclear what measures the PA will take against him.

63
Press Releases Issued by PCHR on Security Service Personnel Shooting
and Killing Civilians

April 29, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about a shooting at Al-Azhar University. A

student from the university was playing with his gun in a cafeteria near the
university when suddenly a bullet was fired, resulting in an injury to
Kamilia Al-Mughayar, a student who was walking on the opposite side of
the street. Al-Mughayar was shot in the right side of her body and
immediately transferred to Al-Shifa Hospital, where she received
treatment. In addition to being a student in the Law School at Al-Azhar, the
perpetrator works with the Palestinian General Intelligence. At the time of
the press release he was being detained by the Palestinian police.

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights expressed its deep concern about
this incident, the general lack of caution in the handling of weapons, and
the lack of concern for the safety of civilians. Despite declarations by the
Palestinian police that they have initiated a campaign to collect weapons
from civilians and that they promote the protection of civilian lives,
weapons remain widespread in Gaza. Several times this dangerous situation
has raised the concern and drawn the attention of PCHR. Now it has
reached the point that university students carry weapons, endangering the
lives of other students, and violating respect for the campus and its
surroundings.

August 27, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the killing of the brothers Mohammed
and Majdi Ibrahim Al-Khaldi.

The press release stated that two Palestinians from the Gaza Strip were shot
dead in the context of a dispute between families in the Nusiraat area. At
the time of the press release, the Palestinian security forces had closed the
area and arrested the suspected murderers.

In the early hours of August 27, 1998, both Mohammed Al-Khaldi, 30

years old from Deir El-Baleh, and his brother, Majdi Al-Khaldi, officer of
the Palestinian General Intelligence, were shot dead by members of the
Abu Sultan family. The two people suspected of the murders were reported
to be members of the Palestinian security forces.

PCHR condemned the crime and called upon the PA to take the necessary
measures within the rule of law to punish the murderers. PCHR reiterated
its demands to the PA to control the trend toward militarization and
arbitrary use of weapons by individuals working for the Palestinian security

64
forces. PCHR believes that this trend is a source of danger and a threat to
civil life as it undermines the safety of all Palestinian citizens.

August 31, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the PA’s carrying out a court decision
calling for the death penalty.

At 2:30 p.m. on August 30, 1998, the PA executed the brothers Ra’id and
Mohammed Abu Sultan, who had been sentenced to death by a military
court the day before. PCHR expressed its deep concern that this step may
establish a precedent in the areas under Palestinian jurisdiction in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip.

A military court was formed by President Arafat in order to try members of

the Abu Sultan family who were accused of murdering the brothers
Mohammed and Majdi Al-Khaldi on August 27, 1998. Headed by the
former Attorney General, Khalid Al-Qidreh, the court was convened
between August 28-29 and sentenced to death three brothers of the Abu
Sultan family.

PCHR expressed its concern about the quick trial and the fact that it could
not be appealed. The trial lasted only two days and was held almost
immediately following the crime. According to Palestinian law, the court’s
decision to use the death penalty can only be implemented after being
approved by the President. President Arafat approved the court decision
against two of the murderers while lowering the sentence against the third
perpetrator to life in prison.

PCHR reiterated its position against the death penalty and called upon the
PA to take effective measures in order to restrict and control the use of
weapons by security forces, bearing in mind that the three perpetrators
were members of security forces that have been involved in such crimes.
Previously, PCHR stated that restrictions of this sort on weapons are
necessary to protect the lives of citizens and to achieve stability and safety
for Palestinian society.

December 28, 1998

PCHR issued a press release detailing how on December 27 a member of

the Palestinian security forces fired at his cousin, Khalid Abu Shuaib, 35
years old, from Deir El-Baleh. He injured him in the stomach. The incident
took place due to a family dispute. An eyewitness said he saw the
perpetrator enter the building of Deir El-Baleh Society for the
Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons. The perpetrator fired his automatic
weapon at Shuaib from a distance of two meters. The victim was
transferred to Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza where he underwent immediate

65
surgery. PCHR was informed that he had improved from his original
critical condition. PCHR was also informed that the perpetrator, who is a
member of Force 17 (presidential security), surrendered to the headquarters
of Force 17 in Deir El-Baleh.

PCHR expressed its deep concern over the occurrence of the attack as such
incidents took the lives of many civilians during 1998 and the last few
years. PCHR reiterated its demand that the PA should take immediate and
effective measures to regulate the use of weapons by individuals in its
security forces.

The press release noted that the PA executed two of its security personnel
on August 30, 1998 after they were accused by a special military court of
murdering the brothers Mohammed and Majdi Al-Khaldi. At the time,
PCHR stated that the death penalty does not constitute an effective
deterrent to such crimes. PCHR further insisted that the PA should take
effective measures to regulate the use of weapons and take action against
the militarization of Palestinian society.

Death(s) in Suspicious Circumstances

During 1998 PCHR followed up one case related to a death in suspicious

circumstances. In this instance, PCHR suspected that a member of the
Palestinian security forces was involved in the death. On September 6,
Hussein Abu Ghali, 55 years old from Khan Younis, left home to go to the
Presidential Headquarters to ask for assistance to obtain a permit from the
Israeli authorities so that he could accompany his son to Jordan where he
was to receive medical treatment. On the very same day, his family was
informed of the father’s death. Omar Abu Ghali, the brother of the
deceased, testified to PCHR that he saw shoeprints on the clothes of his
brother and blood covered the sheet draped over his body. In another
testimony, Mohammed Abu Ghali, a son of the deceased, told PCHR that
he saw blood on his father’s nose and bruises on his chest.

Hussein Abu Ghali was transferred at 12:30 p.m. in a military ambulance

accompanied by a military nurse. The Palestinian police informed the
family about his death at 5:00 p.m. and stated that the reason of death was
unknown. The family accused a member of presidential security of
attacking their father and causing his death.

Press Releases about the Death of Hussein Abu Ghali

September 7, 1998

The Centre issued a press release stating that on September 6, 1998,

Hussein Abed Abu Ghali, 55, a resident of Khan Younis, Gaza Strip, died

66
in suspicious circumstances. Family sources accused a member of the
presidential security forces of beating him to death.

According to Abdul Fattah Abu Ghali (the son of the victim), his father left
home on September 6 on his way to the President’s Headquarters (Al-
Muntada) seeking medical help for one of his sons who had been wounded
by Israeli soldiers on May 15, 1998. At approximately 5:00 p.m., the
family was informed by the police that the father had died and that his body
was being kept at Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza.

Later, the family was informed by the police that the father was transferred
dead to the hospital from the waiting hall at the President’s Headquarters
(Al-Muntada) and that the reason for death had not been determined. No
medical report was given by the hospital to the family members who
received the body and buried it in the evening hours. A tent of condolences
was opened on September 6, but later closed. The family believes that the
death was not natural, but resulted from a beating at the hands of
individuals in the presidential security forces.

Omar Abu Ghali, the brother of the victim, testified to PCHR that he saw
signs of beating as indicated by shoeprints on the clothes of his brother.
Mohammed Abu Ghali, the son of the victim, also testified that he saw
signs of beating on his father’s chest and signs of bleeding from the nose.
The family complained to the Palestinian police that signs of beating were
evident on different places on Hussein’s body. A press release was issued
by the family on the morning of September 7 accusing a member of the
presidential security forces of beating Hussein to death.

PCHR, as the legal representative of the family, complained to the office of

the Palestinian Attorney General, and demanded an immediate
investigation of the death of Hussein Abu Ghali and the suspicious
circumstances surrounding it. PCHR asserted that there are reasonable
grounds for suspicion of death as a result of beating by individuals in the
presidential security forces. The main officer accused by the family was
reported in the past in other attacks against civilians. PCHR field workers
reported that he attacked two journalists on August 24, 1998, and that he
was subjected to a term of imprisonment by Force 17 (security of the
president).

September 8, 1998

PCHR issued a press release on September 8, 1998 referring to the previous

day’s press release about the death of Hussein Abed Abu Ghali (a resident
of Khan Younis) in suspicious circumstances. As the legal representative of
the Abu Ghali family, PCHR demanded that the Palestinian Attorney
General’s Office investigate the case immediately.

67
On September 8, 1998, PCHR received a letter signed by the Palestinian
Attorney General stating that he authorized a pathologist to conduct an
autopsy. The letter added that the autopsy revealed that the death of Abu
Ghali resulted from consequences of cardiac disease and diabetes.
According to the letter, no signs of criminal physical violence appeared on
the body of Abu Ghali.

The Continuing Work of the State Security Court

Despite the criticism by Palestinian and international human rights

organizations of the State Security Court, it continues to operate in the area
of the Palestinian Authority. The State Security Court was formed in
February 1995, eight months after the establishment of the PA in the Gaza
Strip and Jericho. The decision to establish it was made by President
Arafat. His decision was received with strong opposition by human rights
organizations since security courts typically work in a manner that
contradicts the criteria for fair trials and correct legal procedures. Usually
such security courts carry out quick trials in which the accused has no legal
representative. Furthermore, the accused person normally knows about the
time of the court session for only a limited period of time prior to its being
held.

In many cases, the State Security Courts are used to manipulate civil legal
measures and to overcome them. One of the most prominent cases of this
sort occurred in 1998 with Dr. Ibrahim Al-Maqadma who was arrested by
the Palestinian security forces on April 10, 1998. As the representative of
Al-Maqadma, the lawyers of PCHR requested from the Palestinian
Attorney General the reasons for his arrest and the exact accusations
against him. Unfortunately, they did not receive any response as the
Attorney General did not know anything about the case.

On June 20, 1998, the High Court of Justice rejected a request filed by the
lawyers of the Centre demanding the immediate release of Dr. Maqadma
who was illegally arrested. The High Court of Justice decided that it had no
jurisdiction over his case. This decision came after the Attorney General’s
declaration that the arrest of Dr. Al-Maqadma was in accordance with legal
measures, and that he was brought before the State Security Court on the
charge of cooperating against the Authority with the intent to carry out
criminal plans.

Accordingly, the Attorney General asked the High Court to reject the
Centre’s request since it was not under its jurisdiction. The response of the
Attorney General was surprising, especially two months after the arrest of
Al-Maqadma. In these two months the representatives of Al-Maqadma
tried to find out the reason for their client’s illegal arrest, but did not
receive any answer from the Attorney General. In addition, the Attorney
General had not succeeded in finding out the reason for his arrest and had

68
not succeeded in requiring the police to allow Al-Maqadma’s
representative to visit him. From the first days of Al-Maqadma’s arrest, the
Attorney General did not know the reason for his arrest. This fact forced
the Centre to appeal to the court.

What is most troubling in the matter is the fact that the arrest of Al-
Maqadma was renewed without the knowledge of the Attorney General.
The very existence of the State Security Courts and their continued
activities constitute a major threat to public freedom and the independence
of the judiciary in Palestine.25

The Non-Implementation of the Courts’ Decisions

The year witnessed a number of violations of the decisions of the

Palestinian courts by PA commissions and institutions. These violations
negatively influenced the independence of the Palestinian judicial system
and made it difficult to enhance the rule of law in PA areas.

It might be that one of the most prominent court decisions that was not
implemented was the High Court of Justice decision issued on June 4, 1998
about the release of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi who had been under arrest
since April 9, 1998. By the end of 1998 Dr. Al-Rantisi was still under
arrest by the police in contradiction with the law and in a clear challenge to
the court decision. Many other court decisions went unimplemented as
well.

Press Releases from the Centre about the Non-implementation of Court

Decisions

June 22, 1998

PCHR issued a press release expressing its condemnation of the Ministry

of Housing in intentionally defying a decision of the Palestinian High
Court of Justice. In a letter to the General Prosecutor, Dr. Ramadan Al-
Najar, Director General of the Ministry of Housing and consultant to the
Minister of Housing, proclaimed that Decision Number 137-96 of the High
Court was made under false pretenses. The decision called for an

25
The High Court of Justice made two similar decisions that it had no jurisdiction to review two
cases followed by the lawyers of PCHR. The first case is related to the citizen Yasser Muhammad
Taha’, who was arrested on May 13, 1997. The Centre appealed to the court to release him after it
failed to achieve any result with the Attorney General. On December 7, 1998, the court decided to
reject the request after the Attorney General answered that the mentioned citizen was brought
before the State Security Court.

The second case is related to Hussein Mustafa Ashour, who was arrested on March 13, 1996. On
December 10, 1998, the court decided to reject the request forwarded by the lawyers of the Centre
to release him for the same reason as before – that the citizen is under detention due to a decision
by the State Security Court.

69
immediate halt to bulldozing and other measures taken by the Ministry of
Housing regarding land parcels one and two of block number 2365.

The letter from the Director General followed an intervention by PCHR

challenging the violation of the aforementioned decision of the court, the
continued bulldozing, and other measures enacted by the Ministry of
Housing on that parcel of land.

PCHR was shocked by the response of the Ministry of Housing and

condemned any further bulldozing of land as a violation of the decision
made by the highest Palestinian judicial body. PCHR regarded such
bulldozing as a violation of the independence of the Palestinian judiciary
and a threat to its decision-making authority. This dangerous action should
not be tolerated without strict consequences. PCHR invited the PA to take
the following immediate steps: 1) Stop all bulldozing activities and oblige
the Ministry of Housing to compensate the rightful beneficiaries of the
land; 2) Punish all those who involved in violating the law and the
decisions of the Palestinian judiciary; and 3) Oblige all bodies of the
Executive Authority to respect and execute the decisions of the Palestinian
High Court of Justice and respect the rule of law.

October 10, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the demolition of a house in Gaza
by the Gaza Municipality. In defiance of a ruling from the Palestinian High
Court of Justice, the Municipality of Gaza City demolished the house of
Jamal Thalathini by bulldozer on Monday, October 5, 1998. Thalathini,
who protested against the Municipality’s illegal action, was beaten by
members of the Palestinian security forces (Military Intelligence) and
transferred to Al-Shifa hospital unconscious. He suffered injuries to his
head, nose, ears, chest, and back. At the time of the press release,
Thalathini remained in the hospital while his family was left without
shelter.

On October 4, 1998, the day before the demolition of his house, Jamal
Thalathini received a notification of removal from the Municipality, but he
managed to obtain an order from the High Court of Justice suspending the
removal from his home.

In the press release, the Centre asserted that once again, the Municipality of
Gaza had defied the decision of the highest Palestinian judicial authority.
The PA, it said, had taken no firm action to stop such illegal activities. On
the contrary, the National Security Forces and Military Intelligence, which
should not be involved in such cases, appeared to lend their support to the
Municipality.

70
PCHR expressed its deep concern about the repeated illegal activities of the
Gaza Municipality. PCHR called upon the PA to: 1) ensure that all those
involved in defying the ruling of the court be held accountable for their
actions; 2) PCHR condemned the use of violence against Jamal Thalathini
by members of the Palestinian security forces; and 3) PCHR called for an
appropriate remedy and redress for the family of Thalathini, including the
provision of decent housing for them.

The Retirement of the Chief Justice

Since the middle of February 1998 the position of Chief Justice has been
unfilled as a result of the retirement of Chief Justice and President of the
High Court, Qusai El-Abadlah. The absence of a judge to fill this position
should be regarded as a dangerous threat to the independence of the judicial
system and damaging to any effort to enhance the rule of law, the concept
of the separation of powers, and the institutionalization of government.
Moreover, this situation reflects a case of carelessness by the Executive
Authority toward the judicial authority and signifies an effort by the PA to
control and dominate the judicial authority. The position has stood empty
for 10 months, and it does not appear that the Executive Authority is
serious in correcting the damage that has taken place to the judicial
authority and its president.

The head of the General Personnel Office of the PA decided to retire the
Chief Justice, Counselor El-Abadlah, effective February 16, 1998. This
decision came in a letter dated on January 17, 1998, and sent by the
president of the General Personnel Office to El-Abadlah. The letter
clarified that due to the fact that the judge had reached the legal age of
retirement of 60, and in light of the president’s approval to extend his work
to February 15, 1998, it was decided that he would be retired on February
17, 1998. El-Abadlah was appointed as Chief Justice and head of the High
Court of Justice in a decision taken by President Arafat. According to the
law, the President is the only one who has the authority to appoint and to
retire the head of the High Court. Moreover, El-Abadlah was appointed to
his position by President Arafat after he (El-Abadlah) was more than 60
years old and the decision of his appointment did not mention any
contracting obligations of either a permanent or temporary character.

It is worth mentioning that the weekly news of Al-Risalah published a long

interview on January 15, 1998 with Counselor El-Abadlah two days before
the decision on his retirement was taken by President Arafat. In that
interview, El-Abadlah criticized the PA and some of its institutions’
interventions in the work of the judicial authority. He accused the Minister
of Justice in the PA of attempts to obstruct the work of the judicial system
and attempts to weaken the judges. Moreover, Counselor El-Abadlah spoke
about a number of illegal practices taken toward judges, particularly
regarding promotions for judges that took place without proper legal basis.

71
 He also criticized the PA for not implementing decisions of the Palestinian
courts.

Press Release Issued by the Centre about the Retirement of the Chief
Justice

On January 25, 1998, the Centre issued a press release about the Executive
Authority decision to retire the Chief Justice Qusai El-Abadlah. The press
release stated that this was a surprising and shocking step and negatively
influenced Palestinian judicial independence. The press release expressed
great surprise with the suspicious way in which El-Abadlah was retired by
the head of the General Personnel Council. Accordingly, the Centre
emphasized the following:

1. The decision to dismiss El-Abadlah by the head of the General

Personnel Council is an illegal measure that may undermine the
independence of the Palestinian judiciary. The unorthodox dismissal
tarnishes the integrity of the judiciary.
2. PCHR expresses its deep concern about the decision, especially as it
coincides with critical comments by El-Abadlah that appeared in Al-
Risalah.
3. The critical comments made by El-Abadlah were extremely sensitive
and important. They deserve further and more thorough investigation by
concerned institutions within the PA in order to uncover more accurate
conclusions.
4. PCHR also calls upon Palestinian President Yasser Arafat to intervene
in order to protect the independence of the judiciary, and to take whatever
measures are required to ensure the integrity of the judiciary, including
annulling the decision by the head of the General Personnel Council.

The Resignation of the Palestinian Attorney General

At the beginning of May 1998 the Palestinian Attorney General Fayez Abu
Rahma resigned in protest to the PA’s undermining of his authority. His
resignation came 78 days after the dismissal of Chief Justice Qusai El-
Abadlah, and reflected the degree of deterioration in the rule of law and
justice in the PA’s area. The decisions of the Attorney General were not
respected by the Executive Authority and the officials responsible for law
enforcement. Moreover, since the beginning of the year a large amount of
his delegation had been reduced. According to the law, the position of
Attorney General is regarded as one of the most important formal positions
in the protection of the rule of law and citizens’ rights. The Attorney
General is considered to be the guardian of the public’s case, and he
specializes in criminal prosecution. During 1998 the Centre forwarded to
the Attorney General 104 letters related to arrested citizens. His office was
asked in these letters to clarify the reasons for the arrests of these citizens,
to allow their families to visit them, and to release them. The Centre

72
received only one response. In this solitary response, the lawyers of the
Centre were allowed to visit one of the detainees. The police, however, in a
clear challenge to the authority of the Attorney General, did not permit
them to visit him.26

In a similar situation to that of the Chief Justice, the Executive Authority

did not attempt to appoint a new Attorney General and the position
remained empty through the end of they year. The absence of an Attorney
General means that many of the measures that are carried out by the
Executive Authority are in and of themselves considered illegal, including
the arrests of tens of citizens for periods of more than one month as it is
necessary in such cases to have approval from the Attorney General. Such
approval is now clearly lacking. According to the law, all the detainees
who are being held without charge or trial are considered held by the
Attorney General. In the absence of an Attorney General it is not known by
whom these people will be held. As a result of this serious defect in the
Attorney General’s position there are tens of detainees who have been held
without charge for more than three years in a structural contradiction to the
norms of law. This was one of the basic reasons forcing the Attorney
General to resign.

A Press Release about the Resignation of the Attorney General

On May 5, 1998, the Centre issued a press release about the resignation of
Attorney General Fayez Abu Rahma due to the undermining of his
authority. In the press release, the Centre expressed its deep concern about
the current situation in the judiciary, especially the office of the Palestinian
Attorney General, after the resignation of Palestinian Attorney General
Fayez Abu Rahma, 78 days after the dismissal of the Chief Justice. The
Palestinian Attorney General resigned in response to the repeated
undermining of his authority and jurisdiction by the Executive Authority.
The resignation of the Attorney General clearly indicates the true status of
the rule of law in the areas controlled by the PA. The continuous
undermining of the rule of law will certainly affect the status quo and the
future of human rights in Palestine. On numerous occasions, the Executive
Authority has not respected the decisions of the Attorney General, nor his
authority and jurisdiction as set out in Palestinian law. In any society,
especially Palestinian society, the rule of the Attorney General is of the
utmost importance because of his mandate to conduct investigations and to
ensure respect for citizens’ rights, freedoms, and the general public
interest.

The Attorney General’s decision to resign did not come as a shock because
of a series of events that have occurred since he was appointed. Since
December 28, 1997, the mandate of the Attorney General has been
subjected to direct interference and his authority to carry out general
26
In this regard, see the case of Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi on pages 49-50 and 53-56 of this report.

73
prosecution has been significantly and illegally diminished. On August 15,
1997, the Palestinian Attorney General issued orders to release 11
Palestinians who had been detained for many months in the Gaza Central
Prison without trial. At around 9:00 p.m. that same day, the prison director
released the men. Three hours later, they were re-arrested and the director
of the prison was arrested for releasing the men.

In another example of the Attorney General’s undermined authority, on

April 9 and 10, 1998, Palestinian police arrested Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi
and Dr. Ibrahim Al-Maqadma, who are top leaders of Hamas. At the
request of their families, PCHR agreed to defend these men and applied
for permission to visit their clients in prison. When the Palestinian police
refused, PCHR appealed to the Attorney General. On April 13, he granted
the lawyers permission for visitation, but this permit was also rejected by
the Palestinian police. PCHR then appealed to the Palestinian High Court
of Justice, which decided, inter alia, to allow PCHR lawyers to visit their
clients. However, at the time of the press release, the Palestinian police
had yet to comply with this order.

The real reasons behind the resignation of the Attorney General still exist,
namely the lack of respect and repeated disregard of his decisions. PCHR
has already expressed its concern over the severity of this continued
problem. Though not shocked by the decision of the Attorney General to
resign, PCHR called for an end to such neglect, advancement of the rule of
law, and respect for the mandate and jurisdiction of the Attorney General.
PCHR affirmed the necessity for law enforcement officials to respect the
decisions of the Attorney General as well as the need for increased
awareness of the mandate and jurisdiction of the Attorney General as set
out in Palestinian law.

Based on the above-mentioned facts, PCHR called on the Executive

Authority to give the Attorney General all authority provided to him by
Palestinian law while appointing a new Attorney General. At the same
time, PCHR reaffirmed the need to respect his decisions and promote his
jurisdiction in order to ensure the rule of law. A strong Attorney General
and an independent judiciary are fundamental conditions for a Palestinian
civil society in which justice, democracy, and respect for human rights
prevail. The failure to promote these conditions cannot be justified by any
situation, no matter how exceptional or how complex. The rule of the
Attorney General and the independence of the judiciary are the keys to
overcoming difficult legal situations. The power of the PA should rest on
respect for these principles in theory and in practice.

The Palestinian Legislative Council

74
Since the inauguration of the Palestinian Legislative Council in March
1996 the Centre has devoted a large part of its effort to following up the
Council’s work and to encouraging it to adopt legislation in accordance
with democratic principles and human rights criteria. The Centre is
seriously following up the legislation discussed by the Council and often
provides a critique of these drafts and suggests modifications to some of
the articles. These comments are forwarded to members of the Council.
During the last two years the Centre has developed a structure of positive
relationships with most of the Council members. Many of these members
from time to time participate in the different activities that are hosted by
the Centre and many times members of the Council are invited for
meetings and workshops held by the Centre on subjects and issues of
concern. These meetings and workshops secure the necessary and suitable
environment to exchange opinions and visions between human rights
activists, representatives of civil society institutions (including NGOs and
political parties), and Council members.

At a different level, the Centre followed up the Legislative Council

activities in regard to its tasks of legislation, monitoring, and
accountability. During 1998 the Centre developed a new report to evaluate
the Council’s achievements in the mentioned tasks during the first and
second sessions of the Council’s work. This evaluative report was issued
in November 1998 to cover the first and second sessions of the Council’s
work, the period from March 1996 to March 1998. The report was largely
distributed to different segments of Palestinian society, particularly to the
Legislative Council members. The Centre hopes that this report will be
helpful, will enhance the parliamentary experience, and will support
democratic practices in Palestine.27 This report will be produced annually
by the Centre.

PCHR’s Report on the Palestinian Legislative Council

This report is considered to be the first and only report to attempt to assess
the conduct of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). The report
concluded that the PLC during its first session (from March 7, 1996 to
March 6, 1997) and second session (from March 9, 1997 to March 8,
1998) failed to meet the achievements expected of it. Regarding its task as
a legislative body, the PLC has been unable to establish the Basic Law as a
basis for the relationship between the three authorities and the public.
Although the Basic Law was approved in its first, second, and third drafts,
the PLC did not take any serious measures against the Executive Authority
for its rejection of the Basic Law. Although the report acknowledged the
PLC’s difficult position in relation to the Executive Authority, it seems
that the PLC suspended its activities regarding the Basic Law indefinitely.
What is worth noting is that the Palestinian Election Law of 1996, through
which the PLC members were elected, clearly states that the first task of
27
A copy of this report can be obtained through direct contact with PCHR.

75
 the elected Palestinian Legislative Council is to establish a constitutional
system for the interim period.

In addition, the PLC was unable to commit the Executive Authority to the
decisions that it issued. Most of these decisions are related to political,
social, economic, and legal issues, and they are considered to be of great
importance as they have a direct influence on the public. Moreover, such
decisions determine the road to a democratic society.

In respect to accountability and monitoring, the PLC was able to make

good progress although there is still a great deal more to achieve. For
example, the PLC was successful in calling certain Executive Council
members for inquiry and was able to form investigation committees to
follow up the issues related to misuse of authority, violation of human
rights, and administrative corruption. Unfortunately, the PLC was not able
to commit the Executive Authority to follow its recommendations and
change the current situation.

Consequently, at times the PLC looked weak and marginalized in

comparison with the Executive Authority. What was unique about the PLC
was that in its two sessions there was the intention to avoid confrontation
with the Executive Authority. The PLC, for example, refrained from using
a vote of no confidence against the government. The report mentioned
many reasons behind this complex situation regarding the failure of the
PLC:

1. The uniqueness of the Palestinian situation and the constraints imposed

on the PLC’s work, as a result of the fact that its existence came as one of
the obligations of the Interim Agreements signed between the two sides.
The agreement limited the period of the PLC’s work to the interim period
and this decreased its ability to commit the Executive Authority to its
decisions and laws. The Executive Authority felt that it was unnecessary to
commit itself, due to the temporary nature of the laws.
2. The PLC is the first real parliamentary experience for the Palestinians.
This lack of experience has led the members to feel uncertain about their
real roles in the PLC.
3. This situation was worsened by the Executive Authority’s rejection of
the principles of monitoring and accountability as a basis for the
relationship between the two authorities. The Executive Authority ignored
all the laws and decisions issued by the PLC, which had a dangerous and
negative influence on the members, making their activities seem
meaningless.
4. The presence of an institutional context is vital for the work of any
parliamentary institution. The existence of an efficient and independent
judicial system that is able to implement the laws that are issued by the
PLC and enhance the rule of law is especially important.

