Human Rights Council calls for urgent international action to end grave Israeli violations in Occupied Palestinian Territory

24 January 2008

 

Council Concludes Sixth Special Session


The sixth Special Session of the Human Rights Council concluded today after adopting a resolution in which it called for urgent international action to put an immediate end to the grave violations committed by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including the series of incessant and repeated Israeli military attacks and incursions therein and the siege of the occupied Gaza Strip.

In the resolution, which was adopted by a roll-call vote of 30 in favour, one against and 15 abstentions, the Council expressed grave concern at the repeated Israeli military attacks carried out in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, which resulted in loss of lives and injuries among Palestinian civilians, including women and children. The Council demanded that Israel lift immediately the siege it had imposed on the occupied Gaza Strip, restore continued supply of fuel, food and medicine and reopen the border crossings. The Council also urged all concerned parties to respect the rules of human rights law and international humanitarian law and to refrain from violence against the civilian population.

In concluding remarks, the President of the Council, Ambassador Doru Romulus Costea of Romania, said that the Council had showed its ability to react quickly and swiftly to situations that required its consideration. All should sit and think after each Special Session about what had been achieved and what had not been achieved. Thinking about what had happened was important. Special Sessions dealt with urgent situations where rapid action was needed. One had to keep the image of the victims in mind. Victims were everywhere. The Council had already proved it could do so on many occasions.

Syria introduced the draft resolution on behalf of the Group of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Palestine spoke as a concerned country. Speaking in explanation of the vote before the vote were Slovenia on behalf of the European Union, Guatemala, Japan, Russia and Cameroon.

Speaking in explanation of the vote after the vote were Ghana, Brazil, China and Switzerland.

In the debate, speakers expressed their concern about the siege of Gaza and Israeli attacks which they said violated international humanitarian and human rights law. They warned that the escalation of the violence was negatively affecting any chances for peace. Many speakers stressed that the Israeli occupation was the main reason for the violations of the human rights of Palestinians.

Speaking in the debate were Representatives of Morocco, Algeria, Argentina, Sudan, Iran, Tunisia, Yemen, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Libya, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Mauritania, Turkey, Iceland, Maldives, Venezuela, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Costa Rica, Lebanon, Australia, Colombia, Ecuador, Norway, Chile, and the League of Arab States.

The following non-governmental organizations also took the floor: North South XXI, World Union for Progressive Judaism, Centre of Housing Rights and Evictions, Human Rights Watch, International Federation for Human Rights, International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations, speaking on behalf of several NGOS1; B'Nai B'rith, speaking on behalf of Coordination Board of Jewish Organizations; United Nations Watch, Union of Arab Jurists, International Commission of Jurists and World Vision Jerusalem.

Egypt and Cuba exercised their right of reply.

The Council will hold its seventh regular session from 3 to 28 March.

Resolution

In a resolution (A/HRC/S-6/L.1) on the human rights violations emanating from Israeli military attacks and incursions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip , adopted by a roll-call vote of 30 in favour, 1 against, and 15 abstentions, the Council expresses grave concern at the Israeli repeated military attacks carried out in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly in the occupied Gaza Strip, which resulted in loss of lives and injuries among Palestinian civilians, including women and children; and calls for urgent international action to put an immediate end to the grave violations committed by the occupying Power, Israel, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory including the series of incessant and repeated Israeli military attacks and incursions therein and the siege of the occupied Gaza Strip. The Council demands that the occupying Power, Israel, lift immediately the siege it has imposed on the occupied Gaza Strip, restore continued supply of fuel, food and medicine and reopen the border crossings; calls for immediate protection of the Palestinian civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territory in compliance with human rights law and international humanitarian law; and urges all concerned parties to respect the rules of human rights law and international humanitarian law and to refrain from violence against the civilian population. The Council also requests the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to report to the Council, at its next session, on the progress made in the implementation of this resolution.


The result of the vote was as follows:

In favour (30): Angola, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Uruguay and Zambia.

Against (1): Canada.

Abstentions (15): Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cameroon, France, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, Romania, Slovenia, Switzerland, Ukraine and United Kingdom.


Introduction of Resolution

FAYSAL KHABBAZ HAMOUI ( Syria ), introducing the draft resolution in the name of the Group of Arab States and the Islamic Conference , said that the resolution aimed to protect the Palestinian people and avoid a humanitarian disaster. Long discussions had taken place. It was regretted that some attempted to politicise the situation and had remained silent. There should be a balance between the beater and the victims. The text proposed was balanced. It was hoped that it would be accepted by consensus, in order to give the Palestinian people a positive sign. It was an opportunity for every country claiming that it was defending human rights to show that what they said was in line with what they did.