76
5. The absence of an opposition in the PLC due to the boycott by the
opposition groups of the 1996 general elections. This absence created weak
parliamentary alliances and the PLC has consequently been unable to make
the monitoring and accountability mechanisms more efficient.

The report recommended the following as means to push forward the

democratic process in Palestinian society and to support the PLC in
achieving its basic tasks of legislation, monitoring, and accountability:

1. It is necessary that the PLC work at securing approval of the Basic Law
since the Basic Law is considered the foundation of any constitutional
relationship between the three authorities and since it determines the
delegations of each authority and regulates the relationship between the
government and citizens.
2. It is important that the PLC follows up the results of the investigation
committees it has formed. The absence of seriousness by the PLC in taking
the recommendations of its committees into consideration is noticeable,
especially those committees which were formed to follow up human rights
violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. For example, the
Executive Authority did not commit itself to any of the committees’
recommendations to follow up human rights violations.
3. It is necessary that the PLC work at following up the decisions it has
issued. All the decisions issued by the PLC in the first two sessions were
related to issues or questions of citizens’ concern. Therefore, following the
implementation of these decisions is as important as following up the
implementation of the Basic Law.
4. It is important to improve the relations between the members of
parliament and the public. Given that members of parliament represent the
public and act on their behalf, they must be committed to respond to public
demands. It must not be understood from this that the role of the members
of the Council should bring an intervention in personal issues such as
assistance in finding jobs or mediating for others.
5. Based on this and given that the right to access to information is a basic
right, the PLC has to work at developing all means that allow citizens to
look at its work and follow it up, either through the media or any other
means. The idea of covering the PLC’s activities on television was raised
on a number of occasions, but just one of the PLC’s meetings was covered
on television. Therefore, it is important that this issue is raised again. The
PLC is the only authority that can determine what kind of information is
delivered to the public about its activities.
6. In this context, developing popular programs to increase citizens’
awareness about the role of the parliament is considered of great
importance since such programs contribute to securing the necessary
environment for the PLC’s work. Such activity can be achieved through
conferences, workshops, meetings, and other means.

77
The Failure to Hold a By-election in Gaza Constituency

There was supposed to be a by-election in the Gaza constituency on May

29, 1998 to elect a new member to the Council to replace the resigned
member, Dr. Haider Abdel Shafi. The Legislative Council accepted the
resignation of Dr. Abdel Shafi on March 30, 1998. In his resignation letter,
Dr. Abdel Shafi clarified his belief that the Executive Authority had turned
its back to the requirements of constitutional coordination and cooperation.
He asserted that the Executive Authority’s undermining of Council
initiatives to adopt the Basic Law provided strong evidence of the negligent
policy it was following in relationship to the Council. Dr. Abdel Shafi
expressed his regret over the weak stand of the Speaker of the Council
toward this policy and for his failure to adopt a serious stance to stop the
Executive Authority’s policy in this regard.

According to the 1995 Palestinian Election Law an election will be held 60

days following the retirement or resignation of a Council member.
Actually, the Central Election Committee started to prepare and organize
an election for May 29, 1998 after Dr. Abdel Shafi’s resignation. However,
the Court of Elections Appeals met regarding the election issues to discuss
an appeal provided to cancel that election due to the fact that the term of
the new member would be less than the minimum period (of one year) that
was determined by the Palestinian Election Law in 1995. On May 20,
1998, the court decided to cancel the election. Consequently, the position
of the resigned member, Dr. Abdel Shafi, remains empty. (For more details
about this case see below.)

Press Releases about the By-elections for the PLC

May 6, 1998

PCHR issued a press release expressing its readiness to participate in local

monitoring of the by-elections of the Gaza constituency scheduled to be
held on May 29, 1998 to elect the successor to Dr. Abdel Shafi, a member
of the PLC who resigned on March 30, 1998.

May 18, 1998

PCHR issued a press release stating that the Election Appeals Court would
convene to consider an appeal presented by advocates Abdel Rahman Abul
Nasser and Dr. Kamal Al-Asdal to cancel the by-elections in the Gaza
constituency. They argued that the remaining period for the member
elected would be less than one year, the minimum period according to the
1995 Palestinian Election Law in which to hold a by-election.

The Central Election Committee set May 29, 1998 as the date for by-
elections to elect a new member to the PLC to succeed Dr. Abdel Shafi, a

78
former council member whose resignation took effect March 30, 1998.
According to Dr. Osama Abu Safia, the Director General of the Central
Electoral Committee, the committee received a letter from the Speaker of
the Council, informing the committee that there was a vacancy as of April
4, 1998. Because the term of the Council will end at the end of the interim
period on May 4, 1999, this means that the remaining period is more than
one year.

Accordingly, holding an election in due time is completely consistent with

the 1995 Palestinian Election Law. Article 92 (4) states: “If the remaining
period of term of legislature at the moment of the vacancy exceeds one
year, by-elections shall take place in the constituency where the member
whose position is vacant was elected.”

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights is concerned that there is an

attempt to cancel the by-elections and that the real reason for this is the
poor showing at registration centers. The Central Electoral Committee
opened 11 centers for registration, distributed geographically throughout
the Gaza constituency. Each center was given a final election register from
1996 and a call went out for those who were not registered to register at the
centers. The number of non-registered people was estimated at 10,000, but
over 18 days only 60 people registered. This is an indicator of the lack of
concern and enthusiasm among the voters. This conclusion is supported by
the fact that all candidates are derived from the same political background.
Excluding Fateh and its supporters, no political party nominated candidates
for the election.

PCHR called for holding by-elections in due time and without delay, in
accordance with the law, to contribute to the development of the
democratic process. PCHR was eager to avoid a repeat of the experience of
1997 when local elections were called for August of that year, but then
canceled by a political decision.

May 19, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the court’s postponement of its
decision of an appeal to cancel the by-elections in Gaza. In the press
release, the Centre mentioned that on Monday, May 18, 1998, the Election
Appeals Court convened to consider an appeal presented by advocate
Abdel Rahman Abul Nasser and Dr. Kamal Al-Asdal to cancel the by-
election in the Gaza constituency scheduled for May 29, 1998. The by-
election had been called in order to fill the vacancy in the Palestinian
Legislative Council left by the resignation of former Council member Dr.
Haider Abdel Shafi. According to the appeal, holding this election would
be null and void because the remaining period of term for the member-elect
would be less than one year, the minimum period according to the law.

79
The press release stated that in the previous day’s press release PCHR
called for holding by-elections in due time and in accordance with the law.
The Centre noted that the vacancy opened on April 4, 1998, making the
remaining period of term more than one year as the legislative term
concludes at the end of the interim period on May 4, 1999.

Advocate Abul Nasser told the court that the reason for his appeal was to
assert that May 4, 1999 is the date for the end of the interim period and to
urge the court to assert this date and not to let the Israelis exploit the
matter. The court, however, had adjourned and would not reconvene until
May 20 to make its decision. PCHR found no reason for the court and
judiciary to become involved in asserting the date for the end of the interim
period as the date had already been agreed upon in the Interim Agreement.

The Centre also found it necessary for by-elections to be held in the Gaza
constituency in accordance with the 1995 Palestinian Election Law and
asserted that canceling these elections would negatively affect the
development of the democratic process and the rule of law.

May 21, 1998

The Centre issued a press release on the subject of the Election Appeals
Court cancellation of the by-elections in the Gaza constituency. The
decision of the court held on May 20, 1998 mentioned that there was no
presidential decree for such an election and the court decided that since
there had been no presidential decree calling for elections, all measures and
preparations taken by the Central Election Commission to hold elections
had no legal basis. Therefore, the court canceled the decision of the Central
Election Commission to hold by-elections in the Gaza constituency to fill
the vacancy in the Palestinian Legislative Council.

Beatings of Members of the Legislative Council

On August 26, 1998 the Palestinian security forces beat a number of

Legislative Council members and journalists when they gathered in a
peaceful sit-in in front of the house of Imad Awadallah in Al-Bireh in
protest of the imposition of severe house arrest against his family. The
Palestinian security forces imposed a strict arrest on his house after his
escape from a prison related to the Preventive Security Service on August
15, 1998. From that date, his relatives were not allowed to leave their
house. The house arrest was regarded as an illegal measure carried out by
the security forces and was viewed as being a collective punishment
prohibited by local and international laws. In fact, this measure was
received with outrage by the Palestinian people. A number of human rights
activists and Legislative Council members participated in a peaceful sit-in
in front of the Awadallah house on August 26, 1998. During the sit-in, a
number of Legislative Council members and journalists were subjected to

80
beatings by personnel of the Palestinian security forces wearing civilian
clothing. Among the members of the Council who were subjected to
beatings were Abed Rabu Abu Auwn, Jamal Al-Shati, and Suleiman Al-
Roumi. According to Al-Ayaam newspaper, a similar occurrence happened
the following day as well when Council member Hatem Abdel Qader was
subjected to a beating by a person wearing civilian clothing under the
supervision of security service personnel who were standing in front of
Awadallah’s house.28

The Legislative Council strongly condemned these practices and asked

President Yasser Arafat to retire Jibril Rajoub, head of Preventive Security
Services in the West Bank, to investigate him about the beating of the
Legislative Council members by his officers, and to bring all those who
participated in beating the Council members to a public trial. In addition,
the Council asked for the house arrest against the Awadallah family to be
broken immediately as it is a kind of collective punishment which has been
rejected and fought against by the Palestinian people on many occasions. In
its exceptional meeting held on August 31, 1998, the Council formed a
special committee to follow up the work of the Military Judicial Committee
which took responsibility for investigating the incident. The Council had
heard the response of the government forwarded by the Parliament Affairs
Minister Nabil Amr affirm that the Ministerial Council supported the
measures of President Arafat that aimed at forming a Military Investigation
Committee headed by Ismail Jabr, the National Security Forces
Commander. The Council regarded the government’s response as being
insufficient.

The Palestinian security forces house arrest against Imad Awadallah’s

family continued until August 28, 1998, and stopped due to the orders of
President Arafat to break the house arrest against the family. But no
information was released about the investigation of the beating of Council
members, nor any measures taken against Rajoub.

PCHR’s Critical Comments on the Draft Law of Charitable Associations

and Community Organizations

Throughout the last few years, especially since the establishment of the
Palestinian Authority (PA) in 1994, a strong debate has arisen in the
Occupied Palestinian Territories regarding the work and the organization of
the Palestinian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the promotion
of civil society. In view of this, thorough discussions were devoted to the
legal framework which regulates the activities of NGOs and their
relationship with the government, especially in light of the PA’s initiative
when a draft law named the “Law of Charitable Associations, Social
Societies, and Private Institutions” was proposed in September 1995. A

28
Al-Ayaam newspaper, August 27, 1998.

81
previous draft law proposed by the PA had been rejected by the NGOs and
an amended version was introduced.

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) has been involved in
these discussions on the NGO level, especially with the Network of
Palestinian NGOs. In December 1997, PCHR published its study of the
draft law proposed by the PA. In addition to the Centre’s critical comments
about the law, the study covered the historical development of the legal
framework which governed the activities of the NGOs, starting with the
1907 Ottoman Law and ending with Israeli Military Orders which added
further restrictions to the work of the NGOs.

The Network of Palestinian NGOs increased its interest and efforts in this
regard in the aftermath of the Palestinian general elections in 1996 and
again after the inauguration of the Palestinian Legislative Council. The
Network of Palestinian NGOs proposed its own draft law, accompanied by
a campaign and lobbying with Legislative Council members, to persuade
them to adopt it in the Council. Another draft law proposed by the
Executive Authority to the Legislative Council seems to favor the
government’s proposal, although it incorporates specific points from the
NGOs’ proposal. By July 30, 1998, the draft law was passed on the second
reading in the Council. According to Palestinian law, the draft law must be
sent to the President for ratification and amendment within one month. A
third reading will take place if the Council receives comments from the
President within one month. The Council failed to receive any such
comments from the President’s office, making it unclear whether the law
would be passed or subjected to further change.

Throughout the stages of passing this law, the Network of Palestinian

NGOs was very active in persuading Council members to adopt its views.
This case provided a model for the work of civil society organizations and
demonstrated how they can play an effective role in influencing the
decision-making process, especially in terms of laws and legislation. PCHR
praised the efforts of the Legislative Council members and the wide range
of NGOs for their efforts to adopt a new law that would contribute to the
strengthening of civil society and give independence to NGOs. PCHR was
pleased that the draft law passed on the second reading left out many of the
areas that were criticized in the first draft. Indeed, relatively speaking, it is
superior to relevant laws in other Arab countries.

Following the second reading of the draft law, PCHR asserted that four
principles are of the utmost importance in promoting the activities of NGOs
and strengthening Palestinian civil society.

1. Pluralism is a basic element of a democratic system, which includes,

inter alia, legislation for the presence and acceptance of a wide range of
independent NGOs protected from the intervention of the central

82
 government. The more constitutional and legal protection against
government intervention provided for NGOs, the more able they will be
to play an effective role in civil society.

2. The efficiency of the work of NGOs depends on how democratically

they are structured.

3. NGOs are not private or profit-making institutions. As such, principles

of transparency and accountability before government and community
should be implemented in regard to their activities.

4. It is almost impossible to promulgate a comprehensive law providing a

legal framework for all categories of NGOs. It is understood that the
proposed draft law is designed only to regulate the work of such NGOs,
which are based on membership. Other categories may need another law or
even laws to replace the current legal framework.

The Failure to Hold Local Elections

The year witnessed another failure in the democratic transformation in

Palestine due to the failure to hold Local Council elections. Up till now
there are appointed councils in all Palestinian municipalities in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority started preparing for these
elections in 1997 after it approved the Local Councils’ Election Law on
December 16, 1996. On January 10, 1998, President Arafat issued a decree
to form a General Committee for the Election under the direction of Dr.
Saeb Erekat.

The PA decided not to hold elections under the justification of the blocked
peace process and the non-implementation of the re-deployment stages that
were agreed upon with the Israeli government. At that time, PCHR
expressed its concern that this local election would not be held during 1997
and that the appointments made by the PA to the Local Councils would be
more than temporary appointments. Now 1998 has gone by without
holding local elections. This represents a failure in the process of
democratic transformation of Palestine and in establishing democratic
institutions in Palestine.

Continued Restrictions on Freedom of Expression and Publication

During 1998 the PA continued imposing restrictions on freedom of

expression and press and adopted a group of measures to restrict citizens in
expressing their opinions and pursuing their right to information. In
addition to what has been mentioned in some parts of this report
concerning the arrest of hundreds of citizens due to their political beliefs or
opinions, the year witnessed restrictions placed on journalists; indeed, a
number of journalists were arrested or summoned to police stations, and

83
 many press offices were closed by the Palestinian police. These measures
not only contradict international standards for human rights, but also
contradict the Press Law that was issued by the PA in 1995. 29

On October 23, 1998, President Arafat, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and

President Clinton signed the Wye River Memorandum on continuing the
implementation of the Interim Agreement articles. This memorandum had a
significant negative influence on freedom of expression, especially when
the measures that the PA committed itself to adopt in order to fight
“violence and terrorism” are taken into consideration. Simultaneous to the
signing ceremony for the Wye River Memorandum, the Palestinian police
arrested a number of journalists and adopted additional measures that
restrict freedom of expression. By the beginning of November 1998 the PA
adopted new measures that restrict the work of foreign correspondents in
the areas that are under its jurisdiction as a means to isolate them and
prohibit them from contacting the opposition parties’ leaders. On
November 19, 1998, Presidential Decree Number 3 for 1998 regarding
“supporting the national unity and prohibiting terrorism and violence” was
issued. This decree has dangerous and negative implications for freedom of
expression and press.

Restrictions on Journalists’ Work

1. On August 29, 1998, members of the Palestinian police beat Munier

Mahmoud Abu Riziq, 23 years old from Gaza City, who was working with
Al-Hayaa newspaper and is a member of the Administrative Board of the
Journalists Union. Abu Riziq informed the Centre that he was beaten by
more than 10 policemen as a result of his attempt to attend a court session
to charge two military men. Moreover, he added that he was subjected to
insulting curses.

2. On September 13, 1998, Palestinian police held Saber Ibrahim Nour

Eddin, 19 years old from Gaza City, who was working as a photographer in
the French Press Agency. He was held for about 11 hours. In the
information he gave the Centre he mentioned that at 5:30 in the evening of
Saturday, September 12, 1998, a number of policemen stopped him while
he was trying to get in his car beside Al-Jundi al-Majhoul in Gaza after he
had finished photographing events at the peaceful gathering called by the
Detainees’ Family Committee (for prisoners in PA prisons). One of the
policemen asked the journalist to give him the photographs from the
peaceful gathering but the journalist vehemently refused. The policemen
then asked him for his journalist card and his personal identity card. After

29
Even the Press Law of 1995, which all parties called the PA to commit itself to, is not
considered the ideal law to protect the right of expression and publication. PCHR criticized this
law strongly. In this regard, see the study that was published by PCHR under the topic of “Critical
Comments on the Palestinian Press Law of 1995.”

84
 they checked it, a policeman asked the journalist to go to the police
department if he would like to get the cards back.

At 10:30 a.m., Sunday, September 13, 1998, the journalist Nour Eddin
went to the police department where he was transferred to the criminal
investigation department. He was held there until 10:00 p.m., at which
time he met Brigadier Talal Abu Zeid (Head of Criminal Investigations
in the police department). According to the information received by
PCHR, Brigadier Abu Zeid accused him of throwing stones at the
policemen and claimed that he had videocassettes that showed him
throwing stones at the policemen. Nour Eddin rejected the claim,
saying it was not correct, and asserted that he was only a journalist
doing his job. After that, Brigadier Abu Zeid asked Nour Eddin to sign
a commitment in which he expressed his willingness to work within
the Palestinian law and to come to the police station at any time asked
to by the police. The journalist Nour Eddin signed the commitment and
was released at about 10:30 p.m. on Sunday, September 13, 1998.
Nour Eddin mentioned that he was not subjected to torture or cursing
during the time he was held.

3. During the signing of the Wye River Memorandum, the Palestinian

police adopted new measures to control the freedom of expression and to
prevent the opposition from publishing its opinions about the
Memorandum. At 9:30 p.m. on October 23, 1998, the Palestinian police
controlled the junction of roads leading to the house of Sheikh Ahmed
Yassin, the spiritual leader of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas),
and held a number of journalists working for foreign press agencies.
Among them were 11 Palestinian journalists and one foreign journalist.
The Palestinian police prohibited the journalists from conducting an
interview with Sheikh Ahmed Yassin. In addition, the Palestinian police
held the photography equipment and confiscated all the video and
recording cassettes that were with the journalists.

A number of journalists informed the Centre that they were held in the
police department until the middle of the night and were informed that
it is prohibited to conduct any personal interviews unless there is
previous approval from the Criminal Investigation Department of the
Palestinian police. The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights strongly
condemned such measures adopted by the PA.30 In addition, the
Palestinian Journalists’ Association issued a press release in which it
expressed its rejection of such measures, considering them as clear
violations of all norms and laws, including those that were
promulgated by the PA. In addition, the Association called for a
peaceful sit-in for all journalists and called for a strike by the
journalists. As a result of the intervention of the Presidential Secretary

30
See pages 87-88 of this report for the October 24 press release by the Centre that provides
further information about this case.

85
 General Tayyeb Abdel Rahim, the matter was mediated and the strike
stopped shortly after it began.

4. On December 18, 1998, the Palestinian police arrested eight journalists,

including Deputy Chair of the Journalists’ Association Zakharia
Talmas, during their covering of a peace march that condemned the
American/British strike on Iraq. Anyone who had photography
equipment was arrested. The journalists were held in a room in the
police station that was labeled: “Branch for Protecting Public Morals.”
All the journalists were released after three hours and their equipment
was confiscated by the police. Some of them were asked to sign
commitments in which they agreed to not photograph anything that
might damage the appearance of the PA. On December 30, 1998, a
meeting between the head of the police, General Ghazi Al-Jabali and
representatives from the Association was held. In that meeting, Al-
Jabali expressed his regret about the irresponsible behavior that was
adopted by the police against the journalists and he promised not to let
such behavior take place again. Finally, a deal between the Journalists’
Association and Al-Jabali took place in which the two sides agreed to
use the Press Law of 1995 as the basis for organizing the relationship
between the two sides. As a result, the Association announced its
breaking of the strike.

Closing Licensed Press Offices

1. On April 9, 1998, the Palestinian police closed the office of Reuters

News Agency in Gaza City, and forced the journalist Taher Shritah and
four of his colleagues in the office to sign a document in which they
committed themselves to not dealing with the Agency for three months.
The closing of the office was due to its distribution of a video cassette in
Jerusalem in which the citizen Adel Awadallah, a member in Izz Eddin El-
Qassam, the military wing of Hamas, rejected the accusation of the PA that
he participated in assassinating Mouhie Eddin Al-Sharif

2. On August 3, 1998, the Palestinian police forces confiscated a number

of copies of the bi-weekly newspaper Felestinuna which is published by
the Youth Movement of Fateh. According to one of the officials in the
Youth Movement this measure was taken by order of General Ghazi Al-
Jabali, the head of the Palestinian police, after the newspaper criticized him
due to a problem that occurred between him and members of the Preventive
Security Service.

3. On December 18, 1998, the Palestinian police forces closed three press
offices after they covered a popular demonstration condemning the
American and British strike on Iraq. The press offices closed included the
Associated Press Office, the Gaza Center for Television Broadcasting, and
Jaffa Press Office.

86
Press Releases on the Continued Restrictions Placed on the Press and
Freedom of Expression

March 18, 1998

The Centre issued a press release about the decision of the High Court
taken in its meeting of March 15, 1998 to commit the Palestinian police to
re-open the Al-Risalah newspaper office. The newspaper was closed by the
Palestinian police on September 4, 1997, and was opened again on
December 4, 1997 after a telephone call from Tayyeb Abed El-Rahim, the
Secretary General Secretary of the Presidency. Although there was an order
to re-open, the Centre continued to follow up the issue in order to get a
ruling from the judiciary that the measures taken by the police were illegal.

The decision of the court was the result of an appeal made by the Centre to
the High Court asking the Attorney General to clarify the reason for the
ongoing shutting down of the news office without legal justification. The
lawyer of the Centre in his appeal asserted that the closing of the news
office occurred without an order from the Attorney General and all the
measures that were taken or adopted against the news office were illegal,
especially as the Press Law of 1995 asserts in Article 42 that a specialized
court has to examine and check all the cases that relate to the violation of
the law itself. Furthermore, the Attorney General has to take responsibility
for the investigation.

April 13, 1998

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights issued a press release about the
closing of the Reuters Office in Gaza on April 9, 1998 by the Palestinian
police and the forcing of journalist Taher Shritah and four of his colleagues
that were working in the same office to sign a document committing
themselves not to deal with the Reuters Agency for three months. The
agency office had distributed in Jerusalem a cassette showing an interview
with Adel Awadallah rejecting the accusation of the PA against him that he
was responsible for the assassination of Mouhie Eddin Al-Sharif. The
Centre’s press release called for the re-opening of the agency as the closing
of the office took place without legal measures and in contradiction to the
Press Law of 1995. Article 42 of the Press Law of 1995 asserts that the
Attorney General, and not the police, has responsibility for investigating all
possible violations of the law.

October 24, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the denial of access for journalists to
conduct interviews with opposition leaders. The press release mentioned
that at the time of the commencement of the Wye Memorandum signing

87
ceremony, Palestinian police took new measures to restrict freedom of
expression and to prevent opposition groups from publishing their views on
the agreement.

Around 9:30 p.m. on Friday, October 23, Palestinian police forces sealed
off all the roads leading to the house of Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the spiritual
leader of the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas. A dozen journalists
working with foreign press agencies were escorted to the police
headquarters in Gaza City. The 12 journalists, 11 of whom were Palestinian
and one a foreigner, were all prevented from conducting interviews with
Sheikh Yassin.

According to the press release, PCHR was informed by a number of these

journalists that they remained at the police headquarters until after
midnight. Furthermore, their camera film and their recordings were
confiscated. They were informed by the police that no such interviews are
allowed unless prior permission from the police department is given.

In the press release, PCHR condemned the step taken by the Palestinian
police as it constitutes a grave violation of both the individual right of
expression and the right of the press to publish and receive information.
The right of expression is a basic right guaranteed by international
conventions regarding human rights. Moreover, freedom of expression is
the cornerstone for the building of a democratic society.

November 7, 1998

PCHR issued a press release about the PA’s imposition of additional

restrictions on the freedom of expression and press. The Centre expressed
its deep concern about the new measures adopted by the PA earlier this
month to regulate the activities of the foreign press in areas under its
jurisdiction. PCHR believes that such measures contradict relevant
Palestinian laws and constitute further restrictions on the right to freedom
of expression and the right to the freedom of the press. Indeed, PCHR fully
supports the stand taken by the Palestinian Journalists’ Association and the
Palestinian Ministry of Information against the new measures.
Furthermore, PCHR calls for the PA to cancel such measures and revert
back to the previous satisfactory measures.

On November 2, 1998, in order to regulate the work of foreign

correspondents, the General Information Office of the PA issued the so-
called Executive Regulation Number 9, based on a presidential verbal
directive. According to Article 4 of the regulation, “the office grants press
cards to accredited correspondents and their aides (both foreigners and
locals), entitling them to movement in PA areas.”

88
 According to Articles 5 and 6, the Authority’s Press Department will be
responsible for coordinating the entry of foreign correspondents or press
delegations conducting special missions. It will be responsible for advance
organizing of appointments for the press with Palestinian officials.
According to Article 10 of the new regulation, the Press Department should
be informed of a press delegation’s time of arrival not less than 48 hours in
advance. The Press Department will provide services for foreign media
agencies, including appointing one employee to accompany each
delegation. In reaction to several critiques by foreign press agencies, Ziad
Abd El-Fattah, the head of the office, said that the whole affair is no more
than a new regulating process, according to which the agency will be
responsible for providing services for foreign journalists, regulating their
entry and exit into PA areas and facilitating their missions in an appropriate
manner, to guarantee their movement does not contradict security measures
related to the PA’s interest. Abd El-Fattah added that many media agencies
were recently noticed inciting against the PA and that the new regulation
would in fact guarantee the free movement of foreign journalists and at the
same time protect the PA from incitement.

The Palestinian Ministry of Information issued a press release on

November 3 which asserted that the PA’s relationship with local and
foreign journalists is the sole jurisdiction of the Ministry and that no formal
decisions have been issued to the contrary. In another press release, the
Ministry said that it is the only contact reference with foreign journalists
and that Regulation Number 1 of 1996 issued in accordance with the
Palestinian Press Law of 1995 is the only legal framework that can
establish contact between the PA and foreign journalists. This preserves
journalists’ rights to carry out their activities in conformity with relevant
laws. The Ministry demanded that foreign journalists should disregard any
other regulations issued by any other irrelevant agency. Furthermore, in a
letter addressed to a number of Palestinian officials, Mr. Yasser Abed
Rabbu, the Palestinian Minister of Information, asserted that the new
regulation issued by the General Information Office was out of the office’s
jurisdiction. He added that it contradicted Palestinian laws and regulations,
damaged the reputation of the PA, and transformed it into an oppressive,
intelligence authority that restricts the movement of foreign
correspondents. The Minister announced that such new measures are null
and void and the office has no jurisdiction to issue them.

The General Information Office was established by Presidential Decree

Number 41 of February 12, 1996, as an independent public office in the
President’s Office. The decree mentioned nothing about the jurisdiction
and authority of the office. Accordingly, PCHR expressed the following:

1. These new media regulations come as part of the measures carried out
by the PA since the signing of the Wye River Memorandum (the
Palestinian, Israeli, and American agreement of October 23, 1998) in order

89
 to impose more restrictions on the freedom of expression and increasing
censorship on the press. At the same time as the signing of the
Memorandum, the Palestinian police detained 12 Palestinian and foreign
journalists and prevented them from conducting an interview with Sheikh
Ahmed Yassin (the founder and spiritual leader of Hamas) and confiscated
their videotapes. The journalists were informed that such interviews should
be approved by the police in advance. Later that day, Sheikh Ahmed
Yassin was put under house arrest and his telephone line was disconnected,
isolating him from the outside world. Furthermore, the PA launched
massive waves of arrests that swept up more than 150 people in the Gaza
Strip alone, including leaders, members, and supporters of the Islamic
movements (which oppose the agreement).
2. The relationship between the PA and foreign press agencies and their
correspondents is under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Information,
according to the Press Law of 1995 and Regulation Number 1 of 1996
(Regulation of the Correspondents of the Foreign Press). PCHR believes
that the interference of any other body is illegal and that the new
regulations issued by the General Information Office are null and void.
3. Despite the critical reservations expressed by the Palestinian human
rights community on the Press Law of 1995, the PA has never been
satisfied with the restrictions imposed on the freedom of expression and
press which are implied in this law. In practice, the PA has in fact taken
other restrictive steps in defiance of the law, including the closure of
newspapers and summoning of journalists to police stations, and sometimes
even detention of journalists. These measures threaten freedom of the press
in a dramatic way.
4. It seems that the current restrictions on the freedom of expression and
press are no longer enough, as the latest measures reveal a new,
unprecedented phase that will be characterized by more restrictions. It is
clear that the new measures aim at isolating opposition leaders and at
ensuring that no voice is heard other than the voices of the PA and
supporters of the Wye River Memorandum.
5. PCHR believes that the new measures undermine one basic pillar of the
democratic foundation, since no democracy can be achieved without
freedom of expression and press.
6. These new arrangements not only undermine the freedom of the press
and add more restrictions on the freedom of expression, but they constitute
a major threat to the livelihoods of local journalists, especially those
working in press offices that provide logistical services for the international
media. Such services will from now on be provided by the PA through the
General Information Office.
7. PCHR calls upon the PA to cancel these new measures and return to the
previous arrangements which were more than sufficient to regulate the
entry of foreign correspondents into PA territory. PCHR also warns of the
dramatic consequences of the new measures on the democratic process and
the efforts to establish a democratic system in Palestine.

90
 December 3, 1998

On December 3, 1998, the Centre issued a press release expressing its

concerns with the presidential anti-incitement Decree Number 3 of 1998.
The press release mentioned that on November 19, 1998, Palestinian
Chairman Yasser Arafat issued Decree Number 3 of 1998 regarding
“strengthening national unity and preventing incitement.” The decree
specified a number of acts that would be considered illegal and punishable
by law. These acts included incitement, racial discrimination, the use of
violence, and incitement to violence in a manner damaging to Palestinian
relationships with foreign countries. Moreover, the decree prohibits the
formation of illegal associations and incitement to violate agreements
signed between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and foreign
countries.

The presidential decree is considered to be part of the Palestinian

Authority’s commitment resulting from the Wye River Memorandum of
October 23 signed by the PLO, Israel, and the United States. Under the
agreement, the Israelis have no “reciprocal” responsibility to change their
relevant laws. PCHR warned at the time of the negative consequences of
the Memorandum, especially the security aspects, and once again called on
all parties not to violate human rights during the implementation of the
peace process. PCHR strongly believes that a just peace will not be
achieved by violating basic human rights.

The Palestinian Authority issued this decree in accordance with its

commitment to the Wye River Memorandum, but Israel nonetheless
continues its incitement against the Palestinian people and the PA itself.
The Israeli government, including the prime minister and foreign minister,
continues its incitement by urging the Israeli settlers in the West Bank and
Gaza Strip to take over more Palestinian land for settlements.

PCHR received the new presidential decree with surprise and expressed its
concern with it for the following reasons:

1. The Palestinian Authority issued this decree in contradiction to the laws

governing the area. The decree constitutes a grave breach of the jurisdiction
and authority of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). According to
Article 28 of the Constitutional System of 1962 (which is valid in the Gaza
Strip), the Executive Authority is entitled, in the absence of the Legislative
Council, to issue orders with the power of law in cases that cannot be
postponed. Such orders, however, shall be brought before the Legislative
Council as soon as the Council is re-convened. The article is intended only
to allow the legislative process to continue with certain urgent matters
when the Legislative Council is not convened. Yet this does not mean in
any way that the Executive Authority can assume for itself the
responsibilities of the Legislative Council

91
2. It is well known that the PLC has been working in its third session
since March 1998. The Council finished its annual vacation on October 20,
a month before the presidential decree. Accordingly, PCHR believes that
there is no legal justification for issuing this decree, with the power of law,
especially as it relates to basic freedoms and rights. Indeed, as the Council
was in session, this can only be seen as a usurpation of the proper role of
the legislative branch by the executive branch. Quite simply, the executive
branch had no right to make such a decree.
3. All acts pronounced as outlawed by the decree are already illegal,
prohibited, and punishable by current Palestinian laws valid in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip. In fact, the Palestinian Authority has inherited a
significant amount of law and legislation promulgated in the area by the
Ottoman rule earlier this century, the British Mandate, and the Israeli
occupation. In each of these areas there were laws that prohibited acts such
as incitement, violence, and illegal association. Most of these laws
constitute a grave breach of political and civil rights and are imposed on the
region by alien powers to guarantee maximum control. PCHR believes that
the new decree added very little of significance to the already existing
restrictions.
4. The only new element in the decree is that it considers illegal any
incitement to violate agreements between the PLO and foreign countries.
This very specific issue raises legal arguments regarding whether such
agreements are valid in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. International
agreements become part of local law after ratification by the legislative
branches of each country. Neither the Palestinian National Council (the
legislative branch of the PLO) nor the PLC have ratified such agreements
in order to bring them into alignment with local law. In addition to this, the
decree is very broad when we consider that hundreds of agreements have
been signed between the PLO and foreign countries in the last 30 years. As
the majority of Palestinians do not know about these agreements it is very
possible that a citizen may violate one of these agreements without being
aware of it, unless the meaning is restricted to the Interim Agreements with
Israel.
5. In addition to this, it is not clear what is meant by incitement to violate
agreements. It is not clear what the borders are between acts of incitement
and opposing the Interim Agreements and expressing opposing political
views on the Wye River Memorandum. We believe that the line between
the freedom of expression and incitement must be clarified.
6. The pre-amble of the decree contradicts the contents. It relies on the
1979 Revolutionary Penalty Law of the PLO. This law was not
promulgated in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by a presidential decree prior
to the establishment of the Legislative Council in 1996 or by the Council
itself after that time. Legally speaking, PCHR believes that this law is not
valid under the current legal system in the area. In addition to this, the 1979
Revolutionary Penalty Law implies incitement against a foreign country
(Israel). This may result in confusing citizens even more. Indeed, merely to

92
state what is mentioned in the Revolutionary Penalty Law could itself be
considered as incitement against Israel.

In the press release, PCHR calls upon the PA to cancel this decree, to
respect the principle of the separation of powers, and to assure that the
executive branch does not exceed its powers. Furthermore, PCHR
expresses its surprise at the lack of reaction and the silence of the
Legislative Council toward this case and the limitations it puts on its
legislative role.

Finally, PCHR expressed its concern that at the very same time, the
Council took no steps to make sure that the Palestinian Basic Law, passed
in the third draft in the Council in October 1997, was put into effect.

December 19, 1998

On December 19, 1998 the Centre issued a press release about the arrest of
four leading members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine
(PFLP) and eight journalists, including the head of the Palestinian
Journalists’ Association, Zakharia Talmas. The press release mentioned
that the Palestinian police also closed three press offices. The police
measures were taken in the aftermath of a peaceful march against the
American-British bombardment of Iraq and to express solidarity with the
Iraqi people. Palestinian police broke up the march and many of the
participants were beaten. PCHR expressed its deep concern with the
behavior of the Palestinian police. The action of the police constituted a
basic violation of human rights, especially the right to freedom of speech
and peaceful assembly.

Yesterday’s arrests took place after a public event marking the 31 st

anniversary of the PFLP. The PA had even authorized the event marking
the anniversary. Dozens of leading representatives of political parties,
members of the PLC, and more than 3,000 citizens were present. All of the
speakers strongly condemned the American-British bombardment against
Iraq and participants burned American flags. Such flag-burning was
irritating to the PA. After the event, around 4:30 p.m., participants marched
from Nasser Street toward the Legislative Council building. The march was
led by leading figures of Palestinian parties and by members of the
Legislative Council.

The press release mentioned that Palestinian police broke up the march and
closed the roads to participants. Only members of the Legislative Council
and a number of the other political leaders were able to cross the barriers.
Other participants attempted to cross, but they were prevented by the police
and beaten with truncheons. This contributed to the deterioration in the
situation. Some of the participants began throwing stones at the police. The
police responded by shooting tear gas canisters. The unrest lasted for about

93
 30 minutes and by 6:00 p.m. the situation was quiet after PLC members
and political leaders intervened to contain the strife.

The press release added that eight journalists were arrested by the police
while they were covering the event. Anybody with a camera was arrested.
The journalists were transferred to the police headquarters and placed in a
room designed for people who had transgressed moral standards. At 8:00
p.m., all the journalists were released, but their materials were confiscated.
Some of the journalists signed a pledge of not photographing or
videotaping “actions that may damage the reputation of the PA.”

The PA clearly felt politically embarrassed by people under its jurisdiction

organizing marches hostile to the United States in which the American flag
was burned. Even in the United States, however, flag-burning remains a
legal act protected by the First Amendment of the United States
Constitution.

Later, PCHR was informed that the police closed three press offices in
Gaza City. The closed offices were the Gaza Center for Television
Broadcasting, the office of the Associated Press, and Jaffa Center.

In another escalation of tension, the police arrested four leading members

of the PFLP. The arrested members were Jamil Majdalawi, a member of
the PFLP Politburo, the Palestinian National Council (PNC), and the
Palestinian Central Council; Kayyed Al-Ghoul, a member of the Central
Committee of the PFLP and a member of the PNC; and Dr. Rabah Mohana
and Walid Al-Ghoul, both leading members of the PFLP. All of these
people were arrested around 7:00 p.m. in front of the entrance to the
Legislative Council. The police approached the four leaders while they
were in the Council and informed them that they were all invited to drink
coffee with Talal Abu Zeid, head of police investigations. The invitation,
however, soon turned into an arrest once they were all outside of the
Legislative Council. Three of them were released after three hours, while
the fourth, Walid Al-Ghoul, remained under arrest.

Finally, PCHR in the press release expressed its deep concern about the
behavior of the Palestinian police and the violation of the basic rights of
citizens, especially the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly. PCHR
called upon the PA to:

1. Immediately release Walid Al-Ghoul;

2. Re-open the three press offices which were illegally closed without due
process (according to the 1995 Palestinian Press Law the police have no
right to close press offices as a specialized court is required to examine
such cases first and the Attorney General is entitled to investigate in each
case); and

94
3. Lift restrictions imposed on journalists and ensure that they are allowed
to carry out their work freely. In this regard, PCHR expressed solidarity
with the Palestinian Journalists’ Association. The Association condemned
the actions of the police against the journalists, which included their
detention in a room for the protection of public morality (a very grave
insult). Those people arrested have made many contributions over the years
to the Palestinian cause. It causes serious damage to their reputations to be
maltreated in this way.

Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights Unit

At the beginning of October 1997, the Centre established the Economic,

Social, and Cultural Rights Unit. This unit was set up due to the need to
highlight these rights through research and studies. PCHR attempts to
advance such rights in Palestine in accordance with international standards
and laws, particularly the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and
Cultural Rights which was adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly in 1966. The unit aims at providing recommendations through
which these rights can be integrated with the Palestinian situation. In
addition, the unit reviews legislation and related draft laws to ensure their
harmony with international standards. The unit also aims at securing the
data that is necessary for individuals to develop plans and to implement
programs and policies in a way that does not contradict international
standards and law.

The interest of PCHR in economic, social, and cultural rights dates back to
the beginning of 1995, the year of the Centre’s establishment. At that time,
the work on such rights revolved around two fundamental matters. The first
was to provide legal assistance for citizens in cases related to these rights.
The second was to publish the Closure Update documenting the effects of
the Israeli policy of closure on the economic, social, and cultural rights of
the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. In April 1997, the Palestinian Centre for
Human Rights, in cooperation with Al-Haq, published a joint study about
housing rights. With the establishment of the new unit, the work in these
two areas continues with the support of new members of staff, especially
research members.

Study on the Right to Health Services in the Gaza Strip

In November 1998, PCHR published a study entitled “Health in the Gaza

Strip: Between Realities and Ambitions.” This study was a serious attempt
to investigate some of the basic aspects of economic, social, and cultural
rights by evaluating health services in the Gaza Strip and the extent to
which citizens enjoy these services.

The study showed how the weak infrastructure of the Gaza Strip negatively
affected its health service and how the organized policies and measures of

95
the Israeli occupation forces negatively affected the infrastructure,
especially water, sewage, housing, solid waste, and other matters. Such
matters have negative effects on the Gazan public and increase the risk of
disease among them. The study focused on the deterioration in the water
situation for drinking and washing due to the level of salinity being higher
than the accepted international level.

The study asserted that despite the political events that took place in 1993
between the PLO and the government of Israel, the Gaza Strip is still
suffering from a deterioration in the economic and social conditions. There
has been a deterioration in the health of Gazans in the last three years due
to the policy of closure imposed by the occupation forces on the Gaza
Strip. This policy led to the death of six Gazans as a result of the Israeli
occupation prohibiting them from passing through Israeli areas to receive
medical treatment unavailable in the Gaza Strip. The health situation of
hundreds of people deteriorated as a result of this Israeli policy against
Gazans.

The study highlights the health services in Palestine that are provided by
various parties (the PA, UNRWA, NGOs, and the private sector). The
study followed the developments that took place in these services from the
beginning of the transfer of health from the Israeli side to the PA. The
study concluded that there have been no visible or real improvements in the
health services in the last five years. The study mentions that the unfair
geographical distribution of the hospitals in the Gaza Strip, where most of
the hospitals are concentrated in Gaza City, negatively affects the equitable
provision of health services to all citizens. The study concluded that it is
necessary to restructure the secondary health services provided to Gazans
and to focus on establishing new institutions in the areas that lack these
services. The study refers to the fixed number of beds in the hospitals,
despite the fact that the population is increasing at an accelerated rate. It
also mentions the ineffective effort to open the European hospital and the
weakness of the government sector in its failure to increase the number of
beds in the governmental hospitals. Only 21 beds were added in the
governmental hospitals in 1997. The opening of Al-Amal hospital in Khan
Younis and Al-Awda hospital in Jabaliya were necessary additions. These
hospitals were constructed with the assistance of non-governmental
organizations (NGOs).

The study acknowledged the developments that took place in the primary
health care service in the Gaza Strip. It pointed out, however, that there has
been a significant shortage in the number of doctors in primary health care,
particularly in the governmental sector. The study also mentioned that there
has been an increase in the daily workload of the doctors in UNRWA. This
matter negatively affects the quality of the primary health care service it
provides.

96
 The study illuminated the problem of the permanent deficit in the budget of
the Health Ministry over the last four years, which reached 59.7 percent of
the real budget in 1995, 49.2 percent of the estimated budget in 1996, and
54.1 percent of the budget in 1997. The study predicted that this deficit in
the budget would increase in the budgets of the coming years in light of the
Health Ministry’s expectation regarding expenditures and revenues. The
reason for this deficit is attributed to unequal distribution of the budget
articles; for example, the increased rate of expenditure on wages and
salaries and the increased expenditure on medical supplies at the same time
that there has been a decrease in revenue. The study concluded that now
more than ever before, the Health Ministry requires an evaluation of its
expenditure and revenue in order to develop a clear financial policy that
aims at decreasing the deficit in its budget and limits unjustified
expenditures.

The study mentioned the aspects of administrative and financial corruption

that were exposed in the Public Monitoring Commission Report and the
report of the Palestinian Legislative Council regarding the Ministry of
Health and asked for measures to be taken against anyone involved in
corruption and abuse of power.

Also, UNRWA was warned not to decrease its health services for
Palestinian refugees, especially within the context of the deterioration in
the economic and social situation of citizens. UNRWA was requested to
improve the service it provides to the refugees through making more effort
to secure the necessary funds for increasing its services. Improved service
should continue until such time as the refugee problem is concluded based
on UN resolutions, especially UN Resolution 194. The study asserted that
UNRWA is now requested to secure the necessary budget to finance its
health service for the refugees in the Gaza Strip since this is clearly its
responsibility. Until this happens, UNRWA must not, under any
circumstances, back away from its commitment to these refugees.

The final recommendation of the study was to unify the efforts of all
sources that provide health services in the Gaza Strip, in order to draw up a
national health strategy in Palestine based on the idea that the right to
health care is universal. Moreover, the study requested that the Ministry of
Health in cooperation with others, develop an immediate health initiative
based on real and effective participation at different levels. The study
summarized a group of points that have to be taken into consideration.
Among these points are:

1. To assess the current health services in the Gaza Strip in order to

determine the factors that obstruct the implementation of health rights and
citizens’ enjoyment of the maximum level of mental and physical health.
An evaluation of the violations that were practiced in this regard during the
years of Israeli occupation and the influence of these violations on the

97
 health situation would be essential to developing a clear mechanism to help
overcome these health violations.
2. To develop a national health plan based on the idea that the right to
health is a basic human right. In this respect, all parties involved in health
services must participate in drafting such a plan.

Legal Assistance Provided by the Centre Regarding Economic, Social,

and Cultural Rights

The Legal Unit followed up citizens’ complaints that related to social and
economic rights. The legal unit followed up more than 30 complaints in
1998. Among these complaints were:

1. Eleven complaints against the Ministry of Health and various

governmental hospitals. Three of these complaints related to the death of
patients in Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza. The unit received a response from
the Ministry of Health that there was no negligence by the hospital doctors
in the three cases.
2. Nine complaints were provided to PCHR against the Ministry of
Housing. Four of these were provided by citizens living on governmental
land for tens of years. Their houses were demolished without giving the
inhabitants alternative accommodation. The Ministry gave a negative
response to three of these complaints and the fourth case was compensated.
3. Three complaints were made against the Public Personnel Office
(Diwan El-Muwazafeen). The three cases were related to financial debt and
governmental recruitment.

Press Releases about Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

June 23, 1998

PCHR issued a press release expressing its outrage at the behavior of a

number of Palestinian officials and policemen toward mothers of
Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons. The women were physically and
verbally abused at the Ministry of Finance and at the headquarters of
Palestinian Television on June 15 and June 16, 1998.

Around 60 women, who are the mothers, wives, and sisters of Palestinian
detainees in Israel, approached the Ministry of Finance on June 15 to meet
with the Minister of Finance, Zuhdi Nashashibi, and to demand their
monthly stipends, which were ten days overdue. Although the Ministry had
issued their checks on June 5, the women were unable to cash them at the
post office due to a lack of funds in the account.

Mrs. Hamduma Wishah, the mother of Jabber Wishah, who is serving a life
sentence in the Israeli jail of Nafha, testified to PCHR that the women were
prevented from entering the building to meet with the Minister. She added

98
that she was beaten by a policeman, fell down, and was knocked
unconscious. When she regained consciousness, she found herself upstairs
in the Ministry building where she was subsequently beaten by another
policeman, who kicked and punched her. Shahira Mustafa Abu Al-Najar,
mother of Haitham Abu Al-Najar, who is serving a 15-year sentence in
Nafha prison, testified to PCHR that her right arm was broken after a
Palestinian policeman beat her with his weapon in front of the Ministry of
Finance.

In another development, Hisham Macki, Director of Palestinian Television,

arrived at the Ministry and promised the women that he would intervene on
their behalf, in order to secure their payments. He asked the women to
follow up with him the next day at the headquarters of Palestinian
Television. Mrs. Wishah testified to PCHR that she arrived at the
scheduled time with eight other women to meet with Mr. Macki. They were
met by an employee of Palestinian Television who prohibited them from
entering the building and verbally abused them. Despite this attack, they
informed him of their meeting with the director. In another testimony,
Najat Al-Falouji, mother of Dia Al-Falouji, who is serving a life sentence
in Nafha prison, informed PCHR that the employee abused her and
attempted to run her over with his car.

October 19, 1998

PCHR issued a press release warning of the disastrous results that might
emerge from the Ministry of Health’s financial crisis. The press release
mentioned that in a very dangerous development and in a direct threat to
the lives of the people, the Ministry of Health on October 15, 1998 decided
to restrict the performing of any surgery in all government hospitals in the
West Bank and Gaza Strip. Only urgent surgery would be allowed and any
other surgery would be postponed indefinitely until the financial crisis was
solved and the hospitals were re-supplied with the necessary surgical items.
Available figures show that 991 major surgeries and approximately 544
minor surgeries take place in Gaza on a monthly basis.

The Ministry of Health supervises 13 hospitals and 260 medical centers in

the West Bank and Gaza Strip. All the activities of the Ministry are under
threat. This is a very dangerous development as the health services in the
West Bank and Gaza Strip could collapse.

The reason behind this is that the Ministry of Finance has not paid the
money allocated to the Ministry of Health, which amounts to 65 million
NIS for this year and approximately 30 million NIS from last year. As has
been decided, the Ministry of Finance should transfer 14 million NIS per
month to the Ministry of Health. However, between January and the day of
this press release it has transferred only 64 million NIS.

99
 This financial crisis resulted in the inability of the Ministry of Health to
buy necessary items from medical suppliers, which has led to an acute
shortage of medicines and other medical supplies that the Ministry of
Health has been lacking for the last three months. Consequently, this has
pushed the Ministry to use its strategic storage medicines and according to
estimates, there are now more than 500 medical items unavailable in the
Ministry.

These developments pose potential dangers that threaten the lives of

Palestinians and the collapse of the whole medical system. Consequently,
PCHR is appealing to the President of the PA to intervene to remedy the
situation and punish those responsible.

PCHR is also demanding that:

1. The Ministry of Finance should transfer immediately the allocations to
the Ministry of Health so that it can carry out its services toward the
people. Nothing can justify the position of the Ministry of Finance since
the amount of money that is being paid by the people as fees for health
insurance and other fees totals 135 million NIS. If this money were
transferred to the Ministry of Health, this would contribute significantly to
solving the financial crisis.
2. The Palestinian Legislative Council must take firm steps to intervene to
stop the financial crisis. It is not at all acceptable that the situation is widely
deteriorating without any firm and sharp intervention from the Legislative
Council. The situation demands the cooperation of the Executive Authority
in opening a comprehensive investigation into this matter and in bringing
to public attention all the findings as soon as possible.

A Letter to the Minister of Higher Education

On July 9, 1998, PCHR sent a letter to Dr. Hanan Ashrawi, then the
Minister of Higher Education in the PA, asking her to do her best to
overcome the student crisis in the Gaza branch of Al-Quds Open
University. The letter was of critical importance because it related directly
to efforts to democratize the student movement. The crisis resulted from
the denial of the students’ right to hold elections at the scheduled time and
as the result of unfortunate events which took place inside the university
campus on June 27, 1998. As a result, Preventive Security intervened and
arrested one of the students on June 29, 1998. At the time PCHR wrote the
letter, the problem persisted and the future of the educational process in the
university had deteriorated as had the value of Palestinian education. Years
of student struggle had led to the development of a democratic student
movement and the creation of an atmosphere of pluralism, but this was
being jeopardized by the events at Al-Quds Open University.

The Development of the Crisis

100
• At 1:00 p.m. on June 27, 1998, an unfortunate event took place
inside the Gaza branch of Al-Quds Open University during a peaceful
gathering organized by the student blocs, except Fateh Youth Movement.
Tension arose among a number of students considered to be members of
the Fateh Youth Movement and members of other blocs, especially the
PFLP and Hamas. As a result, five students were injured and some of them
were taken to Al-Shifa Hospital to receive medical treatment.

• The event took place as a result of the student blocs’ (except the
Fateh Youth Movement) request to dissolve the Student Council because
its term had expired. They called for a new election. The student blocs had
discussed the matter of holding elections more than one time, but had not
reached agreement. Accordingly, the student blocs, with the exception of
the Fateh Youth Movement, requested from student affairs officer
Suleiman El-Dirawi (a former member of the Student Council and former
officer in the Youth Movement) that he dissolve the former Council and
hold new elections. They failed to receive a response from him.

• On June 10, 1998, the student blocs, with the exception of the Youth
Movement, held a meeting with Dr. Yacob Nashwaan, the manager of the
Gaza Educational Area of the University. Based on the discussion that took
place in the meeting, Dr. Nashwaan ordered the officials in the student
affairs office to conduct a meeting with the representatives of the student
blocs to discuss the matter. The meeting was held on June 17, 1998, and
included a representative of the student parties and a representative of the
Student Council, but the meeting finished without reaching any agreement
about the date for holding the election. It was agreed, however, that the
minutes of the meeting would be forwarded to Dr. Nashwaan. On June 20,
1998, the officials in the student affairs office forwarded the minutes to Dr.
Nashwaan, who added his opinion that “It’s a good effort and should be
kept in the election file.” He mentioned that the decision to hold the
election was in the hands of the president of the university.

• Accordingly, on June 21, 1998, the student blocs faxed Dr. Sufiyan
Kemal, the university president and Dr. Younis Amr, the student affairs
dean in the university, to explain the problem to them and to ask them to
determine a time for holding the election.

• On June 22, 1998, a day in which Dr. Younis Amr was in the
university, a representative of the Popular Front and a representative of the
Islamic bloc tried to hold a meeting with him, but he refused. He justified
his refusal by saying that he did not have enough time on his schedule,
although he did conduct a meeting with representatives of the Student
Council and the Fateh Youth Movement. On the next day, a representative
of the student blocs tried to meet Dr. Amr, but he refused for the same
reason. While he was leaving the university at 2:00 p.m. he told the
representatives of the PFLP and Islamic blocs who asked him about the

101
 exact day of the election that it had been deferred to an unknown date. He
justified this by saying that the university was busy in constructing new
buildings and installing new equipment. As a result, they asked him to
dissolve the current Council and to form a temporary Council to administer
student affairs, but he answered them by saying, “It’s better to live 1,000
days under the government of a dictator than to live one day without any
government.” He then left.

• On June 24, 1998, the student blocs, with the exception of the Fateh
Youth Movement, issued a press release clarifying the problem. Before
distributing this press release, the representatives of the student blocs went
to the official for student affairs to forward it to him and to ask permission
to distribute it. The official refused to give them permission to distribute it
even before reading it. As a result, the student blocs did not commit
themselves to his decision and started to distribute the press release in a
way that led to tension and fistfights between members in the Student
Council on one side and the students who distributed the press release on
the other side. On the same day, the student movement, with the exception
of the Youth Movement, protested through a letter to Dr. Yacob Nashwaan.

• On June 26, 1998, the Student Council issued a press release

answering the student blocs’ press release. On the same day, these blocs
sent letters clarifying the events in the university. These letters were sent to
a number of PLC members and political parties, institutions, and public
personalities, asking them to intervene and find a solution to the problem
through mediation.

• On June 27, 1998, the mentioned student blocs decided to organize a

peaceful gathering on the university campus to protest against the
undetermined date of the election and asked a number of Palestinian
Legislative Council members, political parties, institutions, and public
figures to attend the peaceful gathering. Although the university
administrative board refused to permit the peaceful gathering, it
nonetheless began at 1:00 p.m. with participation by PLC members,
including Dr. Kemal Al-Shrafi, Dr. Musa Za’bout, Mr. Yousef Al-Shanti,
and Dr. Ziad Abu-Amr. At 1:05 p.m., the president of the Student Council
intervened and asked the gathered students to leave, but they refused.
Although Dr. Al-Shrafi asked the president of the Student Council not to
intervene since this was not part of his work, but the work of the university
administration, but he insisted on intervening nonetheless. The official for
student affairs also asked the students to leave and to remove all the posters
since they were considered illegal. As a result of the tension from these
requests, more students gathered in the place while other young people who
were not students in the university arrived and participated in heightening
the tensions to the point of fistfights between rival student groups. As a
result, the glass of one of the university windows was broken and five
people were injured and had to be treated at Al-Shifa Hospital. During this

102
 time discussion between a number of the leading persons in the political
powers took place, and after 30 minutes the situation was controlled and
the tension dissipated. At a later time, Dr. Nashwaan arrived to the
university and held a meeting on the matter in his office. A number of the
PLC members, a representative of the political powers, a representative of
the Youth Movement, and the Student Council president all participated in
the meeting. The meeting concluded with accepting a suggestion to form a
committee from the student blocs’ leading persons in the Gaza Strip to
discuss the case and to try to mediate it during the next 24 hours.

• On June 27, 1998, the university administrative board issued an

administrative order in which it prevented the distribution of all press
releases and publications from any bloc if such distribution took place
without permission. This order was not limited only to prohibiting the
distribution inside the campus, but also to prohibiting the distribution of the
information by other means as well.
• On June 29, 1998, the Preventive Security Services summoned some
of the leading members of the student blocs. The following names are the
names known by PCHR of summoned students:

1. Ghassan Ali Al-Aqra’ from Jabaliya camp who is a leader of the

Popular Front bloc. The mentioned student did not go to them at the
specified time and the matter was mediated after an intervention by the
Popular Front.
2. Ibrahim Salah from Jabaliya camp who is an activist in the Islamic
bloc. He was arrested on July 4, 1998.
3. The student Moein Abu Ankal from Jabaliya camp who is an activist in
the Islamic bloc. The student was interrogated and later released.

In a later development, the administration of the university sent a warning

to 13 students from the university on July 11, 1998 in a step attempting to
ban them from their right to stand for the election when it is eventually
held. On July 12, 1998, the student Ibrahim Salah was released. On July 15,
1998, the students who received the warning from the university
administration issued a press release for the public clarifying the following:

1. A warning had been sent without forming an investigation committee to

determine the reason for the events and the people who participated in
them.
2. Some of the names that were mentioned in the warning were not at the
university when the events happened and one of them proved without any
doubt that he was at his place of work on the day in which the events
happened. This forced the university administration to delete his name from
the list of names included in the warning. In addition, it was proven that
one of the students was paraplegic and did not participate in the events.
3. All the students who received the warnings belong to different student
blocs and no warning was sent to any student from the Fateh Youth

103
 Movement which, according to the press release, is the basic reason for the
problem.

At the end of their press release, the students demanded the formation of an
investigation committee to examine the events. They also demanded the
implementation of the Student Council constitution and the punishment of
all those who violated this constitution.31

Women’s Rights Unit

The Women’s Rights Unit was established in the Centre at the beginning of
May 1997 for a period that could be renewed after a comprehensive
evaluation of the work experience of the unit. By the end of the unit’s first
year of work on April 30, 1998, and after an evaluation of the unit’s work,
it was decided to establish the unit permanently as one unit among the other
units of the Centre. The Women’s Unit is working on two basic programs;
the first is the legal aid program and the second is the research and legal
awareness program for women. These two programs are considered of
great importance for women and are in accordance with their needs and the
expectations of the Centre. The legal aid program has been found to be
particularly worthwhile. In fact, PCHR is the only organization in the Gaza
Strip that provides such legal services for women. The unit also participates
in all activities and programs that are organized by Palestinian women’s
organizations and institutions.

Legal Assistance Program for Women and Women’s Organizations

This program is aimed at providing legal assistance for women and

women’s organizations. Such legal assistance includes the following:

1. Providing legal consultation;

2. Representing women in the Sharia’ Courts (cases of family law);
3. Providing legal assistance for jailed women; and
4. Providing legal assistance for women’s organizations.

The legal assistance is normally provided through a female lawyer in the

unit. The other lawyers in the Centre provide their assistance when
necessary. As regards the legal assistance in Sharia’ legal aid, such
assistance is provided by a lawyer specialized in family law, who has been
working on such matters since October 1997. Most of the indications show
that there is an increase in women’s demand (from different areas of the
Gaza Strip) to receive such services.

During 1998 the unit followed up more than 110 cases, with an average of
7-10 cases per month. One of the reasons that increased the willingness of
31
Elections at Al-Quds Open University were held finally on November 11, 1998.

104
 women to come to this program is the coordination that took place between
the Sharia’ Court and the unit to transfer the cases that had humanitarian
implications to the unit. Also, coordination took place with women’s
organizations. This coordination aimed at transferring all the cases that
need legal intervention. At the same time, the unit transferred cases that
needed social or psychiatric assistance.

The cases that were followed by the unit in the Sharia’ Court included
alimony, determining custody, child visitation rights, separation, and other
financial rights of women following divorce.

The following table illustrates the kinds of personal affairs issues that were
followed by the Women’s Rights Unit.

Alimony Funds to Rights to Custody Separation Financial Obedience Total

wife for see the rights rights of
having children the woman
provided following
childcare divorce
54 4 9 11 12 15 5 110

In addition to this, the unit provided a number of legal consultations for

women’s organizations in the civil and personal affairs issues. Through its
work in the legal assistance issues the unit succeeded in achieving a
number of court decisions taken by the court for the first time. The most
prominent cases of these are as follows:

1. Ms. N.B.
She married when she was 14 years old to one of her relatives and lived in
her husband’s house for four years without giving birth to any children. Her
life was full of family and personal problems with her husband because of
her living with the family of her husband. Before she came to the Women’s
Unit asking for assistance she had left her husband’s house for four years
and appealed to the Sharia’ Court asking for alimony and other financial
rights from her husband (the cost of house furniture). After she got the
decision from the court in her favor, the husband appealed to the court
asking for his right of obedience. He won this decision from the court and
when the wife refused to accept the decision the husband appealed to the
court asking for implementation of the decision. He won another decision
against his wife stopping the alimony. The court also pronounced her
“nashez” (meaning that she cannot re-marry while the problem still exists).
The “nashez” decision continued for a period of more than one year.
During that time, the woman tried to introduce her case to public opinion.
The Women’s Unit followed up and took responsibility for the case,
succeeded in getting a decision from the Sharia’ Court to cancel the
“nashez” decision, and got a new alimony arrangement for the woman.

2. Mrs. N.H.

105
 This case can be summarized as following: the husband of the woman had
been arrested for more than three years without having any Palestinian
court decision on his cooperation with the Israeli occupation forces. For a
long time prior to this the wife had wanted a divorce. The Sharia’ Court
was not able to separate the two because under the Oslo Agreement the PA
cannot prosecute known collaborators. Normally, to obtain a court decision
backing separation, the woman would need a court decision specifying how
long her husband would be in prison. Historically, in cases where there is
no decision specifying the period of time of imprisonment, the court cannot
do anything as there is no legal foundation through which it can base its
decision for separation. The Women’s Unit intervened and took
responsibility for the case. It succeeded in getting a decision from the
Sharia’ Court to grant a separation between Mrs. N.H. and her husband.
This was the first time such a decision had been made by the court and it
must be recognized that it came within the context of the very complex
situation created by Oslo prohibiting prosecution against even the most
well known collaborators.

3. Mrs. B.Q.
She is an old and ill woman with five sons, all married, and all refusing to
support her financially and provide her with the care she needs. The woman
tried to get a decision of financial help through the Sharia’ Court, but she
failed to win the decision because she did not know the proper legal
procedures. After she asked for legal assistance from the Women’s Unit
she got a decision imposed on her sons. The sons are required to pay to her
150 Jordanian dinars per month, which is considered a large sum compared
with other previous and similar situations.

4. Mrs. L.H.
Her husband died and left her with two children. The father of her husband
forced all three to leave the house given to her by her husband. In addition,
the father-in-law prohibited the wife and children from taking a sum of
money inherited from her deceased husband. The woman came to the
Women’s Unit for legal assistance to get financial support for her children
from their grandfather. She succeeded in winning the decision against the
children’s grandfather since he is considered the nearest male relative of
the children and as such he is the person who has to finance the children
according to Sharia’ law.

5. Ms. F.A.
When she and her husband divorced she was forced to leave her child who
was only a few months old. In addition, Ms. F.A. was prohibited from
seeing her child until he became nine years old. During this time he did not
know that he had a mother other than the new wife of his father. The
woman was transferred to the Women’s Unit by the Women’s
Rehabilitation Program of the Gaza Community Mental Health Programme
in order to help her in getting a court decision to see her child. The woman

106
 won this decision despite the opposition of her former husband and his
second wife. Due to this decision the child learned of the existence of his
birth mother.

Research and Legal Awareness for Women

From its formation, one of the most important goals that the Women’s
Unit has aimed to achieve is the upgrading of the status of women’s rights
and helping women understand the legal rights that they have guaranteed
to them by local and international law. The unit believes that women’s
understanding of their rights is vital for them to secure their rights and is a
basic step toward ending all the discrimination and abusing factors against
women in Palestinian law. The unit prepared a series of legal booklets in
order to help women in understanding basic legal aspects concerning
women’s rights, including laws pertaining to personal issues. Also, the unit
organized lectures for enhancing the status of women’s rights. These
lectures aimed at the following:

1. Raising legal awareness, especially in family law;

2. Developing a relationship between the Women’s Unit and women’s
organizations, and encouraging women to benefit from the free-of-charge
services provided by the unit;
3. Providing legal consultation in the field for women with lawyers of the
unit

Legal Awareness Lectures

During 1998 the unit conducted 19 legal awareness lectures from which
845 women and girls from different areas in Gaza benefited. Through
coordination with the social services unit (women’s program departments)
in UNRWA during the period of February 8 to April 13, 1998, the unit
organized 10 lectures in the women’s activity centers of UNRWA. Six
hundred women and girls benefited from these lectures. Through
coordination with women’s grassroots organizations in the Gaza Strip, the
unit organized nine lectures in different areas in the Gaza Strip between
July and November 1998 from which 245 women and girls benefited.

Details on Legal Awareness Lectures

Number Date The Center’s location The targeted The number of

group (ages) people attending
lectures
1 8/2/98 Jabaliya 14-27 62
2 11/2/98 Beit Hanoun 15-55 105
3 15/2/98 El-Daraj 15-40 65
4 17/2/98 Shati 14-24 63
5 22/2/98 Khan Younis 14-30 55
6 24/2/98 Rafah 15-40 54
7 28/2/98 El-Bureij 15-50 58

107
 8 24/3/98 Nusiraat 14-30 50
9 30/3/98 Deir Al-Baleh 15-40 43
10 13/4/98 El-Maghazi 15-50 45
Total 600

Lectures on Legal Awareness for Women in Coordination with Women’s

Grassroots Organizations
Date The Women’s Place Number of people The targeted
Organization attending group (age)
16/7/98 Union of Women’s Jabaliya 25 15-50
Work Committees,
North Gaza Branch
23/7/1998 Union of Women’s Beit Lahya 15 15-55
Work Committees,
North Gaza Branch
30/7/1998 Union of Women’s Al-Qarama 40 15-55
Work Committees,
North Gaza Branch

108
 2/8/98 Union of Women’s Al-Sabra 30 20-54
Committees for
Social Work, East
and West Gaza
12/8/98 Union of Women’s Zaytoun 20 15-40
Committees for
Social Work, East
and West Gaza
15/8/98 Union of Women’s Sheikh 30 15-50
Committees for Ajleen
Social Work, East
and West Gaza
2/9/98 Union of Women’s Sheikh 20 20-45
Committees for Radwan
Social Work, East
and West Gaza
12/9/98 Union of Women’s Sheikh 30 15-55
Committees for Ajleen
Social Work, East
and West Gaza
12/11/98 Union of Women’s Al-Qarama 35 20-50
Work Committees,
North Gaza Branch
Total 245

The lectures that were carried out by the Women’s Unit in the Women’s
Activity Centers of UNRWA in the period of February to April 1998
proved to be very successful. It became clear during these lectures that
there is a real need to upgrade women’s legal awareness and to provide
them with greater legal aid. Consequently, an agreement was concluded
between the Women’s Unit and the Women’s Program of UNRWA. This
agreement revolved around providing legal consultation and lectures in
regard to upgrading women’s legal awareness. The meetings were held for
six months in the Women’s Activity Center on Al-Daraj Avenue in Gaza
City. The unit prepared a program of legal lectures in addition to providing
for legal consultation and following up the cases that are in urgent need of
legal intervention by the Women’s Unit.

The unit provided its legal consultation and legal lectures from the
beginning of October 1998 through the end of the year and into 1999. The
lecture program was as follows:

Number Date Program

1 12/10/98 Introduction
2 19/10/98 Providing legal consultation
3 26/10/98 Lecture on family law (marriage)
4 2/11/98 Lecture on the effects of marriage contracts
5 9/11/98 Lecture on divorce
6 23/11/98 Lecture on results of divorce
7 30/11/98 Lecture on inheritance

109
 8 7/12/98 Lecture on making wills (wasseya)
9 14/12/98 Lecture on the International Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women
10 21/12/98 Lecture on women and violence
11 28/12/98 Lecture on the mechanism of implementing the decisions
of Sharia’ Courts

Due to the success of this program, the women’s programs in UNRWA are
working with the unit to discuss the possibility of expanding it. This matter
will be discussed in 1999.

Women’s Legal Guide

This is a group of booklets that introduces the legal articles implemented

in the Gaza Strip regarding women’s issues such as family law. These
booklets are written in straightforward language, taking the form of
questions and answers. Each booklet specializes in discussing one issue or
group of legal issues that is of concern. The unit distributed these books
widely. They are distributed to women during the lectures on legal
awareness and are given to women’s organizations as well. During 1998
the unit published three booklets:

1. Marriage (January 1998)

2. Divorce (April 1998)
3. Inheritance (October 1998)

Currently, the unit is working on publishing more booklets during the next
year, covering other issues regarding family law and Palestinian law. This
subject is related to personal affairs law and other Palestinian laws. In
addition, the unit is preparing to cover subjects that are related to the
international standards concerning women’s rights.

A Workshop about the Procedures of Sharia’ Courts

On May 7, 1998, the Women’s Unit organized, in cooperation with the

Women’s Rehabilitation Program of the Gaza Community Mental Health
Programme, a workshop titled “The Problems Confronted by Women
When They Ask for Separation.” The workshop held in the Centre aimed
at introducing the problems that emerge in the Sharia’ Court. Among these
problems is the difficulty that women face in proving the harm they
receive from their husbands, the ambiguity of the articles that are related to
separation, and the difficulty of the procedure in the Sharia’ Court. The
workshops were attended by the representative of the Chief Justice for the
Sharia’ Court, Mahmoud Salama, a number of Sharia’ Court judges, and
Sharia’ lawyers. The workshop tried to find an effective solution to the
mentioned problems through a group of recommendations it made.

110
 Unit Participation in a National Campaign to Increase the Age of
Marriage to 18

Through an initiative from the Women’s Affairs Team and with the
participation of a number of jurists and women’s organizations, the
Women’s Rights Unit in the Centre participated as a representative of
PCHR in the national effort to increase the marriage age to 18. This effort
aimed at pressuring the decision-makers to increase the age of eligibility
for marriage. Within this context, a number of meetings and workshops
were organized to determine appropriate mechanisms for pressuring
decision-makers and mobilizing the public to achieve this goal. The unit
participated in this meeting and expressed its readiness to take part in this
effort.

Unit Participation in the Campaign to Fight Violence against Women

The Women’s Rights Unit participated in this campaign jointly with

UNIFEM and the Working Women’s Society, in addition to a number of
jurist and women’s organizations. The effort aimed at raising awareness of
issues pertaining to violence, especially violence against women and girls.
Within this context lectures were organized to discuss the legal,
psychological, and social implications of the violence phenomenon. The
unit participated in these lectures and focused on the violence from a legal
and human rights point of view. The effort began on November 25 and
continued until December 10, 1998.

Unit Intervention with Formal Institutions

1. The unit’s effort achieved great success in solving complaints

confronted by women. This was done, in part, through contacts made with
other concerned institutions. Among the qualitative achievements for the
year were the participation of Mrs. Hanan Matar in a training session
organized by the Women’s Affairs Staff-Gaza under the topic of
“Management and Planning for Women Who Are in Manager Positions in
Women’s Organizations” in the period from June 24 to October 3, 1998.

2. The unit sent a letter to the Minister of Social Affairs regarding

women’s rights to see their sons in police centers. This letter came after the
unit learned lessons from a similar problem regarding the rights of women
to see their children following separation from their husbands. As many
women had complained that the place for visiting at the police station was
unsuitable, the unit asked the Ministry to find suitable visiting places under
its supervision. In response to this letter, the unit received a letter from the
Minister of Social Affairs suggesting the places that could be provided by it
for mothers to visit their sons instead of at the police stations. The unit is

111
 currently investigating such locations in coordination with the Ministry and
the Sharia’ Court.

3. The unit appealed to the representative of the Chief Justice of the

Sharia’ Court regarding alimony to a woman and her children. The unit
based its appeal on the fact that most of the Sharia’ Court decisions
regarding alimony are limited by a level of 50 Jordanian dinars for the wife
and 20 Jordanian dinars for the children, without taking into consideration
the differences in income between different men and possible changes in
the financial situation of the husband. Although Article 59 from the Family
Rights Law of 1954 asserts that the judge should determine alimony
according to the financial situation of the husband, in fact, his situation has
often not been taken into consideration by the Sharia’ Court as most of
these decisions are taken without investigating the husband’s finances.
After an appeal, the court started to find out the situation of the husbands
and accordingly decided the amount of alimony.

112
 THE CENTRE’S RELATIONSHIP WITH LOCAL SOCIETY

The Centre paid a good deal of attention to the connection with the local
environment at both the popular and the formal level. The Centre believes
that developing such connections is important for protecting human rights
and enhancing respect for these rights. During 1998 the Centre was active
at different levels in this regard, including the following:

Strengthening Relations with the Local Community and Expanding the

Number of Beneficiaries

The Centre believes that enhancing its relation with the public depends
basically on the size and the kind of services that the Centre provides for
the public without discrimination. Accordingly, the Centre continued
delivering its direct and indirect services to the public during 1998.
Moreover, it was able to achieve a qualitative improvement in the style in
which these services were delivered to the marginalized segments of the
society. There were two types of services provided by the Centre: 1)
delivering legal aid for the victims of human rights violations and their
families; and 2) raising the people’s awareness of human rights and
democracy.

Legal Aid for Victims of Human Rights Violations

The Centre provides this service through two basic units, the Legal Unit
and the Women’s Rights Unit. The Legal Unit provides its services to
victims of human rights violations, victims of the abuse of authority, and
victims of illegal administrative practices and measures at two levels –
Israeli and Palestinian. This is done either through legal consultation or
through direct intervention with the concerned authorities, including
governmental institutions, commissions, and the judicial authority. During
1998 the unit followed up its work at the Israeli level in the following
areas: 1) the Palestinian detainees in the Israeli jails; 2) the freedom of
movement to and from the Gaza Strip; and 3) the land confiscation by
Israel. At the Palestinian level the unit followed up in the same period on
the following subjects: 1) the detainees in the Palestinian prisons and
detention centers; and 2) the complaints of the people against the Authority
resulting from the abuse of authority and illegal administrative practices. 32

Regarding the Women’s Rights Unit, it provides its legal aid for children
and women who are victims of human rights violations, especially the
violation of family law, either through legal consultation or through direct

32
For example, the Centre specializes in providing free legal service for citizens in compensation
issues in which complaints are filed against the Palestinian Authority or any other institution that is
working under the PA. During 1998 the Centre followed up two cases in which citizens were shot
at by members of the Palestinian security forces on July 15, 1997.

113
 intervention with the concerned institutions and organizations, including
the Sharia’ Court. In fact, the Centre is the only organization in the Gaza
Strip that provides such services for women.33

Raising Public Awareness on Human Rights and Democracy:

Developing a Training Program

During 1998 the Centre continued raising public awareness of human rights
and democracy based on its belief that the knowledge of these rights is a
crucial factor that contributes to human rights protection. Moreover, the
Centre developed a special program for training with targeted groups from
different segments of society as a means to participating in creating an
effective cadre able to enhance such norms. In addition to this, the Centre
distributed its publications to wide segments of the society in order to make
them aware of the latest developments in the human rights situation. It also
participated in public awareness campaigns through its initiatives and by
coordination with other local and international institutions in the Gaza
Strip.34 Moreover, the Centre has a specialized library on human rights and
law that is open to the public. Students, researchers, and people concerned
with human rights and democracy can borrow these books free of charge.

Regarding the training program, it is implemented by an internal effort

from the Centre staff. Senior staff from the Democratic Development Unit,
the Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights Unit, the Legal Unit, and the
Women’s Rights Unit are cooperating in implementing this program. In
addition, experts from outside the Centre are invited to participate and to
render help and assistance. During 1998 four training sessions were
organized in which 94 people participated. At the end of each session, the
participants were awarded a special certificate from the Centre.

1) During the period from April 20 to May 4, 1998, the Centre organized a
training session for Al-Azhar University students of political science.
Twenty-four students participated in a session which involved 20 hours of
lectures in different subjects to enhance awareness on human rights and
democratic values.

2) During the period from September 20-28, 1998, the Centre organized a
training session on democracy and human rights for NGO employees.
Seventeen trainees representing 14 NGOs in the Gaza Strip participated.
The session highlighted different subjects in human rights and democracy
with a focus on the criteria related to the work of the NGOs and the
activities of civil society. The session involved approximately 24 working
hours distributed over eight working days.

33
For more details about the activities carried out by the unit in this regard, see pages 104-107 of
this report.
34
In this regard, see pages 107-110 of this report about the upgrading lectures that were carried out
by the Women’s Rights Unit in different areas of the Gaza Strip.

114
3) During the period from November 8-15, 1998, the Centre organized a
training session on democracy and human rights focusing on lawyers who
are members of the Palestinian Bar Association as the targeted group.
Twenty-eight lawyers participated in this session, which focused
particularly on special subjects relevant to practicing law, the role of the
lawyer in defending and achieving justice, and enhancing the accepted
international criteria for the independence of the judiciary. The session was
21 hours long.

4) During the period from November 28 to December 5, 1998, the Centre

organized a training session on human rights and democracy focused on
journalists and the workers in the media. Twenty-one participants were
involved in the session. The session continued for 21 training hours and
was coordinated with the Journalists’ Association. It focused on different
subjects that have a relationship to the press and the freedom of expression
and publication.

Building Relationships with Other Palestinian NGOs and Civil Society

Palestinian NGOs played a special role in the struggle for independence

and freedom during the years of the occupation. With the establishment of
the PA on part of the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the role of these
organizations in the nation-building and democratization process increased.
Civil society institutions, including NGOs are considered a basic
foundation for any democratic society and an important means for
achieving democratic transformation. Accordingly, the Centre pays great
concern to working with the NGOs and participates in efforts that aim at
enhancing its professional aspects and independence. The Centre is a
member in the Palestinian NGO network which is an independent, local
framework including tens of the most active and professional NGOs. In
addition, the Centre has a coordinated relation with tens of NGOs in which
opinions and expertise are exchanged. Finally, the Centre is involved in
joint projects and activities with other NGOs and dedicates itself to
providing legal services to all Palestinian NGOs. 35

Perhaps one of the most successful joint projects during the last two years
was the establishment of the Palestinian Forum of Education for
Development. The forum was established in the Gaza Strip in 1997 on the
initiative of four NGOs, the Ministry of Youth and Sport, and the World
Refugees’ Children. The founding NGOs are as follows: the Palestinian
Centre for Human Rights, YMCA in Gaza, the Women’s Affairs Center in
Gaza, and the Free Thought and Culture Center in Khan Younis. In
addition, Save the Children and UNICEF participated in the forum as

35
In this regard, see pages 107-110 of this report for further information on the lectures to upgrade
awareness on the legal rights of women that were carried out by the Women’s Unit in cooperation
with NGOs.

115
 observers. The first outcome of the work of the forum was the
establishment of the Canaan Institute in 1997. The Institute concentrated its
work on developing human resources as a means to achieving sustainable
development.36

Participation in Workshops and Local Conferences

Another aspect of PCHR work is the enhancement of relations with the

local environment through its involvement in different activities that are
organized locally, including lectures, workshops, and conferences. These
activities are organized by NGOs, political parties, or governmental
institutions. The most important activities that the Centre participated in
were as follows37:

1) On February 24, 1998, Ebtissam Zaqout, a researcher in the Democratic

Development Unit38 participated in a workshop about children’s rights
agreements conducted by Canaan Institute, within the context of its long
program of orienting activists from the administrative personnel of
commissions, institutions, social programs, and educational and cultural
programs. In this workshop, Zaqout introduced the Convention on the
Rights of the Child of 1989. She introduced the history and importance of
the agreement and compared it to the actual situation of Palestinian
children.
2) On June 13, 1998, Khalil Shaheen, a researcher in the Economic,
Social, and Cultural Rights Unit, participated in a session to prepare the
cadre for the special camps for disabled people. The session was organized
by the Ministry of Youth and Sport, and was conducted in the Society for
the Physically Disabled. In that workshop, Shaheen discussed the rights of
the disabled. Seventy people participated in the lecture. Shaheen presented
the international standards related to the rights of disabled people and
introduced the circumstances that disabled people in the Gaza Strip face.
3) During the period from January to June 1998, Hamdi Shaqqura,
coordinator of the Democratic Development Unit, participated in a series of
workshops about democracy. The workshops were conducted in a number
of clubs and youth centers in different areas of the Gaza Strip. These
workshops were a part of the programs of the Palestinian Center for
Dissemination of Democracy and Community Development
36
In July 1998 Centre volunteer Celine Richard (from France) prepared a report to evaluate the
participation of the Centre in the Palestinian Forum of Education for Development and the
educational Canaan Institute. The report had the methodology of a questionnaire, interviews with
all the participants in the forum, and follow up of the activities that were carried out by the
participants. The report offered its results and recommendations for the Centre and the other
participants. It mentioned that all the participants believe that it is of great importance for the
Centre to devote significant effort to developing the programs of the Canaan Institute, particularly
those programs focused on human rights and democracy.
37
In this regard, see pages 107-110 of this report for further information on the lectures that were
conducted by the Women’s Rights Unit in cooperation with women’s organizations.
38
Starting on August 1, 1998, Ebtissam Zaqout moved from being a researcher in the Democratic
Development Unit to working as the coordinator of the Field Work Unit.

116
 (PANORAMA) and were coordinated with the Ministry of Youth and
Sport.
4) On July 8, 1998, Hamdi Shaqqura was the guest of Wednesday
Dialogue, which is organized weekly by Canaan Institute. The meeting was
conducted under the title of “The Basic Freedoms: The Freedom of
Expression and Thought.” Shaqqura introduced in his speech the
importance of freedom of expression and thought in the democratic
political system and democratic society. He also introduced international
criteria relevant to these two freedoms. Then he presented the Palestinian
situation and focused on the obstacles that restrict people from enjoying
these rights. At the end of his speech a discussion and debate took place.
5) On July 16, 1998, through an invitation from the Ministry of Youth and
Sport, Hamdi Shaqqura delivered a lecture about democracy in front of
more than 80 teenagers who were participating in a summer camp
sponsored by the Ministry. This lecture came within the context of the
Centre’s work of raising public awareness about democracy. In this lecture,
Shaqqura focused on the basic elements of democracy as a system and style
of life, including participation in decision-making processes and basic
freedoms. He asserted that democratic elements are characterized by a
universality that cannot be subject to negotiation or bargaining under the
justification of cultural relativity or any other reason. At the end of the
meeting a debate between the participants took place and focused on the
most important problems that face democracy in Palestinian society.
6) On August 18, 1998, Raji Sourani, the Director of PCHR, through an
invitation from the Ministry of Information and the Negotiation Affairs
Department in the Palestinian Authority, participated in a workshop
conducted in Shawa Cultural Center. In that workshop, Sourani presented a
paper with the title of “Prospects for NGOs’ Reactions if a Palestinian State
is Proclaimed.”
7) On September 7, 1998, through an invitation from Canaan Institute,
Hamdi Shaqqura delivered a lecture on civil society and its role in
enhancing democracy. In the lecture, Shaqqura focused on the meaning of
civil society and distinguished between the role of the government in
democratic societies where there is little interference by the government in
the work of NGOs and the role of the government in undemocratic
societies where there is a tendency toward control of all aspects of life. The
government in such undemocratic societies always tries to control all the
civil society institutions and to restrict their freedom and work. After that, a
debate between the participants on the particularity of the Palestinian case
took place. The participants agreed that there is a necessity to work at
upgrading the degree of independence of the civil society.
8) On September 12, 1998, through an invitation from the General
Information Office, Raji Sourani participated in an open meeting for
discussing the death penalty and its influence on Palestinian society. The
meeting was organized in Shawa Cultural Center and came as a result of
executing the first death penalty against two brothers after they were

117
 accused of criminal killings by a military court. 39 In his dialogue, Sourani
mentioned the stand of human rights activists and organizations which
reject the death penalty. This position is supported by many countries and
has resulted in the cancellation of the death penalty in all the European
countries. He questioned the benefits of implementing the death penalty in
Palestine, mentioning that this penalty was not imposed during the
Egyptian administration, except in one case in 1965. In his introduction of
the case of Al-Khaldi and Abu Sultan families and the decision of the
military court to implement the death penalty on three members of the Abu
Sultan family, Sourani mentioned a number of points, among which were:
A) the court which was formed was a military and exceptional one, and the
way it was formed does not encourage respect and confidence in it; B) the
court did not have the minimum level of legal and judicial checks and the
court took its decision so quickly that justice could not be said to have been
achieved; C) the law that was implemented in the court (the Revolutionary
Penalty Law of 1979) is illegal since this law was not adopted by the
Legislative Council and was not issued by a presidential decree; D) this
event is a precedent-setting one that is very dangerous and that could in the
future become politicized for use against the political opposition; and E)
this matter undermines the Palestinian civil judiciary and its independence.
9) On October 11, 1998, through an invitation from the Student Council of
Al-Azhar University, Ebtissam Zaqout, participated in a workshop under
the title of “Women and the Future.” This workshop was conducted in the
university. In the workshop, Ebtissam delivered a lecture about women in
international agreements. In the lecture, she mentioned women’s status in
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, the International Covenant
on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights of 1966, and the Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 1979. At
the end of the lecture a debate between the participants took place.
10) On November 21, 1998, through an invitation from the Art College of
the Islamic University in Gaza, Raji Sourani participated in a workshop
about human rights. The workshop was conducted in the university. In the
workshop, Sourani presented the historical development of human rights
concepts and then he introduced the Israeli violations of Palestinian human
rights. Moreover, he mentioned in his talk the human rights circumstances
in the PA’s area.
11) On November 25, 1998, through an invitation from Canaan Institute,
Raji Sourani delivered a lecture with the title of “The State of Law and
Right.” Twenty trainees participated in the lecture. This lecture came
within the context of the second week of training for the Canaan Institute
and concerned the role of the social activist in building a democratic
Palestinian society.

The Relationship of the Centre with Palestinian Authority Institutions

39
See in this regard, pages 63-65 of this report.

118
Since its establishment in 1995 the Centre has worked at enhancing the
positive dialogue between it and Palestinian Authority institutions. This
effort came as a result of the Centre’s belief in the role of Palestinian civil
society in participating in achieving the inalienable rights of the Palestinian
people. The Centre supports all international and local efforts that aim at
building an independent Palestinian state dominated by a democratic
political system that respects human rights. Within this context, the
Palestinians see that it is of great importance to establish a network of
professional relations with the Palestinian government institutions,
including the legislative, executive, and judicial authorities, and to enhance
the positive and constructive dialogue with them.

119
 THE ACTIVITIES OF THE CENTRE AT THE REGIONAL AND
INTERNATIONAL LEVEL

During 1998 the Centre continued its regional and international activities
aimed at respecting human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
and at participating in the efforts that aim at achieving the Palestinians’
inalienable political rights. One aspect of Centre work during 1998 focused
on securing the de jure application of the Fourth Geneva Convention of
1949 in the Occupied Territories. A second aspect of Centre work involved
intervening with UN bodies to explain and show the Israeli violations of
Palestinian human rights. In addition, the Centre participated in many of
the international activities related to such matters. At the same time, it
continued in enhancing its relations with effective institutions at the
regional and international level. Within this context, the Centre received
scores of governmental and non-governmental delegations. Moreover, the
representatives of the Centre met with many journalists and representatives
of local and international news agencies. During these meetings, the Centre
provided a comprehensive explanation of the human rights situation in the
Occupied Palestinian Territories.

All Centre publications, including press releases, research, and reports, are
translated into English and distributed internationally.

The Work of the Centre to Secure the de jure Application of the

Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territories

In a significant development, and in an overdue response to Palestinian

demands, the UN General Assembly adopted resolutions RES-10/2, RES-
10/3, RES-10/4, and RES-10/5, which once again defined Israel as a
belligerent occupying power gravely violating the provisions of the Fourth
Geneva Convention through its legal and administrative practices and
measures. The Assembly also stated that the Fourth Geneva Convention is
de jure applicable to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including East
Jerusalem and the rest of the Arab territories under Israeli military
occupation. As a result of Israel’s continuous refusal to fulfill its legal
obligations under the Convention, the UN General Assembly has asked the
High Contracting Parties (HCPs) to the Fourth Geneva Convention to
convene a conference regarding the applicability of the Convention to the
Occupied Palestinian Territories, including Jerusalem. This conference
would also aim to ensure that the HCPs respect their obligations under
Article 1 of the Convention. The UN General Assembly also asked the
government of Switzerland, as a depository of the Convention, to take the
necessary steps to convene a meeting of experts to determine how best to
follow the recommendations stated in resolution RES-10/4. This meeting
should occur as soon as possible, and no later than the end of February
1998. The UN General Assembly also has asked the Swiss government to

120
invite the PLO to participate in the conference and any preliminary steps
related to the conference. The Swiss government contacted the HCPs and
the PLO, but failed to convene the meeting because, as claimed by the
Swiss government, consensus was not reached by the HCPs. It was very
clear that both the Israeli and the U.S. governments wanted to avoid such a
conference at all costs, claiming that the conference would prejudice the
peace process between the PLO and the government of Israel. The
government of Switzerland supported this stance, and avoided
implementing the resolution under the force of American and Israeli
pressure

These contacts with the concerned parties resulted in the following

events:
First, on April 29, 1998, a meeting took place in Bern between
representatives of the Swiss government and the Palestinian Authority for
the purpose of exchanging views on a Swiss proposal to convene a
quadrilateral meeting. This meeting, which would simultaneously be a
meeting of experts, would include the PLO, the Israeli government, the
Swiss government (as the depository of the Convention), and the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Representatives of the
PA have affirmed that any such meeting should deal with the de jure
applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Second, on May 27, 1998, the Swiss government, through its representative
office in Ramallah, sent to the PA a draft of a proposal titled “Diplomatic
Note,” which outlined Swiss plans to implement the relevant resolutions.
This proposal suggested a private, quadrilateral meeting (to be held from
June 9-11, 1998) which would be aimed at “examining measures and
mechanisms which contribute to the effective application of the Fourth
Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.” The Swiss
government considers its proposal for this meeting to be an appropriate step
given its mandate from the UN General Assembly. In the next phase, the
proposal states a meeting of experts “should proceed to an analysis of the
general problems concerning the Fourth Geneva Convention and seek
possible remedies which would contribute to respect for the Convention (in
general, and in particular in the Occupied Territories).” Clearly, the Swiss
intend for the meeting not to specifically address the applicability of the
Fourth Geneva Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The
discussions would be informal and result in a report by the chairman.

Third, the PA responded to the Swiss proposal as it contained prejudices in

its formulation, in its treatment of the resolutions, and in its planned
agenda. The Swiss government responded to the PA’s comments by
modifying some of the points within the proposal. The Swiss government,
however, refused to acknowledge that the meetings should deal with the
applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to the Occupied Territories
of Palestine.

121
The Swiss plan contradicts the letter and spirit of the relevant UN
resolutions. The Swiss government is authorized to request that the HCPs
convene, however, it is apparently no longer neutral and no longer
committed to performing its legal duties. Its current actions seem guided by
pressure from the United States and Israel. The governments of these two
countries have encouraged Switzerland to pressure the PA to accept “its”
proposals or else accept responsibility for the failure of the HCPs to
convene.

PCHR followed up these developments during 1998 and dedicated its

efforts to aborting the Swiss initiative for a limited conference; instead,
PCHR applied pressure to hold a meaningful conference of HCPs.

PCHR Memorandum on the UN Recommendation for HCPs to Convene

On June 6, 1998, PCHR prepared a memorandum that was sent to all

concerned parties in which PCHR asserted the following points:

First, the UN General Assembly resolution calling for the HCPs to convene
in order to fulfill their obligations to apply de jure the convention to the
Occupied Palestinian Territories is of utmost importance. Local and
international human rights organizations have for many years asked the
HCPs to convene and ensure the applicability of the Fourth Geneva
Convention. A conference of HCPs would focus attention on Israel’s
human rights violations and reaffirm the legal status of the Occupied
Palestinian Territories as such. This designation must not cease until the
Palestinian people achieve their legitimate rights, especially the right of
self-determination.

Second, recent Swiss efforts have fallen well short of the UN General
Assembly mandate. They contradict in letter and spirit the resolutions of
the UN General Assembly, which called for a conference focusing on the
obligations of the HCPs to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, not a
quadrilateral meeting that would divert attention from that focus. The issue
raised is not a political one, but a legal one that demands that the HCPs,
including the Swiss government, fulfill their obligations under international
law. The UN resolution has authorized the Swiss government to take
preliminary steps to ensure a conference of the HCPs. This resolution does
not give it free rein to convene meetings which could prejudice participants
in the conference proposed by the resolution. The drafters of the UN
resolution, perhaps aware of the potential for the misuse of the Swiss
mandate, mentioned only the possibility of convening a meeting of experts.
Should the drafters have anticipated the need for other meetings, it is likely
that they would have alluded to such meetings in the text of the resolution.

122
Third, the purpose of the quadrilateral meeting has been defined in the
Swiss proposal as the examination of the application of the Convention
rather than the de jure applicability of the Convention to the Occupied
Palestinian Territories. There is a significant difference between the two
approaches. As mentioned earlier, Israel claims that it applies de facto the
humanitarian aspects of the Convention, which means that the examination
will likely concentrate on how to improve the implementation of these
aspects. This narrow focus, however, gave rise in the past to human rights
violations (many of which we have mentioned) and grave breaches of the
Convention. This narrow focus also fails to recognize the applicability of
the whole Convention, which states clearly that the Palestinian territories
are indeed Occupied Territories that should be recognized as such by the
Israeli government. A broader focus that recognizes the applicability of the
entire Fourth Geneva Convention would allow examination to be
concentrated on the mechanisms that provide protection for Palestinian
civilians and other provisions that ensure respect for human rights.

Fourth, the potential danger of the quadrilateral meeting and similar

meetings is that they would produce agreements that would prejudice the
rules of international law. International law is the fundamental reference,
and should be kept as the first and last reference in any case regarding the
Occupied Palestinian Territories, especially now that we are approaching
the final status negotiations between the PLO and the government of Israel.
International law, which should be the reference point for the signed peace
agreement between the two parties has been ignored, resulting in a number
of problems that jeopardize the realization of Palestinian rights. Thus it is
critical that international law be preserved by all parties. No concessions
should be made in regard to legal issues under any circumstances.

PCHR also affirmed the following:

First, PCHR reiterates its demand for an immediate conference of the HCPs
to the Fourth Geneva Convention. This conference is essential for the
HCPs to fulfill their obligations to ensure the applicability of the
Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It is also essential to
ensuring that the Israeli occupying power respects the provisions of the
Convention. PCHR reaffirms the UN General Assembly resolutions and
asks for their immediate enforcement in letter and spirit.

Second, any meeting that does not conform to the mandate authorized by
the UN is an attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the fair demands of the
Palestinian people, especially the applicability of the Fourth Geneva
Convention and the protection of Palestinian civilians in the Occupied
Territories. The proposed quadrilateral meeting presents many potential
dangers. It is another step toward deleting legal references and the rule of
international law, which is the basic guarantee of the rights of the
Palestinian people and universal respect for human rights.

123
Third, the continuation of the status quo without the conference of the
HCPs is preferred to a meeting of the kind proposed by the Swiss
government. Such a meeting will undermine the Palestinian effort to
convene a meaningful meeting of the HCPs. In this regard, we demand that
the Swiss government prepare for the HCPs to convene as stated in the UN
resolution, and not prepare and participate in a meeting that is clearly a
product of American and Israeli pressure. The Swiss government, as a
depository of the Convention, should honestly and fairly fulfill the mandate
granted it by the United Nations.

Fourth, in light of these developments, PCHR calls for the PLO and PA to
continue pressing for the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva
Convention to the Occupied Territories, the recognition of the Palestinian
territories as occupied territories, and the recognition of Israel as the
belligerent occupying power.

Fifth, the conference of the HCPs should occur in spite of Israeli and
American refusals because each HCP is legally obliged to ensure respect
for the Convention. The obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention
are legal obligations and, like the conference of the HCPs, must not be
subject to political maneuvering. The law must be applied and states must
respect their commitments. The conference should focus specifically on the
Occupied Territories of Palestine, not on occupied territories in general.

A Consultation Meeting on the Fourth Geneva Convention

On June 21, 1998, a meeting took place at PCHR regarding the

authorization by the UN General Assembly for the Swiss government to
take necessary steps to convene a conference of the High Contracting
Parties (HCPs) to the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 Relative to the
Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. The purpose of the
proposed conference is to determine measures to ensure that the HCPs
respect their obligations under the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian
Territories (OPT). PCHR’s meeting was convened in light of the
communication sent by the Swiss government to the concerned parties.
This communication clearly indicates that the Swiss are circumscribing the
essence of the UN Resolution under American and Israeli pressure.

Participants in the meeting included members of the Palestinian Legislative

Council, officials from the Ministry of Planning and International
Cooperation and Ministry of Justice, the Chairman of the Palestinian Bar
Association, and representatives of local NGOs and political parties.

Raji Sourani, Director of PCHR, welcomed the participants and highlighted

the potential danger surrounding the preparations by the Swiss government
for the conference. He referred to UN General Assembly Resolution
A/RES/ES-10/5 which authorizes the Swiss government to prepare for the

124
 convening of a conference of the HCPs to the Fourth Geneva Convention.
He added that the Centre has been following the issue since 1997, and that
a report was prepared by the Centre assessing the steps taken thus far by
the Swiss government which clearly violate the letter and the spirit of the
UN resolution, especially in terms of convening a quadrilateral meeting of
the Swiss and the Israeli governments, the PA, and the ICRC. The report
also affirmed the potential danger in simply tolerating these measures
which undermine the norms of international law.

Issam Younis, coordinator of the Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

Unit at PCHR, indicated that the international community has accepted the
applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Palestinian territories
occupied in 1967. He added that Israel is the only state that refuses to
accept the applicability of the Convention in the OPT and that its denial
does not contain any legal basis and contradicts the provisions of the
Convention. Israel claims, instead, that it applies the humanitarian articles
of the Convention de facto which, as Younis pointed out, suggests that
Israel erroneously believes that the Fourth Geneva Convention contains
non-humanitarian provisions even though the Convention is considered a
fundamental pillar of international humanitarian law. Moreover, the Israeli
claim of implementing the humanitarian aspects of the Convention is
contradicted by policies such as the legalization of torture, land
confiscation, willful killings, house demolitions, and deportations, which
constitute grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention and, in fact,
amount to war crimes.

Younis stated the Palestinian position centers on the demand for the de jure
applicability of the Convention and for protection of Palestinian civilians in
the OPT. Younis referred to the more than 40 UN Security Council
Resolutions between 1967 and 1993 which demand that Israel apply the
Convention in the OPT.

Participants discussed the developments and the performance of the

Palestinian Authority (PA) during this period and the majority criticized the
PA’s performance. Many of the participants referred to the inherent
shortcomings of the Oslo Agreements in not recognizing the OPT as being
occupied territories and therefore not establishing the applicability of the
Fourth Geneva Convention in those territories. Participants also referred to
the danger of not only ignoring the applicability of the Fourth Geneva
Convention, but also of ignoring all other resolutions and provisions in
international law that support the rights of the Palestinian people.

At the end of the meeting participants reaffirmed the following:

1) The Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation, as the
representative of the Palestinian government at the meetings with the Swiss
government, should issue a comprehensive memorandum detailing its
involvement until now;

125
2) PCHR will prepare a set of guidelines to be taken during the proposed
meeting of experts this September (called for in the UN resolution);
3) The whole matter of the negotiations should be transferred to the PLO
since it is the only authority that is authorized to negotiate issues related to
the Palestinian people; and
4) Any further meetings the PA participates in should be subjected to the
legal scrutiny of Palestinian, Arab, and international experts. Furthermore,
a legal forum should be established for any Palestinian delegation
participating in future meetings.

Advisory Expert Meeting on the Fourth Geneva Convention, Gaza

In its resolution ES-10/5 of March 20, 1998, the General Assembly

reiterated once again its recommendation that the High Contracting Parties
to the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian
Persons in Time of War of August 12, 1949 convene a conference on
measures to enforce the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territories,
including Jerusalem, and to ensure its respect in accordance with Article 1
of that Convention, in which the High Contracting Parties undertake to
respect and to ensure respect for the present Convention in all
circumstances. It also reiterated its recommendation to the government of
Switzerland, in its capacity as depository of the Geneva Conventions, to
undertake the necessary preparatory steps, including the convening of a
meeting of experts in order to follow up on the above- mentioned
recommendation.

On July 15, 1998, the Swiss government sent the Palestinian Authority a
proposal for a mechanism for the application of the Fourth Geneva
Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The Palestinian
Authority requested that PCHR give an advisory opinion on the position
that the Palestinian Authority should take on the proposal and on its
participation in any future meetings with the Swiss government. To fulfill
this task, PCHR convened a meeting of Palestinian and foreign legal
experts in Gaza on August 8 and 9, 1998, in order to give its views on the
relevant legal questions.

Participating in PCHR’s Advisory Meeting of Experts were:

Paul de Waart - Netherlands
John Quigley - U.S.A.
Agneta Johansson - Sweden
Colm Campbell - Ireland
Per Stadig - Sweden
Greg Nott - South Africa
Lynn Welchman - United Kingdom
Georges Henri Beauthier - Belgium
Robert Remacle - Belgium
Charles Shamas - Palestine

126
 Khader Shkirat - Palestine
Mohammed Abu Harthiah - Palestine
Raji Sourani - Palestine
Issam Younis - Palestine
Iyad Al-Alami - Palestine
Hamdi Shaqqura - Palestine
Frauke Seidensticker - Observer, Switzerland

1. Recommendations of the Advisory Meeting of Experts:

1. The Advisory Meeting of Experts recommend that cognizance be taken
of the following:
1.1 There can be no derogation from the Fourth Geneva Convention;
1.2 That whatever the legal status of the Declaration of Principles (DOP)
and subsequent agreements, the Convention takes precedence; and
1.3 That the Convention remains applicable throughout the West Bank
(including East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip, thus Israel remains
accountable for its actions to the extent that it exercises the functions
of government in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This
accountability extends to actions committed by the Palestinian
Authority under Israeli duress which amount to breaches of the
Convention.

2. Accordingly it is further recommended:

2.1 That any arrangements or initiatives in relation to the Occupied
Palestinian Territories must be fully in accordance with the
Convention, and must recognize that the application of the
Convention is non-negotiable. Accordingly, meetings such as the
one held between Israel, the PLO, Switzerland (the depository of
the Conventions), and the ICRC on June 9-11, 1998 (generally
referred to as the “quadripartite meeting”), convened by the
depository in response to UNGA Res. 10/4 of November 13, 1997,
cannot proceed on any basis other than that the de jure application
of the Convention to the Occupied Palestinian Territories is given
and is non-negotiable;
2.2 That any mechanism put in place in response to the Resolution must
be fully in accordance with the Convention, must be based upon the de jure
application of the Convention, and must not absolve, or appear to absolve,
the High Contracting Parties of their responsibilities to ensure respect for
the Convention. By reference to these criteria, the mechanism put forward
by the Swiss government must be considered defective;
2.3 That the High Contracting Parties be reminded of their obligations,
and their pre-existing legal capacities, to repress grave breaches of
the Convention;
2.4 That the High Contracting Parties be also reminded that the
utilization of the Uniting for Peace Resolution in condemnation of
Israeli violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories implies that
such violations constitute a serious threat to international peace and
security;

127
2.5 That the depositary be also reminded of its obligation to act when
called upon to do so in an impartial manner, and that it is reminded
that its functions are administrative and facilitative unless otherwise
called for;
2.6 That due caution, rigor and diligence be exercised by the PLO in
order to ensure that protected Palestinian persons receive the full
benefit of the Convention and that the de jure position is in no way
prejudiced;
2.7 That a multi-layered approach be adopted to the question of the
enforcement of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories, recognizing the threat which continuing
serious violations, including grave breaches of the Convention, and
particularly the maintenance and construction of settlements,
present to the peace process, and to international peace and security;
2.8 That in view of the recommendation to the High Contracting Parties
in UNGA Res. 10/4 of November 13, 1997, to take measures on a
national or regional level, that the initiative of the European Union
in implementing the territorial applicability clause in the Interim
Agreement on Trade and Trade-Related Matters with Israel be
supported and endorsed as a suitable model for adoption elsewhere.
It should also be made clear that the provisions of the Euro-
Mediterranean Association Agreements requiring respect for human
rights, include respect for the instruments of international
humanitarian law;
2.9 That an immediate initiative be taken to convene a meeting of
states, identified by their concern for breaches of the Convention in
the Occupied Palestinian Territories, so that they may resolve to
ensure full Israeli compliance with the Convention in whatever
practical manner they may deem appropriate and effective in
accordance with international law;
2.10 That all efforts be made to ensure that the actions taken by High
Contracting Parties in response to the depository’s proposal for an
expert meeting of High Contracting Parties following from such
meeting, serve the end specified in the above paragraph; and
2.11 That the above approach be complemented by a campaign to
highlight violations of the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian
Territories in preparation for the 50th anniversary of the Geneva
Conventions.

A Series of Meetings to Explain and Act on the Results of the Advisory

Expert Meeting

After holding the above-mentioned expert meeting the Centre increased its
activities at the local and international level to explain the results of those
meetings and to expand its attempts to work to secure the honest
implementation of the UN General Assembly invitation to the High
Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to hold a conference

128
on implementation of the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian
Territories. The Centre sent the results of this meeting to the UN
commissions and the relevant officials, including the Secretary General,
Kofi Annan, and the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary
Robinson. In addition, the results of the meeting were sent to many of the
concerned governments.

At a different level, the Centre made intensive contacts at the Palestinian

level in an attempt to hold Palestinian officials to the fulfillment of their
responsibilities and force them not to respond to the Swiss initiative.
Within this context, the Centre organized a meeting for journalists in its
offices on August 24, 1998 to explain to them the latest developments, the
dangerous influence of such matters, and to urge them to highlight the
matter in the local press.

A Memorandum on the Convening of a Meeting of Experts

On October 18, 1998, the Centre published a memorandum about the latest
developments in the UN General Assembly decision to hold a conference
for the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention. The
memorandum mentioned that the Swiss government had decided that the
period between October 27-29, 1998, would be the time for the convening
of a meeting of experts that would be attended by representatives from the
PLO and the Israeli government, as well as other participants invited by the
Swiss government. The aim of the meeting is to examine the problems
regarding the Fourth Geneva Convention (regarding the protection of
civilian persons during times of war), both in general and in particular
relation to occupied territories.

The purpose of the meeting will be analogous to that of the first periodical
meeting on international humanitarian law that took place in Geneva from
January 19-23, 1998. In the spirit of periodical meetings, the objective is to
maintain and strengthen dialogue between the High Contracting Parties to
the Geneva Convention on general problems regarding the application of
international humanitarian law. This objective is based on the practice
established in the first periodical meeting.

According to UN Resolutions ES-10/2, ES-10/3, ES-10/4, ES-10/5, the UN

General Assembly (UNGA) has asked the High Contracting Parties to the
Fourth Geneva Convention to convene a conference. The aim of the
conference will be to investigate the measures to be taken to implement the
Convention in the OPT and to fulfil the obligations of Article 1 which
emphasize that it should be respected under all circumstances. To achieve
this, the UNGA authorized the Swiss government to act as the depositary
of the Convention, which involves taking the necessary action to prepare
for the conference, including the possibility of convening a meeting of
experts. The PLO should of course, be invited to the meetings and

129
 contributory preparations. In spite of the clear identification of the Swiss
role, the Swiss government is intentionally seeking to undermine the value
and violate the spirit and letter of the resolutions. One example of this was
the Swiss invitation to both the Israeli government and the Palestinian
Authority for a quadrilateral meeting to be attended also by Switzerland
and the ICRC. The meeting took place in Geneva from June 9-11, 1998, in
spite of PCHR’s demand not to convene the meeting due to the potential
dangers that could arise. One area of concern was that the High Contracting
Parties responsible for the applicability of the Convention had nothing to
do with the meeting, given that the question of implementing International
Humanitarian Law (especially the Fourth Geneva Convention) was going
to be a Palestinian-Israeli issue, which was not at all the aim of the UN
resolutions.

Moreover, the Swiss government in mid-July 1998, in a very sensitive

development, concluded a proposal for a mechanism for the application for
the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the OPT. This is in
violation of Switzerland’s authorized role which should solely be to
prepare for the convening of the conference of the High Contracting
Parties. Its role should not be to determine the track and the essence of the
negotiations from the beginning, especially the proposal to preserve the
poor human rights situation in the OPT and the continued violation of the
provisions of the Convention. In effect, such behavior is also a serious
breach of the role of the depository whose involvement should be restricted
to inviting the parties to the meeting. The depositary should not provide
any proposals since it is not the owner of the Convention. We therefore
believe that the Swiss government’s intentions are unsatisfactory.

As for the Swiss invitation regarding the convening of the meeting of

experts between October 27-29, 1998, PCHR is deeply concerned about the
disregard for the letter and spirit of the aforementioned UN resolution in
such a meeting.

PCHR is particularly concerned that the Swiss government has identified

the aim of the meeting as being to analyze the problems regarding the
Fourth Geneva Convention both in general and in particular relation to the
Occupied Territories, which makes the content of the meeting absolutely
meaningless. Identifying the aim of the meeting in such a way means that
any reference to the OPT or to the Israeli occupation is a deviation from the
purpose of the meeting, when in fact the meeting should be devoted to
these issues.

Due to the potential danger of the Swiss arrangements, PCHR, while

expressing its deep concern, is demanding the following:

i. One of PCHR’s main criticisms regarding Palestinian participation

is the mixing of the role of the PLO and the PA. The whole file has been

130
 entrusted to the Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation
(MOPIC), while it should be in the hands of the PLO for legal and political
reasons. This is the case despite the UN Resolutions that stress the role of
the PLO in participating and contributing to the arrangements for the
conference of the High Contracting Parties.

ii. As a result of the potential danger of these meetings, PCHR

demands that the PLO withdraw and not attend the meeting in this form, as
its results would prejudice Palestinian interests and rights. Also, rules of
international law and UN resolutions must not be derogated from in
reference to a just settlement for the Palestinian question. Moreover, PCHR
is demanding that the PLO and its different institutions (especially the
Executive Committee and the Palestinian National Council) on the one
hand and the PA (with its Executive Authority and the Legislative Council,
as well as political parties and factions) on the other hand, take a strict and
upstanding position regarding these developments as they could possibly
prejudice the rules of international law and its legitimacy.

iii. The Swiss government should immediately cease its efforts

regarding the application of the Fourth Geneva Conference in the OPT,
considering that it intentionally violated the mandate that it had been
authorized by the General Assembly. Therefore, if the Swiss government
cannot stand up to Israeli and American pressure, it should ask the UN to
release it from its role for as long as it is unable to comply with the spirit
and letter of UN resolutions.

iv. The High Contracting Parties should break their silence and review
the arrangements made by the Swiss government and take the initiative by
immediately convening their conference without delay. The conference
itself is not the aim, rather, it is the de jure application of the Fourth
Geneva Convention in the OPT and the putting to an end of the systematic
violations of its provisions by the belligerent Israeli occupation. The High
Contracting Parties are under legal obligation to apply the Convention and
to ensure that the steps taken so far will lead to this. An example of what
can be done has been set out in the experts’ recommendations in the
meeting in Gaza from August 8-9, 1998. The following steps were
recommended:

In view of the recommendation to the High Contracting Parties by

UNGA Resolution 10/4 of November 13, 1997 to take measures on
a national or regional level, the initiative of the European Union in
implementing the territorial applicability clause in the Interim
Agreement on Trade and Trade-Related Matters with Israel should
be supported and endorsed as a suitable model for adoption
elsewhere. It should also be made clear that the provisions of the
Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreements requiring respect for

131
 human rights, include respect for the instruments of international
humanitarian law.

An immediate initiative should be taken to convene a meeting of

states, identified by their concern for breaches of the Fourth Geneva
Convention in the OPT, so that they may resolve to ensure full
Israeli compliance with the Convention in whatever practical matter
they may deem appropriate and effective in accordance with
international law.

v. PCHR is highly concerned about ICRC’s participation in the

quadrilateral meeting that took place in Geneva from June 9-11, 1998. This
participation undermined its credibility, impartiality and its interest in
applying de jure the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949. Although ICRC’s
current withdrawal from these meetings is appreciated, at the same time we
demand that ICRC publicly clarify its position regarding this matter.

A Press Release about the Stance of the UN High Commissioner for

Human Rights

On October 29, 1998, PCHR issued a press release in which it expressed its
strong praise for the position taken by Mrs. Mary Robinson, the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights, with regard to the most recent
development relating to the UN General Assembly’s recommendation to
convene a conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva
Convention to address the application and the enforcement of the
Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

PCHR, which has been following this affair closely for many months,
especially the measures and steps taken by the Swiss government and their
dangerous consequences, has published many memorandums analyzing the
various aspects of the UN resolutions and warning of the dangerous
implications of the Swiss initiative. Most recently, PCHR has sent a letter
to Mrs. Mary Robinson, the High Commissioner for Human Rights,
warning of the dangerous consequences of the Meeting of Experts which
already took place in Geneva from October 27-29, 1998. PCHR has urged
Mrs. Robinson, the High Commissioner, to do her best to stop the Swiss
initiative as it contradicts UN resolutions, and to ensure the de jure
application of the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Occupied Palestinian
Territories.

The Meeting of Experts began on October 27 and the statement of the High
Commissioner (who was invited as an observer to the meeting) was
delivered. The statement reflected strong commitment on behalf of the
High Commissioner to ensure the de jure application of the Fourth Geneva
Convention and the need to provide protection for Palestinian civilians in
the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Such commitment is consistent with

132
the position taken by PCHR, which is reflected in its letter to the High
Commissioner. Once again, the High Commissioner for Human Rights
provided a strong example of professional human rights work, far from
politicization and political expediency. Her speech asserted the need to
respect principles of international law and emphasized states’
responsibilities to ensure respect for human rights and international
humanitarian law, especially the Fourth Geneva Convention.

The complete text of the High Commissioner’s statement is below. PCHR

hopes that it helps to highlight the dangerous consequences of the steps and
measures taken by the Swiss government. Furthermore, PCHR will
continue its activity until the Swiss government begins to act in conformity
to the UN Resolutions.

Publication of a Book about the Fourth Geneva Convention

In November 1998 the Centre published a documentary book of all the

developments concerning the Centre’s work on the Fourth Geneva
Convention. The book was published in Arabic and English under the title
of “IVth Geneva Convention and Israeli Occupation of Palestinian
Territories: Theory and Practice.” The book includes the memoranda and
press releases that were issued by the Centre concerning this matter, the
documents concerning the above-mentioned Swiss government invitation,
speeches by a number of participants in the Expert Meeting, and the UN
resolutions related to the issue. The book can be obtained through direct
contact with the Centre.

PCHR’s Interventions before UN Bodies

PCHR devoted part of its effort at the international level to working with
human rights mechanisms and specialized international commission
mechanisms, particularly commissions derived from the United Nations.
The Centre provided these specialized bodies and commissions with oral
and written presentations on the human rights situation in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories. During 1998 the Centre continued its effort in this
direction. It focused on the following:

UN Commission on Human Rights

On March 17, 1998, PCHR’s delegation delivered an oral presentation

about the Israeli violations of Palestinian human rights to the UN
Commission on Human Rights. This presentation came in Session Number
54 of the Commission, which started its work on March 16 and continued
until April 24, 1998. The fourth item of its agenda was related to Israeli
violations of Palestinian human rights in the Occupied Arab Territories,
including Palestine. Issam Younis and Hamdi Shaqqura participated in the
meeting as representatives of the Centre. Moreover, PCHR, the Palestinian

133
Society for Protecting Human Rights and the Environment, and the
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) provided prior to the
meeting a joint report about the Israeli violations of human rights in the
Occupied Arab Territories. That report was approved as a formal document
among UN documents and was distributed widely.

The oral statement of the Centre focused on the most prominent Israeli
violations of Palestinian human rights, including the continuing closure of
the Palestinian territories and the disastrous results of such policies on all
aspects of life. The Centre mentioned the continuous arrest of more than
4,000 Palestinians in the Israeli jails in violation of the Fourth Geneva
Convention of 1949. In addition, the Centre mentioned that Israel is the
only state in the world that has legalized torture. Such torture led to the
death of a number of Palestinian detainees. The Centre asserted that this
reflected the unethical character of the Israeli state and its security forces
and judicial authority.

Furthermore, the Centre introduced the issue of the continuing Israeli

settlement policies leading to the confiscation of Palestinian land and asked
the international community to adopt all the necessary measures to stop the
illegal actions and behaviors being carried out by the Israeli government. It
also condemned the excessive use of force by Israeli soldiers against
Palestinian civilians. The latest victims of this policy were three civilian
workers who were killed and tens of Palestinian civilians who were injured
in the prior few days in the West Bank. Accordingly, the Centre asked the
international community to form an international committee to investigate
the incident and to adopt all the measures necessary to guarantee that such
events would not happen again.

More informally, the delegation met Mr. Hannu Halinen, the UN Special
Rapporteur to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. In the meeting, the
Centre expressed its strong rejection of his decision to include in his report
the Palestinian Authority’s human rights violations. The Centre believes
that this reporting decision will not help in highlighting the Israeli
violations of Palestinian human rights and that the attention of the Special
Rapporteur must remain solely focused on Israeli human rights violations
as long as the occupation continues. In addition, PCHR met the Palestinian
ambassador in Geneva, Mr. Nabil Ramlawi, and a number of officials in
the foreign and Arab delegations to the United Nations, as well as members
of a number of international human rights organizations.

Committee Against Torture

In UN Committee Against Torture Meeting 19 held on May 19, 1998,

PCHR forwarded an alternative report to the Committee. The Committee
also looked at the report forwarded to it by the Israeli government. The
report of PCHR included documented facts countering Israeli

134
rationalizations for the use of torture against Palestinian detainees in Israeli
jails. In addition, the report mentioned that Israel is the only state in the
world that has legalized the use of torture as a formal policy against Arab
and Palestinian detainees in its jails. The report of the Centre included a
number of cases of Palestinian detainees who were subjected to torture by
Israeli security forces. The report was distributed widely during the
Commission meeting.

Human Rights Committee

The Centre provided a report to the Human Rights Committee to counter

the report provided by the Israeli government. The Committee included 18
international experts on human rights that were selected from the countries
of the High Contracting Parties to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR). These experts worked as representatives of
themselves and not of their countries. Normally, the Committee specializes
in monitoring the commitments of the contracting countries with the
articles of the ICCPR.

The Committee started its meetings on July 14, 1997 to discuss the report
provided to it by the Israeli government about its implementation of the
articles of the ICCPR. Israel provided its report to the Committee after five
years of delay as the report was supposed to be provided at the beginning
of 1993. The report did not mention the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
This omission very much concerned the members of the Committee and
became a significant part of its work agenda.

PCHR prepared a report about human rights situation and the degree of
Israeli occupation forces’ commitment to the articles of the ICCPR. The
report mentioned that the failure of the Israeli government report to refer to
its measures and practices against the Palestinian territories reflects an
under-estimation by the Israeli government of the work of the Committee
since the articles of the ICCPR have to be implemented by Israel in the
territories. The Centre called on the members of the Committee to ask the
Israeli government to prepare an additional report that focuses on the
Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Moreover, the Centre mentioned in its report that the government of Israel
held at that time approximately 3,000 Palestinian detainees in very difficult
living conditions. The deterioration in their health and living circumstances
has become very clear. Among these detainees are more than 100
administrative detainees arrested by the Israeli occupation forces without
any trial or accusation. These detainees are prevented by the Israeli
occupation forces from their right to receive regular visits from their
families and to meet their lawyers. These lawyers have not been allowed to
visit their clients inside Israel for more than three years. The Centre
mentioned that Israel is the only state in the world to have legalized torture.

135
It uses torture widely against Arab and Palestinian detainees in a clear
violation of the articles that prohibit torture no matter the circumstances.

In the report, the Centre mentioned the Israeli government violations

regarding the Palestinian people’s right of free movement. Such a violation
of this right came through the partial and total closure policy in the West
Bank and Gaza Strip. This policy has not only banned the individual from
enjoying his or her right to move within the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but
also it has extended to include strong obstacles on the movement of goods
and trading activities. This had a significant negative effect on the
Palestinian territories and led to a deterioration in their living conditions.
At the end of its report, the Centre asked the members of the Committee to
ask the Israeli government to provide its report about the political and civil
rights of Palestinians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and to condemn
the Israeli violations of these rights, particularly the violations regarding
Israeli government use of the closure policy and legalization of torture.

At an earlier time, the Centre presented to the members of the Committee

the report as well as a group of questions to be used by the members of the
Committee during their questioning of the Israeli delegation.

Activities of this sort are being carried out by the Centre with the United
Nations through its membership in the International Federation for Human
Rights (FIDH) which enjoys consultation status with the UN Economic and
Social Council.

The UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the

Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the
Occupied Territories

On July 24, 1998, the representatives of the Centre testified in Cairo before
the UN Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the
Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied
Territories.

In his testimony, Hamdi Shaqqura, the coordinator of the Democratic

Development Unit, spoke about the escalation in the use of excessive force
against Palestinian civilians by the Israeli occupation forces and settlers. He
mentioned that the first six months of 1998 witnessed an increase in the
number of Palestinians killed by the occupation forces. Five civilians were
killed in the Gaza Strip (four of them during popular demonstrations
marking the 50th anniversary of the Palestinian catastrophe – Al-Nakhba –
of 1948. The fifth was killed less than one month following these
demonstrations.) Also, the same period witnessed an increase in the
number of people who were fired upon and injured by the Israeli soldiers
and settlers. In all of these events, there was no threat on the lives of the
Israeli soldiers using firepower against the Palestinian demonstrators.

136
Shaqqura condemned the extensive use of snipers by the occupation forces
against the participants in these peaceful gatherings and demonstrations
protesting the continuing policies of occupation, of settlements, and of land
confiscation.

Moreover, Shaqqura presented the Israeli closure policy on the Occupied

Territories, and within the context of his answering the questions of the
members of the Committee, Shaqqura rejected the notion that there is any
visible improvement in the closure and said that the general framework is
still a comprehensive closure of the West Bank and Gaza Strip with
allowances for limited trade activities and movement of people through
Israel.

In his testimony before the Committee, Iyad Al-Alami, the coordinator of

the Legal Unit, presented the Israeli violations regarding the Palestinian
detainees and the prevention by the Israeli occupation forces of any lawyers
from the Gaza Strip from visiting the Israeli arresting centers and jails. Al-
Alami mentioned that Israel is still detaining almost 2,500 Palestinian and
Arab detainees, in clear violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and the
agreements that the government of Israel signed with the PLO affirming the
release of detainees within the context of confidence-building measures.
Al-Alami mentioned that Israel continues to use torture methods in
interrogations of Palestinian detainees and denies them their right to
receive regular visits from their families. In addition, he presented the
proposed law of the General Security Service (Shabak) that was approved
by the Israeli parliament in its first draft. Al-Alami mentioned that this
matter is extremely serious as it grants political, legislative, and judicial
support to torture measures carried out by officials in Shabak against
detainees.

In addition, Al-Alami presented the suffering of the detainees’ families and

the inhumane measures that they are subjected to, either at Israeli
checkpoints through the search process, prolonged waiting, or the treatment
that they receive from the Israeli soldiers. He referred to the inhumane
conditions that the Palestinian detainees are subjected to, including the lack
of sufficient food, filth, lack of sufficient medical attention, and poor
treatment from the jail’s administration. He mentioned in his testimony the
policy preventing Palestinian lawyers from visiting their clients in the
Israeli jails and their consequent inability to provide them with legal
services. Legal access to detainees is guaranteed by international
agreements and conventions.

In his answering of the Committee’s questions, Al-Alami stated that the

detainees’ circumstances had not seen any improvement, but in actuality
had deteriorated in a dramatic way as a result of the use of their file by the
Israeli government as a means to pressure and bargain with the Palestinian
Authority in the negotiations.

137
Moreover, Al-Alami expressed his deep concern about the life of the
detainee Jamal Al-Khamisi who had been detained in Al-Ramleh prison
and was suffering from cancer of the liver. He also expressed his deep
concern for the lives of all the detainees, especially the ill. He expressed his
opinion that the death of the detainee Youssef Al-Areer was a result of the
medical negligence following his successful medical operation on his heart.
He died hours after he was transferred to the hospital of Al-Ramleh prison.

The UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights

In the period between November 16-18, 1998, the Centre participated in the
work of the UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. This
Committee is responsible for monitoring the commitment to the covenant
articles by the countries that signed the International Covenant on
Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (1966). In particular, the Centre
delegation that included Issam Younis, coordinator of the Social and
Economic Rights Unit, and Hamdi Shaqqura, coordinator of the
Democratic Development Unit, participated in the discussions of the
Committee about Israel. The government of Israel at an earlier time
forwarded the Committee a report about its implementation of its
commitments according to the Covenant. That report included many
intended untruths and did not mention at all the Israeli violations of
Palestinian rights in the Occupied Territories.

The Centre forwarded to the Committee a report countering the Israeli

claims and asserted that Israel remains responsible for human rights
violations in the Occupied Territories even after the signing of the Interim
Agreements and the establishment of the PA in parts of the Occupied
Territories. The report presented the most prominent Israeli measures and
practices that constitute a clear violation of the International Covenant on
Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. The Centre delegation delivered a
speech in front of the Committee members focusing on the Israeli
measures, particularly those measures concerning settlements and land
confiscation, the continuous policy of closure, and what might result from
the grim influence of such policies on economic, social, and cultural rights
in the Occupied Territories. Moreover, the Centre presented in its speech
on the necessity that the Committee adopt a strict stand toward such
measures, that it reject violating measures, and ask the government of Israel
to commit to international law and human rights standards.

Press Releases Issued by the Centre on Special Occasions

The Centre used special anniversaries of important events to send press

releases to world governments and to influence international public
opinion. These press releases encouraged support for the legitimate rights
of the Palestinian people and support for the human rights of Palestinians in

138
the Occupied Territories. They also urged the adoption of the necessary
measures to counter the violations of these rights. During 1998 the Centre
issued the following press release:

Press Release on the Events Marking the 50th Anniversary of Al-Nakhba

On May 14, 1998, the Centre released a press release in memory of the 50 th
anniversary of Al-Nakhba. The press release mentioned that while the
world is preparing to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the birth of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Palestinian people in Palestine
and the diaspora are marking the 50th anniversary of the “Nakhba,” the
uprooting of the people of Palestine from their homeland by Zionist forces.
These forces then declared the birth of the Jewish state in full view of the
international community.

According to the press release, May 15, 1948 represents a turning point in
the history of the region and the people of Palestine. When the Jewish
minority established the state of Israel, the Israeli army, in order to create
the state, enforced a policy of ethnic cleansing, in which hundreds of
thousands of Palestinians in villages and cities were forced to flee. While
Palestinians watch Israel’s celebration of independence on the greater part
of historic Palestine, they are bitterly aware of being deprived of their
inalienable right to self-determination and the establishment of an
independent state on part of Palestine – the Occupied Territories of 1967.

The press release added that throughout the past 50 years, the people of
Palestine have struggled against the Israeli war machine, which occupied
the balance of historic Palestine in 1967. Successive Israeli governments
have attempted to eradicate the people of Palestine, viewing the
Palestinians solely as a threat rather than as a people with whom they could
co-exist. Israel not only turned its back on the partition plan, which was
adopted by the UN General Assembly in November 1947 (and backed the
legitimacy of the idea of a Jewish state), but also UN resolutions,
international law, and the will of the international community, which
assured the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination
and statehood.

Moreover, the press release asserted that despite the fact that the PLO has
offered its hand for peace and historic reconciliation on the basis of mutual
coexistence, acceptance, and respect in two states, the state of Israel and its
occupying forces have continued a hostile and provocative policy to
prevent the Palestinian people from exercising their right to self-
determination and statehood in the Occupied Territories of 1967, including
Jerusalem, four years after the signing of the Interim Agreement between
the government of Israel and the PLO.

139
Press Release on the European Commission Recommendation to Ban
the Importing of Settlement Products to EU Countries

On May 21, 1998, PCHR issued a press release welcoming the

recommendations in which the Council of Ministers of the European Union
and the European Commission terminated the privileges accorded to goods
produced in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
based on the Euro-Mediterranean Association agreement between the EU
and Israel signed in 1995. In the Commission’s view, the Israeli
government has violated the agreed upon rules of origin for exports. Israeli
exports to the 15 countries of the EU are either partially or completely tax-
exempt. These products contain no reference as to their production in
Israeli settlements in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, or the
Golan Heights. The EU defines these territories as occupied according to
international law, which means that they are not part of the territories of the
State of Israel. A European spokesman stated that the European
Commission recommends correcting the state of forgery and fraud of the
European system regarding certificates of origin concerning goods
produced in Jewish settlements in the Occupied Arab Territories. This
affirms the position of the EU that the Israeli territories do not include
Jewish settlements, which therefore cannot enjoy the privileges of Israeli
goods.

In the press release, PCHR asserted that it is time for the international
community, especially the European Union, to play a more powerful and
responsible role in light of the policies of the Israeli government, which
violate basic rules of international law and human rights. Moreover, it
repeated its invitation to the international community to impose economic
sanctions on the Israeli government as a legal means to apply the rules of
international law and to ensure respect for human rights.

Press Release on the Eve of the Signing of the Wye River Memorandum

On October 29, 1998, PCHR released a press release expressing its deep
concern about the prospects of an escalation in human rights violations in
the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). This concern comes in the
aftermath of the signing of the “Wye River Memorandum” on October 23,
1998 by Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, Israeli Prime Minister
Binyamin Netanyahu, and American President Bill Clinton. PCHR believes
that the security arrangements in the Wye River Memorandum contain a
great potential for an increase in human rights violations in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories.

The press release mentioned that for the first time, the government of the
United States will be a full partner in the different phases of implementing
this agreement. Thus, the United States will participate with the PA in a
Palestinian work plan to ensure “the systematic and effective combat of

140
 terrorist organizations and their infrastructure.” Joint Palestinian-American
and Palestinian-Israeli-American committees will be formed in order to
examine, assess, and guide measures taken by the PA. Accordingly, PCHR
believes that the government of the United States will be a full partner in
any human rights violations perpetrated in the OPT as far as security
obligations are concerned.

Moreover, the press release warned of the negative consequences of this

agreement, which may dramatically cast its shadow across the human rights
situation in the OPT. Once again, human rights may be neglected for the
sake of a promised peace and better security for Israel. PCHR stressed that
sacrificing human rights in accordance with the previous Interim
Agreements has yet to achieve either a just peace or security. The core
issue here is that the concept of security from an Israeli point of view
completely ignores the security needs of the Palestinian people and
severely contradicts international standards of human rights. Thus, more
than four years after the signing of the first Palestinian–Israeli Interim
Agreement of May 1994, and more than three years after the signing of the
second agreement of September 1995, human rights violations in the OPT
have continued. The Palestinian citizens in the OPT have not felt any better
off, in terms of security for their land or personal safety. Palestinian land
continues to be confiscated for the sake of settlement expansion and the
establishment of bypass roads for settlers. Tens of Palestinians have been
killed at the hands of Israeli soldiers and settlers, whether in the form of
extra-judicial killings and assassinations (even in areas under full
Palestinian jurisdiction), or in cases in which the excessive use of deadly
force was proven to have been carried out by Israeli soldiers in situations
that posed no threat to their lives. Moreover, Israeli authorities continue to
impose collective punishment against the Palestinian people in the OPT
through the policy of closure, in violation of international humanitarian
laws, especially the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and other human
rights covenants.

The press release added that the government of Israel and the American
administration have continued to exert pressure over the PA, demanding
that the PA perpetrate human rights violations in areas under its jurisdiction
as part of its obligations toward the security of Israel. Under the pretext of
combating violence and undermining the infrastructure of “terrorist
groups,” both the United States and Israel have encouraged the PA to take
illegal measures during the last four years against Palestinian opposition.
Such measures, which have been blessed by the United States and Israel,
include inter alia:

1. The formation of State Security Courts by the PA. Such courts

contradict international standards for fair trials and lack due process
protections accorded in civil courts.

141
2. Illegal massive waves of arrests. Since 1994, hundreds of Palestinian
civilians have been arrested by Palestinian Security Forces for prolonged
terms without charge or trial. A number of those prisoners have been held
for more than three years.
3. The closure of licensed civil institutions by the PA. Such institutions
are well known for their Islamic orientation, but they conduct their
activities in accordance with the rule of law and provide vital charitable,
educational, social, athletic, and religious services for the community.
4. The imposition of restrictions on the freedom of expression. Under the
slogan of combating violence, both the United States and Israel continue to
demand that the PA take effective measures that restrict citizens’ basic
rights to the freedom of expression and press. It has never been clear,
however, where the borders of the terms “incitement to violence” and the
“citizens’ right to express their political opinions” lie.

Also, the press release expressed PCHR’s deep concern about the security
arrangements and warned of further possible violations of Palestinian civil
and political rights, bearing in mind the vague meaning of the concept of
security and measures that could be taken to prevent “incitement to
violence.” Taking into consideration the old-new reading of the concept of
Israeli security, which prevailed in all the Interim Agreements, PCHR
warned about a dramatic escalation in human rights violations, especially in
the following regards:

1. Bringing leaders of the Islamic opposition before the State Security

Courts.
2. The closure of Islamic-oriented civil institutions which are licensed by
the PA.
3. The imposition of additional restrictions on the freedom of expression
and press including the closure of newspapers and magazines of the Islamic
opposition.
4. The intensification of a massive wave of arrests of leaders, members,
and supporters of the Islamic opposition.

In the press release, PCHR regarded the government of the United States as
a full partner in any possible human rights violations perpetrated in areas
under Palestinian jurisdiction in accordance with the new security
arrangements. PCHR called upon the PA to act in conformity with the rule
of law and to refrain from arresting civilians for their political affiliation
and to guarantee the right to freedom of expression. Finally, PCHR called
upon the international community for effective intervention to monitor the
situation in the OPT and to prevent human rights from being sacrificed
once again for the sake of security.

Press Release on the Eve of President Bill Clinton’s Visit to Gaza

142
On December 13, 1998, PCHR released a press release on the eve of
President Bill Clinton’s visit to Gaza. The press release mentioned that for
the last two years, the peace process has suffered from clinical death as a
result of the policies and stands of the Israeli government. The Wye
Memorandum aimed to bring the process back to life again. However, it is
clear that the Israeli government does not intend to apply the provisions to
which it committed itself.

The press release asserted that throughout the last five years human rights
and the rule of law have been sacrificed for the sake of security and peace.
Unfortunately, peace, security, and respect for human rights have not been
achieved.

In the press release, PCHR warned against the dangerous deterioration in

the human rights situation in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, including
Jerusalem. On Monday, December 14, 1998, Gaza will welcome American
President Bill Clinton on his visit to PA-controlled areas. This visit comes
as a result of the agreement reached through the negotiations between Israel
and the PA.

The press release added that the American President's visit to the region
coincides with the dangerous escalation of human rights violations
resulting from Israeli policy and practice towards Palestinian civilians and
areas. At the same time that the American President is arriving in the area,
Palestinian and Arab prisoners in Israeli prisons and detention centers are
on the fifth day of their hunger strike, which came as a last resort in light of
the Israeli government's insistence on refusing their release. This refusal is
a violation of the agreements signed by the Israeli government and
contradicts the spirit of the peace process. An atmosphere of peace cannot
prevail without the immediate release of Arab and Palestinian prisoners. It
is illogical that the PLO (the legitimate representative of the Palestinian
people, including the prisoners) sign a peace agreement with the Israeli
government to end the state of war while Israel keeps in captivity those
who joined the PLO in order to resist the occupation. The lives of the
prisoners in Israeli jails are at risk as a result of the practices of the Israeli
Prison Service and the security branches. The current situation is
intolerable due to the legalization of torture and the substandard prison
conditions. The continuing detention of the prisoners can only mean that
the Israeli government aims to hold them as hostages for political
blackmail.

Moreover, the press release added that Israel has never been punished for
its practices throughout the occupation, despite the fact that its actions were
a grave breach of basic human rights and showed disrespect for the rule of
international law. That is why Clinton’s visit comes at a time in which the
excessive use of force is continuously applied by the Israeli occupation
against Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. As the whole

143
world watched on television, Israel revived the activities of the undercover
Death Squads, “the Musta’ribeen,” in an effort to combat the
demonstrations against the ongoing detention of prisoners. These are the
same squads that killed tens of Palestinian civilians in cold blood during
the Intifada. As of last week, the number of Palestinians killed by the use
of live ammunition by the Israeli forces against demonstrators had reached
four and the wounded more than four hundred.

The press release explained that the Israeli government has escalated its
settlement policy in the West Bank and Gaza Strip through the expansion
of existing settlements and the establishment of new ones. Israel is racing
to change the facts on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and to
increase the number of Jewish settlers there in order to prevent the
establishment of a Palestinian state.

Due to the Wye River Memorandum’s immense impact on the human

rights situation and public freedom in the West Bank and Gaza Strip,
PCHR expressed several reservations in regard to the agreement. Human
rights violations have become apparent to all in the aftermath of the
agreement. Human rights cannot be sacrificed under any circumstances or
with any justifications. On the contrary, true peace requires the respect and
protection of human rights. No peace process will succeed as long as
human rights are being sacrificed.

The press release announced that if the American president is serious about
pushing forward the peace process, he cannot blend politics and human
rights. Human rights violations perpetrated by Israel are crimes that are,
more often than not, war crimes according to international law, most
notably the Fourth Geneva Convention. Thus, those committing these
crimes should receive no lenience or forgiveness. The American
administration cannot continue to employ double standards with respect to
the rights and freedom of the Palestinians. If the American administration
wants to restore some of its lost respect, it must fulfill its international
obligations toward the preservation of the bases of international law and
human rights standards.

The world looked forward to the promise of a better day for human rights
when the British Court decided to extradite Augusto Pinochet to Spain for
trial on the crimes he committed against the Chileans and other people.
These crimes are not different from those committed by Netanyahu. We
cannot wait for history to tell its tale. The facts on the ground force us to
move immediately to stop the efforts to eradicate the rights of the
Palestinians as a people and as individuals.

In addition, the press release asserted that the CIA’s active involvement in
the peace process poses serious dangers to the security of Palestinians. The
CIA has a long and unpleasant history of overseeing human rights

144
violations throughout the world. At precisely the same time that the Wye
River agreement was being signed, new facts were coming to light about
what the CIA knew about human rights violations in Honduras and how
early it knew about such violations. Nevertheless, the organization turned a
blind eye. Here, the CIA (as a representative of the American government
led by President Clinton) and Israeli government will be active partners in
demanding the incarceration of Palestinians. PCHR expresses its very
grave concern that, at the very least, the CIA will be an active element in
circumscribing Palestinian rights and freedom. At the worst, the CIA will
conceal its knowledge of human rights violations against detainees and
may play a role in pressuring the Palestinian Authority to violate human
rights.

The treatment of Palestinian prisoners is of the utmost concern to PCHR.

We are acutely aware of the dangers posed to supporters of opposition
groups at this time. Their rights must be maintained and respected. It is
simply unacceptable for the Palestinian Authority, at the command of Israel
and the CIA, to be required by some absurd notion of peace to run
roughshod over locally and internationally guaranteed human rights. PCHR
will closely monitor any new waves of arrests carried out by the Palestinian
Authority.

Finally, PCHR requested that President Clinton not employ double

standards and that he put the utmost pressure on the Israeli government in
order to bring it into compliance with the international will – a will that has
long agreed to the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. Furthermore,
President Clinton must pressure the Israeli government to guarantee respect
for human rights and the implementation of the principles of international
law as a prime condition for any just peace in the region.

Also, PCHR encouraged the Palestinian Authority to respect human rights,

democracy, and the rule of law. Furthermore, it demands an immediate end
to the practices of the Israeli occupation so as to enable the Palestinian
people to practice their legitimate rights, especially the right to self-
determination and to an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Participation in Regional and International Meetings and Conferences

On February 23, 1998, the Director of the Centre, Raji Sourani,

participated in a meeting on “The Economic Sanctions against the Iraqi
People: A Human Rights Perspective.” This meeting was organized by the
Cairo Center for Human Rights Studies in Cairo. The participants in the
meeting condemned the economic sanctions imposed on the Iraqi people
and condemned the disastrous results of the punishment. They asserted that
what had been suffered by the Iraqi people as a result of the embargo was a
crime practiced by the Security Council against the basic human rights of
the Iraqi people, including the right of Iraqi children to live and the right of

145
Iraqi civilians to enjoy food and medical treatment. In addition, they
condemned the American role, particularly as regards the American
domination of the Security Council, its failure to distinguish in its sanctions
between the political system and the Iraqi people, and its threat to strike
Iraq in a way that might lead to appalling loss of human life.

Moreover, the participants condemned the American stand as regards its

selectivity in implementing human rights standards. Historically, the
United States of America (until the mid-1980s) and United Kingdom
refused to apply economic sanctions against the racist system in South
Africa. This tendency of the United States of America and the United
Kingdom was against the international community’s desire, which
supported the practice of economic sanctions against South Africa. The
United States of America and the United Kingdom declared at that time
that such economic sanctions might negatively influence the South African
people. This is the excuse they gave for not participating in sanctions.

The participants mentioned the Israeli violations of human rights and the
American Security Council veto which provided protection for these
violations on 16 occasions in a way that prohibited taking any measures or
decisions of punishment against Israel. This gave Israel the opportunity to
violate human rights widely. Such violations include land confiscation,
settlements, and discriminatory policies against Palestinians aimed at
forcing Palestinians out of Jerusalem, and the practice of closure. All of
these are an attempt to create a racist system in the Occupied Territories on
a par with apartheid. Also, the Israeli violations include practicing torture.
They have even gone so far as to legalize it under a legal and judicial
umbrella.

The participants called for the removal of the economic sanctions against
the Iraqi people and the adoption of possible international mechanisms to
hold the American government accountable for its inhumane stance toward
the Iraqi people. In addition, the participants asked academics, human
rights activists, and all concerned people to develop a human and Arabic
stand against the American practices against Iraq. They also asked for a
strong stand against Israeli violations of human rights and to translate any
such stand against American and Israeli practices into practical measures
and steps.

In addition, the meeting focused on the Israeli-European bi-lateral

economic agreement. The participants asserted that it is necessary to
activate the agreement, particularly regarding the agreement’s second
article. They affirmed that the minimum level that Europe must apply if it
has no intention to impose economic sanctions on Israel, is to stop the
privileges granted to Israel, particularly the Israeli export of products to
Europe. According to the agreements, the Israeli-exported products to
Europe amounted to 72 percent of its external trade.

146
The participants agreed in their meeting to follow the economic sanctions
as an international mechanism, but at the same time they asked to change
the system and the mechanism for its implementation against some
countries. They added that the ongoing implementation of the system of
sanctions runs in contradiction to humanitarian and international norms.
The implementation of such a system of economic sanctions should either
be guided by UN General Assembly resolutions or else the veto system in
the Security Council must be halted.

Between March 12-15, 1998, the Centre participated in a conference about

the escalation of violence in Algeria. The conference was held in Oslo,
Norway and was organized jointly by the Norwegian Institute for Human
Rights and Amnesty International (Norwegian Branch). The conference
included many international and Arab experts, including the Centre’s
Director, Raji Sourani. The discussion in the conference essentially
revolved around forming an international inquiry committee to investigate
what is going on in Algeria.

Between March 16-19, 1998, Raji Sourani was invited by the Ford
Foundation to participate in the meetings of its officials in Africa that was
held in Nairobi, Kenya. Sourani delivered a presentation titled “Human
Rights within the Context of Conflicts: The Experience of the Occupied
Territories.” In his presentation, Sourani mentioned the problems
confronted by the peace process and its influence on the Palestinian people
and the Palestinian human rights movement. In addition, he presented the
Arab human rights movement and the challenges that are confronted by it.

Between March 20-23, 1998, Raji Sourani participated in a meeting on

“The Challenges Confronted by the Arab Human Rights Movement:
Problems and Strategies.” The Cairo meeting was jointly organized by the
University of Cairo and the Human Rights Center of Harvard. A number of
well-known activists participated in the meeting.

On March 20, 1998, Raji Sourani met with Mrs. Mary Robinson, the UN
High Commissioner for Human Rights, in her office in Geneva. This
meeting took place after a number of messages sent by the Centre
explaining the human rights deterioration in the Occupied Palestinian
Territories.

Sourani explained to Robinson the deterioration in the human rights

situation and the violation of rights carried out by the Israeli occupation. He
particularly stressed the racist policies carried out against Palestinians in
Jerusalem and the expansion of Israeli settlements in the Occupied
Territories, the confiscation of Palestinian land, and the building of bypass
roads. These policies, he said, were turning Palestinian areas in the West
Bank into ghettoes in an attempt to establish facts on the land and prohibit

147
the Palestinian people from enjoying their rights in deciding their future
and building their independent state.

Moreover, he asserted that the Oslo Agreement and the peace process not
only have ignored human rights, but also have led to an unprecedented
deterioration in the human rights situation over the last four years. This is
due to Israeli policies of closure prohibiting the freedom of movement for
goods, the separation of West Bank from Gaza, and the prohibition on
Palestinians from working inside Israel. All of this has led to an increase in
the rate of employment to 63 percent in Gaza and the West Bank.

Sourani highlighted for Robinson the situation of the Palestinian detainees

in Israeli prisons. The number of these detainees reaches almost 2,500. He
asserted the necessity to take strong measures and to make a strong effort in
order to release these detainees and to stop the use of their files as a means
of political bargaining. He also mentioned the condition of human rights
and democracy in the PA’s area. In addition to his critique of the situation
under the PA, he mentioned American and Israeli pressure that forces the
PA to make such violations.

Sourani further asserted to Robinson that due to her personal history as a

defender of human rights and due to her formal position, she has an ethical
and professional responsibility and duty since she is not a politician but an
upholder of human rights conventions under which she must work to
support relevant human rights articles. This is why he asserted to her that it
is necessary that she visit the Occupied Territories and ask the international
community to implement the human rights conventions without giving the
political factors any consideration. This effort should result from the fact
that what is transpiring in the Occupied Territories is not only a dire
violation of human rights of Palestinians as individuals and people, but also
restricts the possibility of the Palestinian people to decide their future and
to enjoy their legitimate national rights.

In addition, Sourani asked that she not change the delegation of the UN
Special Commissioner to the Occupied Territories. He asserted that any
attempt to do so would have political considerations and reasons. He fully
countered the Israeli request and the request of some of its supporters in the
Commission for Human Rights in regard to changing the delegation. Also,
he expressed his strong rejection of the American and Israeli attempt to
ignore Palestine under the fourth item of the Commission and asserted that
this matter was both very dangerous and politically motivated. The aim of
such an effort is to legitimize the occupation. He asked Robinson to
confront any such attempt.

From her side, Robinson asserted that she pays special attention and
concern to the human rights situation in the Occupied Territories. She
expressed her concern with the deterioration of the human rights situation

148
in the Occupied Territories. She added that despite the pressures of her
work she would think seriously in the near future about visiting the
Occupied Territories as she has a serious concern about what is going on
there.

Francesca Morota, the official responsible for the Palestinian file in the
office of the High Commissioner, participated in the meeting.

Between April 25-26, 1998, Hamdi Shaqqura represented the Centre in the
international meeting of the UN Committee on the Exercise of the
Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. The meeting took place in
Cairo. The meeting focused on discussing the steps that might be taken by
NGOs to support the Palestinian people in their fight to achieve their
national hopes. Shaqqura also participated as an observer in a seminar
about assisting the Palestinian people. That seminar was held between
April 27-28, 1998.

Between May 10-12, 1998, Issam Younis, coordinator of the Economic,

Social, and Cultural Unit, participated in the Mediterranean/European
conference titled “Euro-Mediterranean Conference: Strengthening
Democracy and Respect for Human Rights.” The conference was held in
Wilton Park in the United Kingdom. The conference discussed a number of
issues and subjects related to problems of democracy and human rights and
the role of Mediterranean and European partnership in pushing forward
democracy and human rights. The delegation from the Centre met
representatives from governmental and non-governmental organizations.

On June 2, 1998, by invitation from UNAIS and the British Lawyers’

Union, Raji Sourani delivered a lecture in the British Lawyers’ Union
Centre. The lecture included three basic parts. The first part had an
academic and legal character. In this part, Sourani discussed the current
legal situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the problems that
result from the continuation of a number of Israeli military laws. He also
discussed the Palestinian Legislative Council, the nature of its work, its
responsibilities, and the limits on these responsibilities according to the
Oslo Agreement. Sourani asserted that the essence of the problem is that
the Israeli occupation is still present in its physical and legal shape.

The second part had a professional character in which Sourani introduced

the problems concerning lawyers’ careers and the civil Palestinian
judiciary. He criticized the ongoing work of the State Security Courts and
at the same time he highlighted the prohibition preventing Palestinian
lawyers from visiting detainees in the Israeli prisons and detaining centers.
This prohibition has now been in place for more than three years.

Finally, in the third part, he discussed human rights violations. He said that
in the year of the 50th anniversary of Al-Nakhba and the Universal

149
Declaration of Human Rights, Israel developed a new mechanism of human
rights violations. This mechanism expressed itself in Israeli legalization
and legitimization of torture as the Israeli High Court took a decision to
legalize torture. Palestinian human rights organizations in the past had
mentioned that Israel practiced organized torture against Palestinian
detainees in Israeli prisons. This forced Israel to formally recognize for the
first time in the Landau Commission Report of 1987 that it practiced
torture.

Sourani asked the British Lawyers’ Union to take a positive stance toward
this matter and to encourage the other unions in Europe to adopt clear,
frank, and public stands in regard to this matter. At the same time, Sourani
encouraged the European governments and the European Union to adopt
serious measures against Israel.

Sourani condemned in his lecture the stand of the Swiss government

regarding the General Assembly resolution pertaining to the High
Contracting Parties of the Fourth Geneva Convention meeting to discuss
the possibility of forcing Israel to implement the articles of the Convention.
Sourani mentioned the Swiss government attempt to violate the decision
and to decrease its status from being a meeting of the government of the
High Contracting Parties to being a quadrilateral meeting between the PLO,
Israel, Switzerland, and the International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC). He stated that this attempt seriously threatens the Palestinian
position which asserts the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to
the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The Swiss government is attempting to
find a way for Israel to escape from its commitment in implementing this
Convention and the obligation it has under it.

Moreover, Sourani asserted that the human rights situation had deteriorated
since the signing of the Oslo Agreement in 1993. He maintained that the
violation of human rights had reached its worst degree and asserted that the
policy of Israel and the United States of America is based on sacrificing
human rights to achieve “peace.” The result is that peace has not achieved
and the process has become clinically dead as a result of Israeli measures
and the deterioration in the human rights situation. He added that peace
cannot be achieved without protecting human rights.

Between June 9-10, 1998, Raji Sourani delivered two lectures in

Washington, D.C. about the human rights situation in the Occupied
Palestinian Territories. The first lecture was at the Robert F. Kennedy
Memorial Center for Human Rights that is headed by the lawyer Ms. Kerry
Kennedy Cuomo. The Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine (CPAP),
chaired by Dr. Hisham Sharabi, and Grassroots International also co-
sponsored the meeting. The second lecture was at the Washington Institute
for Near East Policy. The two lectures described the deterioration in the
circumstances of the Palestinian people as a result of Israeli policies. These

150
policies have blocked the peace process and led to its clinical death. At the
same time, Sourani asserted in his lectures that the administrations of Israel
and the United States are responsible for the deterioration. They pressured
and encouraged the PA to violate human rights in the Occupied Territories.
This included encouraging the PA to carry out collective arresting waves of
the Palestinian opposition and urging the PA not to respect Palestinian civil
court decisions. In addition, they pressured the PA to destroy civil society
and shut down its legal institutions under the justification of destroying the
infrastructure of terrorists.

Sourani asserted that the Palestinian people have endured a most unique
and distinguished experience. This experience is the outcome of very
difficult circumstances. Civil society is intended to develop and push
forward from such experience. One means of developing such experience is
to enhance democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. These are now
basic challenges confronted by the Palestinian people.

He mentioned that at the same time the occupation continues in its legal
and physical shape according to the Oslo Agreement. It also continues in its
attempt to create facts on the ground and to violate the social and economic
rights of Palestinians. Also, it is working hard not to implement the
legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. To achieve these goals, the
occupation works at expanding the settlements horizontally and vertically,
as well as at adding new settlements. In addition, its attempts to build
bypass roads aim to transfer the Palestinian areas from being a unified
geographical area into separated ghettoes. The occupation intends to
change the demographic and geographic characteristics of East Jerusalem
through adopting the policy of ethnic cleansing and separating the West
Bank from the Gaza Strip. In addition to all of this, the occupation adopted
an organized and continuous closure policy for the occupied Palestinian
areas aimed at prohibiting Palestinians from enjoying their economic and
social rights.

Sourani asserted that the outcome of all of these policies is the deterioration
in the human rights situation. This deterioration, he said, was the worst
since the signing of the Oslo Agreement and forced the people not to trust
the political process and to lose hope in the future. That is why Sourani
warned that the Occupied Territories are becoming like a powder keg that
may explode at any moment. Accordingly, the possibility of having a
peaceful Intifada has become very unlikely while the possibility of having
new bloodshed and a new cycle of suffering has drawn very near. This is
because the Israeli policies are tantamount to an invitation to war. At the
Palestinian level, Sourani asserted that the most important challenges
confronted by the Palestinian people are how to establish civil society and
protect its unity. He added that democracy, human rights, and the rule of
law are the only means to mobilize the Palestinian people and to use their
energy to achieve Palestinian national hopes and strengthen the Palestinian

151
Authority. The Palestinian people’s rights are the only means that affirm
the Palestinian people’s civilization and guarantee for them the respect of
the international community.

He asserted that in memory of the 50th anniversary of the Jewish state, the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Al-Nakhba it is illogical that
the Palestinian people continue to be subjected to injustice. It is further
illogical that the international community remains silent toward crimes that
are being carried out by the Israeli occupation against Palestinians.

The meetings included a number of human rights activists, human rights

organizations, academics, researchers, and Arab, European, and American
diplomats, in addition to a number of American organizations working in
the human rights field. The participants in the meetings asked tens of
questions about the Occupied Territories. These questions reflected the
participants’ deep concern about what is going on in the Occupied
Territories.

Between August 28-30, 1998, Raji Sourani participated in the work of the
international conference for the defenders of human rights and their
protection. The conference was held in Geneva, Switzerland. More than 80
participants and international human rights organizations took part in the
conference, including Amnesty International, the International Commission
of Jurists, and the International Federation for Human Rights. Mrs. Mary
Robinson, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, opened the
conference. The outcome of the conference was the approval of a
convention for the protection of human rights activists.

Between September 3-6, 1998, by invitation from the World Bank, the
Centre participated in a conference titled “Participation and Development”
held in Marrakech, Morocco. The conference was a gathering for the
Mediterranean countries and World Bank to highlight the role and the
importance of NGOs in the region. The President of the World Bank, the
Moroccan Crown Prince, the Moroccan Prime Minister, and the Moroccan
Minister of Justice participated in the conference. Raji Sourani participated
in the conference through a paper on the relationship of Arab NGOs with
Arab governments and the legal framework that organizes this relation.
Within the context of the paper, Sourani presented the Palestinian case and
the latest developments concerning the draft law of Charitable Associations
and Community Organizations which was approved by the Palestinian
Legislative in its second draft on July 30, 1998.

On September 29, 1998, Raji Sourani participated in Sweden’s celebration

of the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The
celebration was an initiative of the Swedish government and took place in
Stockholm. Swedish Foreign Minister Lena Helum-Waln, UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson, and Swedish

152
Commissioner for Human Rights Peter Nobel, in addition to a number of
human rights organizations, youth organizations, members of Parliament,
academics, and journalists, participated in the celebration.

The celebration was held to highlight the human rights message. This
message was the topic of a book that 50 of the world’s most prominent
human rights activists, including Raji Sourani, participated in writing. Each
one of them wrote about his or her experience and personal reasons for
working in the human rights field. The book is a message from these
activists to the next generation in the struggle for human rights. The
Swedish government took responsibility for printing the book in different
languages and for its international distribution. Sourani was chosen to
represent the other writers of the book in delivering a speech on their behalf
at the celebration.

During his visit to Sweden, Sourani met with the International Commission
of Jurists (Sweden Branch) and with Amnesty International as both of them
have a cooperative relationship with PCHR. In addition, he met a number
of Swedish officials.

Cooperation and Coordination between the Centre and Other Regional

and International Organizations

During 1998 the Centre continued its efforts to improve its relations with
regional and international NGOs concerned with human rights and well
known for their support of the legitimate rights of Palestinians. The Centre
considers its relationship with these organizations as a means to participate
in enhancing and supporting the human rights movement in Palestine and
participating in the international effort of the Centre to influence the stand
of governments and international public opinion. Moreover, the relation of
the Centre with these international organizations provides the Centre with a
network through which it can address the concerned international
commissions, especially UN bodies.

International Commission of Jurists - Geneva

Since September 1998 the Centre has been affiliated with the International
Commission of Jurists located in Geneva. The Commission is an NGO and
focuses its efforts on enhancing and monitoring the rule of law, judicial
independence, and legal protection for human rights in the world. The
Commission is considered the most important international jurist body and
includes a number of jurists in 59 branches all over the world. Normally the
Commission adopts the stands of the organizations which are members of it
regarding their respective governments. Moreover, the Commission holds
consultation status in the Economic Council and Social Council of the
United Nations and in UNESCO, and in the European Council. The

153
Commission provides the Centre with the ability to dialogue with
international commissions.

A Meeting between the Director of PCHR and the Secretary General of

the International Commission of Jurists

On April 23, 1998, Raji Sourani, the Director of the Centre, met Adama
Dieng, the Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists.
The meeting revolved around the bi-lateral relations between the Centre
and the International Commission of Jurists of which the Centre is a
member. In addition, the meeting discussed the aspects of the cooperation
between the two organizations and evaluated such cooperation in the time
leading up to the meeting.

The meeting concentrated on how to build the relationship in the future,

particularly since this international organization holds the status of having
the longest relationship with Palestinian human rights organizations in the
Occupied Territories. In addition, the meeting discussed the deterioration of
human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, particularly at the
legal and human level. It was agreed that Dieng and a delegation from the
International Commission of Jurists would visit the Occupied Territories to
highlight the deterioration in the human rights situation there.

Also, the meeting included some dialogue about the next conference of the
International Commission of Jurists that was to be held in Capetown, South
Africa in August 1998. The conference is held once every three years for
member organizations.

The Conference of the International Commission of Jurists, Capetown,

South Africa

In the period from July 20-24, 1998, the Centre participated in the
conference of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) that was held in
Capetown, South Africa. The Centre was represented by Director Raji
Sourani. During the conference, Sourani criticized the participation of
Professor Ruth Gavison, the President of ACRI, who was elected in
September 1997 to be a commissioner of ICJ. The Centre rejected her
participation due to an announcement of hers to the media that was picked
up by the Israeli media in which she supported Israel’s security forces in
their use of torture against Palestinian detainees. This support contradicts
basic standards of human rights. The participation of Professor Gavison
was discussed in the Special Meeting of the Commissioners of the ICJ after
a message delivered by the Centre and a number of other organization
members. The message was transferred to the Executive Committee after it
was made clear that torture contradicts the principles and norms of ICJ.
Gavison denied the story presented by the press.

154
 The conference included a meeting with the Asian Committee in ICJ on
July 22, 1998. During that meeting the president of the Committee, Takow
Yamada (from Japan), suggested the following:

1. The necessity to appoint a legal officer to be responsible for Asia and

appointing another officer to be responsible for the Middle East.

2. The necessity to establish a location for ICJ in Asia for coordination in

the region.

3. The necessity to hold a meeting once every year for the Asian and
Pacific group.

4. The necessity to think about and to work on the possibilities for

strengthening ICJ branches and how to establish new branches in the
countries that do not have branches.

5. The necessity to lend support to any special rapporteur or any human

rights activists whose lives are subject to dangers or threats (as in Burma,
Indonesia, and the Philippines).

6. All of these suggestions were approved. Accordingly, the branch of the

ICJ in Australia was selected as temporary coordinator to prepare for the
Asian meeting. The Middle East was selected to host the next meeting of
the ICJ conference and Raji Sourani was elected to the Coordination
Committee for Asia.

PCHR Receives a Delegation from ICJ-Sweden

On October 22, 1998, the Centre received a delegation of eight jurists and
lawyers from ICJ-Sweden. The delegation met the Centre Director and
staff. The delegation received a comprehensive explanation about the
human rights situation in the Occupied Territories, in addition to an
introduction to the nature of the Centre’s work, activities, and units.

In addition, the Centre organized a tour to the Palestinian Civil Court in

Gaza for the guest delegation in which the delegation met a number of legal
advisors and jurists, including the legal advisor Mahmoud Subha, the legal
advisor Hamdan Al-Abadli, the legal advisor Zuheir Sourani, and the legal
advisor Khalil El-Shyah. The advisors explained the mechanism of the
court’s work in the Gaza Strip and the problems they confront in their
work, including the absence of a unified law in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip. At the end of this visit, the delegation visited the buildings and
offices of the court.

The Centre also organized for the guest delegation a tour in the Gaza Strip
that included Deir Al-Baleh and Shati refugee camp, in addition to

155
Nitzarim, Kfar Darom, and Gush Katif settlements. During the tour the
delegation listened to a precise explanation of the economic and social
circumstances of the people in the Gaza Strip and the problems caused by
the settlements and settler activities in the Gaza Strip.

In the evening, the delegation met in the Centre office with a number of
lawyers, including the resigned Attorney General Mr. Fayyez Abu Rahma,
Younis El-Jeru, Nader El-Khandaqji, Faraj El-Sharafa, Nahid Abu-Rahma,
and Iyad Al-Alami, coordinator of the Legal Unit in the Centre. In addition
to this, Dr. Amin Mekki Medani, the first technical advisor for the UN
High Commissioner for Human Rights, participated in the meeting. During
the meeting, the situation of the judicial authority in Palestine was
presented as was the lawyers’ work and the human rights situation
pertaining to Israeli and Palestinian human rights violations.

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)

The Federation Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’Homme (FIDH) is

an international non-governmental organization dedicated to the world-
wide defense of human rights as defined by the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights of 1948. Founded in 1922, FIDH has 89 national affiliates in
all regions of the world. During 1996 PCHR became a participating
member in the Federation and gained full membership on November 22,
1997. The Federation constitutes a location for the Centre to dialogue with
international commissions, including UN bodies. During 1998 the Centre
dialogued with many of these bodies as mentioned above.

The Arab Organization for Human Rights

The Arab Organization for Human Rights is the oldest Arab regional
organization for human rights. It is located in Cairo. The Trustee Council
of the organization includes a number of Arab human rights activists. In
October 1997, the Director of the Centre was elected as a member in the
Trustee Council of the organization. Sourani is considered the
representative of Palestine in the Council. This, in fact, constitutes the Arab
dimension of the Centre’s work and reflects the organization’s recognition
of the Centre and its achievements. Since October 1997, Sourani has
participated regularly in the meetings of the organization. The organization
supports the Centre’s efforts in protecting and promoting human rights in
Palestine.

A Press Release by the Centre Expressing Its Support for the Egyptian
Organization for Human Rights

On December 5, 1998, PCHR issued a press release expressing its deep

concern over the arrest of Hafez Abu Saada, Secretary General of the

156
Egyptian Organization for Human Rights. PCHR called upon the
government of Egypt to release him immediately.

PCHR mentioned in the press release that Mr. Abu Saada was arrested on
the basis of a report published by his organization unveiling illegal
procedures and crimes of torture perpetrated by the Egyptian security
forces during investigations carried out in Al-Kasheh village in Upper
Egypt. Consequently, the Egyptian media close to the government launched
a propaganda campaign against the Egyptian organization. For example,
they alleged that a grant received by the organization from the Human
Rights Committee in the House of Lords was given in exchange for the
publication of the report. The Egyptian organization, its Board, and its
Secretary General strongly rejected these claims and asserted that the grant
had no relation to the report. Rather, it was given to the organization to
finance a legal aid program for women and the handicapped launched by
the organization in 1995.

PCHR further stated in the press release that Hafez Abu Saada is one of the
most prominent human rights activists in the region. PCHR believes that
the measures taken by the Egyptian government against him constitute a
violation of his right to express his opinion and constitute a threat to the
Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, which is considered to be one of
the region’s leading human rights organizations. PCHR called on the
government of Egypt to release him immediately. PCHR expressed its
complete solidarity with the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights
against this unfounded attack. PCHR also called upon the Board of the
organization to cancel its recent decision to freeze the activities of the
organization – a decision taken as a result of this crisis.

Meetings in Gaza between the Centre and Politicians, Diplomats, UN

Representatives, and Other International NGOs

During 1998 the representatives of the Centre met tens of visitors to the
Centre and the Gaza Strip. These visitors included politicians,
representatives from the United Nations and its commissions, and officials
from other international NGOs. During those meetings the situation of
human rights in the Occupied Territories was discussed in relation to
Centre activities. Usually the Centre encouraged its international guests to
do their best to influence the position of their countries and the public
opinion there in order to support enhancing and protecting Palestinian
human rights and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.

The following is a list clarifying the most important people and institutions
that were met by the Centre and its staff during 1998.

Date of visit Names of visitors and institutions

January 5 1. Troels Victor Dalgaard, Deputy Head, Royal
Danish Representative Office in Palestine

157
January 11 1. Craig Mokhiber, UNSCO Office
2. Konrad Muller, First Secretary, Australian
Embassy in Israel
January 13 1. John Lister, First Secretary, American
Embassy in Israel
January 15 1. Carsten Jurgensen, Program Coordinator,
Friedrich Naumann Stiftung
2. Ambassador Hannu Halinen, UN Special
Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Occupied
Territories
3. Kirsty Wright, Coordinator, Canada Fund
Program; and Shawn Barber, First Secretary and
Consul, Canadian Embassy
January 17 1. Catherine Sumner, Lawyer from Australia
January 21 1. Marcia Hansen, Christian Aid
2. Khader Muslih, European Commission
January 22 1. Jacques Villetaz, Head of Mission,
International Committee of the Red Cross
2. Annie Jay, Field Coordinator, UNAIS
3. Marcia Hansen, Christian Aid
January 26 1. Torgeir Larsen, Senior Executive Officer,
Representative Office of Norway in Palestine
February 1 1. Linda Hir, Central Mennonite Central
Committee
February 2 1. Sam Muller and Linda Taylor, Legal Unit of
UNRWA
February 4 1. A delegation from the Danish Foreign
Ministry
February 5 1. Fateh Azam, Ford Foundation; Per Stadig, the
International Commission of Jurists – Sweden;
Khader Shkirat, Director of LAW
2. Torgeir Larsen, Senior Executive Officer,
Representative Office of Norway in Palestine
February 8 1. Ian Wilcock, Ambassador of Australia in
Israel; Konrad Muller, First Secretary; and
Catherine Sumner, Program Legal Consul,
International Development Law Institute
February 9 1. Delegation from Temporary International
Presence in Hebron (TIPH) from Chief
Commission UNSCO
February 10 1. Catherine Branson, Australian Deputy Chief
Justice; and Amin Mekki Medani, the First
Technical Advisor in the UN High Commission
for Human Rights

158
February 11 1. John Lister, First Secretary, American
Embassy in Israel
February 15 1. Robin Keely, British General Consul in
Jerusalem; Peter Hanson, Operation Manager in
UNRWA
February 17 1. Nuhad Jamal, Program Coordinator; John
Harvey, Development Coordinator, Grassroots
International
February 18 1. Torgeir Larsen, Senior Executive Officer,
Representative Office of Norway in Palestine
February 26 1. Dr. Amin Mekki Medani, the First Technical
Advisor in the UN High Commission for
Human Rights
February 28 1. Delegation from World Veterans Federation
headed by Christian Provoost, Program
Manager
March 4 1. Karin Roxman, Swedish Consul General in
Jerusalem
March 5 1. Shaha Ali Riza, World Bank
2. P. Harish, Ambassador of India to the PA
3. Dash Larson and Kirsten Lund, Dan Church
Aid
March 7 1. Konrad Muller, First Secretary; Virginia
Plowman, Third Secretary, Australian Embassy
in Israel
2. Elizabeth Hodgkin, Amnesty International
March 8 Delegation from CAW – Canada
March 29 1. A meeting with Mr. Alfred Etherton,
Department of Foreign Affairs, U.S.A.
March 30 1. Agustin Velloso, Professor of Comparative
Education, Spain
March 31 1. Mirjam Wust Kruppa, Lawyer, Germany
April 1 1. A meeting with a Swedish delegation through
UNSCO; delegation as follows:
- Mr. Ulf Goeranson, Head of Swedish National
Police College
- Mr. Lennart Karlsson, Deputy Head of
Swedish National Police College
- Ms. Agneta Essen, Head of International
Cooperation
- Mr. Erlinh Soerensen, Police Advisor –
UNSCO
2. Linda Hir, Mennonite Central Committee
April 4 1. Jacques Salles, President, French-Palestine 33
Institute, France
April 5 1. Andre Lorsen, Legal Researcher from
Denmark
2. Sami Zemni and Christopher Parker,
Researchers, Center for Third World Studies,
Middle East Institute, University of Belgium
April 15 1. Jacques Villetaz, Head of Mission,
International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC)

159
April 16 1. John Hajard, Swedish Ambassador to Israel
and Karin Roxman, Swedish Consul General in
Jerusalem
April 18 1. Hani Megally, Middle East Watch
April 19 1. Richard Villa, Lawyer, MPDL
April 22 1. A delegation from the Norwegian Foreign
Ministry, including the following:
- Mr. Leiv Lunde, State Secretary
- Ms. Tanja Storm, Assistant Secretary General
- Ms. Aud Kvalbein, Political Advisor
- Mr. Wegger Strommen, Political Advisor
- Mr. Per Egil Selvaage, Advisor
- Mr. Arne Gjermundsen, Head of Division, Middle East
Desk
April 23 1. John Lister, First Secretary, American
Embassy in Israel
April 27 1. Pierre Sane, General Secretary of Amnesty
International; Dr. Eyad El-Sarraj, Gaza
Community Mental Health Programme; Khader
Shkirat, Director of LAW
2. A delegation of managers of Amnesty
International organizations from throughout the
world
April 28 1. Jamila Hamami, Refugee Children of the
World; Mariam Zaqout, Manager of Free
Culture and Thought Institute (Khan Younis)
2. Turid Smith Polfas, Researcher, University of
Oslo
April 29 1. Elizabeth De Vos, Professor of International
Law, Holland
May 5 1. Geroen Gunning, University of Durham
May 6 1. Annie Gie, UNAIS
May 13 1. Linda Taylor, Sam Muller, and Professor
Kathleen Mahoney, UN
May 19 1. Schneegons Vicuceul, Lawyer, France
May 20 1. Linda Hir and Patricia Chile, Mennonite
Central Committee in Jerusalem
2. Thierry Bechet, Representative of the
European Union
May 21 1. Per Stadig, International Commission of
Jurists – Sweden
May 27 1. Kim Stanton, Department of Legal Affairs,
UNRWA
May 29 1. Uffe Gjerding, Dan Church Aid
June 2 1. A meeting with a parliamentary European
delegation through the European Union
June 4 1. Khidfa Radonovich, Manager of the
Palestinian-Israeli Physicians for Human Rights
June 6 1. Lawyers Andre Rosenthal and Mustafa
Yahya from Jerusalem
June 17 1. Dr. Amin Mekki Medani and Francesca
Moroto from the Human Rights Center of the
United Nations

160
 June 25 1. Romani Leallend, Christian Aid
June 28 1. Allen Ashliman, new Head of Mission, ICRC
in Tel Aviv; Ees Jofanoni, prior Head of
Mission, ICRC
2. Jan Carter, Executive Director, UNAIS
June 29 1. Uys Vilgoen, Head of South Africa
Representative Office, Palestine
July 5 1. Yasmin Waljee and Geoffrey Bindman, Law
Society of England and Wales
July 8 1. Reverend Mark Brown, Chairman, Churches
for Middle East Peace
July 13 1. Members from Kingston Uelfair Rights
Union Chery Honkala Institute
July 21 1. A delegation from the German
Democratic Socialist Youth Organization
2. Dr. Ahmed Banani, Professor of Political
Science in Lausanne University, Switzerland
July 22 1. Jacques Villetaz, Head of Mission, ICRC in
Gaza; and Catherine Deman, Legal Advisor of
ICRC
July 28 1. Michael McGrath, Program Manager, Save
the Children Federation
July 29 1. John Lock, Program Manager, UNV
2. Jacques Villetaz, Head of Mission, ICRC in
Gaza; and Catherine Deman, Legal Advisor of
ICRC
August 2 1. Hugh Swift, Ambassador of Ireland to Egypt
August 5 1. Jacques Villetaz, Head of Mission, ICRC in
Gaza
August 11 1. A meeting with a delegation from the Ford
Foundation held in the Palestinian Independent
Commission for Citizens’ Rights office in
Ramallah
2. A meeting with a delegation from the
Danida Danish Institute held in the Gaza
Community Mental Health Programme
3. James Turpin - European University Institute,
London
August 13 1. David Martin, Director, British Council in
Jerusalem; and Christine Perdsleu, Director,
British Council in Gaza
August 17 1. Alice Johnson, The Palestinian Center for
Conflict Resolution
August 19 1. Francis Le Trionnaire, Attache, Cooperation
Educative et Linguistique, Consulat General de
France, Service Culturel
August 21 1. Rachad Antonius, C.E.A.D., Canada
August 27 1. Carsten Norgaad, Royal Danish
Representative Office in Palestine

161
September 16 1. A Parliamentary Norwegian Delegation
(Legal Committee )
The delegation included the following:
- Kristin Krohn Devold - Conservative Party,
Head of the Committee
- Vidar Bjornstad – Labor Party
- Bjorn Henaes - Conservative Party
- Finn Kristian Marlhinsen – Christian
Democratic Party
- Astrid Marie Nistad - Labor Party
- Tor Nymo - Center Party
- Morten Olsen - Center Party
- Jan Petter Rasmussen - Labor Party
- Jan Simousen - Progress Party
- Aue Sofie Tomrneras - Labor Party
- Ase Wisloff Nilssen - Christian Democratic
Party
- Brenno Brit - Secretary of the Committee
September 21 1. Delegation from Association of Christians
Against Torture – France
September 22 1. Karin Roxman, Swedish Consul General in
Jerusalem
2. Robin Keely, British Consul General in
Jerusalem
September 26 1. Christina Regnell, Desk Officer, Asia
Department; Anne Bruzelius, Deputy Director,
Asia Department; Mats Bengtsson, Program
Officer, Division for the Mediterranean Region,
Asia Department, CIDA; and Ingrid Sandstrom,
Consul, Swedish Consulate in Jerusalem
October 8 1. Fateh Azam, Ford Foundation
2. Marcia Hansen, Christian Aid
October 11 1. Marcia Hansen, Christian Aid
October 13 1. Catherine Essoyan, NOVIB
October 17 1. Jacques Blum, Chairman; Uffe Gjerding,
Program Coordinator of the Middle East, Dan
Church Aid.
October 19 1. Phillip Hazelton, Executive Officer,
APHEDA – Australia
October 21 1. James Shaw, Legal Advisor, UNSCO
October 22 1. Per Stadig, the International Commission of
Jurists – Sweden; and a delegation of lawyers
October 24 1. Nadim Karkutli, Assessor Jur./M.A.; and
Butzler Dirl, Attorney, European Commission
2. The Committee for Evaluating the European
Commission Program in North Africa and
Middle East (the program of Meda Democracy)
October 26 1. John Lister, First Secretary, American
Embassy in Israel
October 27 1. Mathio Finston, Palestinian-Israeli Desk in
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, U.S.A.
October 31 1. Petear Gunning, Irish Ambassador in Cairo

162
 November 5 1. Paul De Waart, Professor Emeritus of
International Law, Vrije Universiteit,
Amsterdam; and Lawyer Hassan Rafiq
Jabareen, Justice Institute, the Legal Center for
the Rights of the Arab Minority in Israel
November 10 1. Torgeir Larsen, Norwegian Representative
Office
2. Chinmaya Gharekhan, Representative of the
Secretary General of the United Nations and UN
Special Coordinator in the Occupied Territories
November 11 1. Kristiat Profest, Manager of the Economic
Program of the International Federation of
Veterans
November 14 1. Delegation from Danida Danish Institute
November 19 1. P. Harish, Ambassador of India in the PA
November 23 1. Virginia Plowman, Australian Embassy
November 24 1. Jacques Villetaz, Head of Mission, ICRC in
Gaza
November 25 1. Criston Nakleh, the French Deputy Consul in
Jerusalem
November 26 1. A delegation from the French-Palestine 33
Institute
December 1 1. Abdel El-Hay El-Alami, International
Commission of Jurists – Sweden
2. Gerald Russed, British Council
December 2 1. A meeting in Ramallah with a delegation
from the Swiss Development Agency
December 3 1. Marie Claude Grenon, Representative,
OXFAM – Quebec
December 17 1. Catherine Sumner, Program Legal Counsel,
International Development Law Institute
2. Carsten Norgaad, Royal Danish
Representative Office in Palestine
December 29 1. Karin Roxman, Swedish Consul General in
Jerusalem

Receiving Visiting Delegations at PCHR

During 1998 the PCHR received 32 international delegations visiting the

Occupied Palestinian Territories. The Centre presented to its visitors a
comprehensive explanation of the human rights situation and encouraged
them to work to influence the policies of their government and the public
opinion in their countries to support the legitimate rights of the Palestinian
people and to work at enhancing and respecting the human rights in the
Occupied Territories. What follows is a list of the visiting delegations to
the Centre for 1998.

163
 Date Institute and Country The The Coordinator
number of
participants
January 17 A group of journalists 7 -
and university professors
from the United States of
America headed by
Shirabe Uamada,
Program Coordinator,
Global Exchange
January 22 A delegation from Sand 14 Middle East Council of
Olive Churches
February 16 A delegation of 18 Middle East Council of
participants in the Churches
International Conference
in the Service of
Bethlehem
February 18 Amos Trust - United 13 Middle East Council of
Kingdom Churches
March 3 Middle East Studies 19 Middle East Council of
Program, Richard Cahill Churches
March 21 Church of Sweden 20 Middle East Council of
Churches
March 25 Dan Church Aid – 6 Middle East Council of
Denmark Churches
March 29 A delegation of 30 Birzeit University
international students
from Birzeit University
March 30 Pax World Service - 25 Middle East Council of
United States of America Churches
April 2 World Learning 13 Nafez Abu Mathkour,
Queen Land
April 22 Lutheran World Relief 16 Middle East Council of
Churches
May 3 A delegation from 26 Middle East Council of
different churches in the Churches
Netherlands
May 16 Ellen Okar and Dina Al 12 -
Sawayel, Professors,
Political Science, Rice
University, U.S.A.
May 27 Evangelische 18 Dr. Fawaz Abu Sitta
Erwachsensnbildung,
Protestant Church,
Germany
June 22 Middle East Children's 18 Barbara Lubin
Alliance, USA.
June 25 A student delegation 20 Joe Zogby
from the United States of
America
July 16 Summer Program at 10
Tantor Institute
Jerusalem

164
 July 21 The German Social 6 Jamal Abu Nahel, FIDA
Democratic Youth
Organization
August 2 International students 40 Birzeit University
from Birzeit University
September 10 Gerhard Pulfer 11 Nafez Abu Mathkour
Martin Mayer Group Queen Land
BADIL
September 12 A delegation from the 26 Middle East Council of
Netherlands Churches
September 26 Rev. Dr. Alan Reid, 17 Middle East Council of
Australian Council of Churches
Churches
October 22 Dr. Richard Cahill, 23 Middle East Council of
Middle East Studies Churches
Program, Cairo
University

October 27 Sweden Christian Study 19 Middle East Council of

Centre Churches
October 29 Sweden Christian Study 35 Middle East Council of
Centre Churches
November 1 Birzeit University PAS 17 Palestinian Center for
Students International Relations
November 3 Sweden Christian Study 40 Middle East Council of
Centre Churches
November 4 School for International 7 AMIDEAST
Training
November 4 A delegation from 7 The Office of the
different countries Special Coordinator of
organized by the the United Nations
planners of Oslo
November 18 Friends World Program 17 -
December 8 Lutheran World Relief 19 Middle East Council of
Churches
December 31 St. Olaf College, U.S.A. 25 Middle East Council of
Churches

Interviews with Representatives of Local and International Media

During 1998 the Director and staff of the Centre met tens of journalists and
representatives from local and international media. The following is a list
of journalists and media organizations met by the Centre during the year.

Date The name of the journalists and the media

organizations
January 12 1. BBC World Service
2. Mona Gaber – Germany
January 14 1. The Voice of Palestine
January 25 1. BBC World Service

165
 February 3 1. BBC World Service
2. Penny Young
February 4 1. Austria Magazine
March 15 1. Alan Borsuk and Sam Laflood, Milwaukee J.
Sentinel
March 26 1. Ales Gaube, Dnevnik Newspaper
2. Frvin Hladwik-Milharcic, Correspondent, DEZO
Newspaper
March 28 1. Richard Scheinin, Religion and Ethics Writer, San
Jose Mercury News, U.S.A.
March 29 1. Ricardo Uilla, MPDL
April 2 1. Duteil Aireille, Reporter, Le Point, Paris
April 15 1. Matt Rees, Correspondent, The Scotsman
2. Ilene Prusher, Correspondent, Christian Science
Monitor
April 28 1. John D. Battersby, Editor, The Sunday Independent,
South Africa
May 7 1. Jurgen Hogrefe and Andre Brutmann, DER
SPIEGEL, The German News Magazine
May 11 1. Ferran Sales Aige, Middle East Correspondent, EL
PAIS, Spain
May 12 1. Aurelie Carton, Journalist, CCFD, France
May 25 1. Isabel Kershner and Saud Abu Ramadan, Jerusalem
Report
June 9 1. Lee Hockstader, Jerusalem Bureau Chief, The
Washington Post
June 13 1. Judy Dempsey, Journalist, Financial Times
June 21 1. Group of Journalists, Global Exchange
July 28 1. Alain Frilet, French Journalist
August 1 1. Aartel Fredenc, French Journalist
August 15 1. Ghazi Sukar, Al-Haqiqa Magazine
August 17 1. Imad Eid, Al-Istiqlal Newspaper
August 19 1. Abdel Salam Abu Askar
August 26 1. Fathi Subbah, Al-Haqiqa Magazine
September 12 1. Cia Silver and Hederic Swsisson, Swedish
Television
2. Lars Gunwar Ercandson, Correspondent, Swedish
Radio
September 23 Abdel Wahab Kulab, Anba’ News Agency
October 18 1. Cerance Lecaisne, French Journalist
October 23 1. BBC World Service
October 27 1. Lee Hockstader, The Washington Post
2. Inez Polak, Foreign Editor, and Dora Rovers,
Middle East Correspondent from Holland
3. TIMES Magazine
October 30 1. Radio France International
2. ABC – U.S.A.
November 2 1. Betsy Hiel, Reporter, Blade Newspaper, U.S.A.
November 3 1. Lee Hockstader, The Washington Post
November 5 1. Sylke Tempel – Germany
November 8 1. J. Henrik Nilson – Sweden

166
 November 12 1. Mehdi Benchelah, Radio France International
November 17 1. Nahida Abu Toima
2. Saleh Abu Rahme accompanied by a Danish
journalist
November 29 1. Fathi Subbah, Al-Haqiqa Magazine
December 1 1. Fatima Maslha, Al-Risala Newspaper
December 5 1. Fathi Subbah, Al-Haqiqa Magazine
2. Hussein Alian, Reporter, CNN World Report
Contributor, BBC
3. Miha Makelainen, Reporter, Finnish Broadcasting
Company, Finland
December 7 1. Dina Nasoetti, Journalist, L'ESPRESSO, ITALY
December 14 1. Dr. Joop Meijers, Middle East Correspondent,
ALGEMEEN DAGBLAD

Participation in Training Sessions to Upgrade Centre Staff Expertise

Within the context of efforts to further develop its staff, the Centre sent a
number of its staff from different units to participate in local, regional, and
international training sessions.

In the period between March 17-29, 1998, Khalil Shaheen, researcher in

the Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights Unit, participated in the first
phase of the training program for upgrading the abilities of trainers that was
held in Amman, Jordan. The program was organized by the Arab Institute
for Human Rights located in Tunisia with the aim of creating a qualified
and professional cadre of workers in human rights organizations in the
Arab world.

Twenty-one male and female participants took part in the program and the
program itself included three phases. The program will help in developing
the training program of PCHR.

In the period between May 23-28, 1998, Mona Shawa, researcher in the
Women’s Rights Unit, participated in a training session organized by the
Women’s Studies Center located in Jerusalem. The session was titled
“Social Gender Analysis.”

In the period between June 21 to July 12, 1998, Mona Shawa

participated in International Training Session Number 19 about human
rights. The session is organized yearly by the Canadian Institute for Human
Rights located in Quebec, Canada. One hundred and fifteen participants
from different areas of the world took part. The session aimed at upgrading
the skills and knowledge of the participants in the human rights field and
enhancing the relationships between human rights institutions in different
parts of the world.

167
In the period between June 24 to July 3, 1998, Hanan Matar, the lawyer
in the Women’s Rights Unit, participated in a training session organized by
the Women’s Affairs Team in Gaza titled “Planning and Management for
Female Managers in Women’s Organizations.”

In the period between July 31 to August 13, 1998, Khalil Shaheen

participated in the second phase of the program for training trainers. The
program is directed at upgrading the skills and capabilities of people who
are going to train others in human rights. The program was organized by
the Arab Institute for Human Rights located in Tunisia. This phase was
held in Tunis.

In the period between August 6-August 31, 1998, Ibrahim Sourani,

lawyer in the Legal Unit, participated in Session Number 29 on human
rights organized by the International Institute for Human Rights in
Strasbourg, France. The session aimed at upgrading the knowledge and
expertise of the participants concerning the basic standards and systems for
protecting human rights. Four hundred and twenty participants from
different areas of the world took part in the session.

In the period between September 10-17, 1998, Issam Younis and Iyad
Al-Alami participated in a workshop about conflict resolution organized by
the Middle East Council of Churches. The workshop was held in Cyprus.

In the period between September 16-19, 1998, Hanan Matar from the
Women’s Rights Unit participated in seminars on “Women, Development,
and Democracy” organized in Morocco by the International Federation for
Human Rights (FIDH), Moroccan Organization for Human Rights, and
Moroccan Society for Human Rights. Approximately 40 participants from
Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, Mauritania, Senegal, and Palestine took part in
the session. The session aimed at strengthening the relations between
women’s organizations and those working in human rights. It also aimed to
highlight the problems confronted by women in the participating countries
and to help develop new skills in human rights. Matar presented a working
paper in which she discussed the problems confronted by Palestinian
women. She also discussed the personal affairs laws that are being
implemented in the Gaza Strip.

In the period between November 14-25, 1998, Nafez Khaldi, researcher

in the Democratic Development Unit, participated in Session Number 9
organized by the Arab Institute for Human Rights located in Tunisia.
Normally members of local Arab human rights organizations participate in
the session. The session aimed at strengthening the skills and capabilities of
participants to upgrade the standards of human rights organizations in Arab
countries.

168
 CONCLUSION

This report is the outcome of the Centre’s work during 1998. It presented a
detailed and comprehensive report of the human rights situation in the Gaza
Strip and in a less comprehensive manner in the West Bank. The report
focused on the fundamental manner in which human rights were violated
by Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The report presented the activities
of the Centre to protect human rights. Moreover, the report detailed the
work of the Centre locally, regionally, and internationally, including its
effective activities with concerned international commissions, especially
UN commissions. As this report helps to illustrate the human rights
situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories during 1998, it should be
regarded as an important Centre document helping to direct the Centre in
its efforts to design its strategy and policies for the years ahead.

169
FINANCIAL REPORT

170