Statement by Concerned Country

MOHAMMED ABU-KOASH ( Palestine ), speaking as a concerned country, said the absence of Israel in the meeting should not have been voluntary. Israel should be withdrawn from all international organs for its gross violations and practices against the Palestinian people. The draft resolution should be adopted by consensus but due to pure selectivity and politicization by a few delegations this was being prevented. Palestine hoped that this text would lead to the lifting of the Israeli siege, restoring the supply of fuel and aid into Palestine and stopping the Israeli aggression.

Explanations of Vote Before the Vote

ANDREJ LOGAR ( Slovenia ), speaking on behalf of the European Union in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said the situation in Gaza was a source of grave concern to the European Union and noted that the recent escalation of violence was extremely grave and required the urgent attention of all parties. The European Union called on Palestine and Israel to bring an end to violence and suffering of civilians on both sides. The European Union joined the authors of the resolution in calling on all concerned parties to respect the rules of human rights law and international humanitarian law and to refrain from violence against the civilian population, but noted that the text of the resolution still lacked acknowledgement of the civilian casualties on both sides. The Council should deplore the fact that innocent civilians on both sides were suffering. The Council should remind all parties of their responsibility to protect civilian lives. The European Union believed that Israel should urgently allow unimpeded humanitarian access to Gaza and open crossings into Gaza for goods and people. For these reasons, the European Union was compelled to call for a vote and would abstain on the proposed draft resolution.

CARLOS RAMIRO MARTINEZ ALVARADO ( Guatemala ), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that Guatemala was concerned about the humanitarian conditions in Gaza. Israel was called upon to stop using excessive force. The launching of rockets into Israel should also end. Both parties had to make efforts. Guatemala would abstain on the vote.

HIROSHI MINAMI ( Japan ), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, expressed its deep concern over the situation in the Gaza Strip, which threatened the lives of many civilians both in Gaza and Israel. Japan was also deeply concerned that this situation would negatively affect the peace process. Japan called on all the parties concerned to avoid the further deterioration of the humanitarian and human rights situation in Gaza. Japan regrettably decided to abstain from the draft resolution.

BERTIN BIDIMA ( Cameroon ), speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said the situation prevailing in Gaza and the West Bank was a subject of considerable concern for Cameroon. Cameroon hoped a just and equitable solution in the region could be found. Cameroon believed that the Security Council had the ultimate responsibility to address this situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and therefore was not in a position to support the draft resolution.

Valery LOSHCHININ ( Russia ), in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that the Russian Federation would have preferred to adopt the resolution on the basis of a consensus. But it had been impossible to reach agreement. Russia would still vote in favour of the resolution.

Explanation of the Vote after the Vote

MERCY YVONNE AMOAH ( Ghana ), in an explanation of the vote after the vote, said that Ghana had abstained because the resolution had not been strong enough to bring an end to the suffering of the civilians in Gaza. Even though Israel had withdrawn in 2005 it remained an occupying force by conducting day-to-day control. Israel had sharply restricted the flow of foods and goods into and outside Gaza and had caused a humanitarian crisis. Israel had an obligation to protect its civilians and those under its occupation in Gaza. The competent authority in Gaza should also take the responsibility to end attacks on Israel.

SERGIO ABREU E LIMA FLORENCIO ( Brazil ), speaking in an explanation of the vote after the vote, noting that Brazil had voted in favor of the resolution, said Brazil was deeply concerned with the deteriorating conditions of the lives of the Palestinian civilians and deeply deplored their suffering. Both parties had the responsibility to refrain from any circumstances amounting to collective punishment. Brazil condemned the use of violence by either side. Escalating violence would not make a durable peace likely. Brazil welcomed the strengthening of the support to the international community to the peace process, as defined by the outcomes of Annapolis and Paris. Israel must allow free access of humanitarian supplies into Gaza.

BO QIAN ( China ), in an explanation of the vote after the vote, expressed China's regrets and discontent that the resolution could not be adopted by consensus. The Human Rights Council in the United Nations was an important organ. There could be only one standard and any practice of double standards could not be accepted.

MURIEL BERSET KOHEN ( Switzerland ), speaking in an explanation of the vote after the vote, hoped that the Human Rights Council would be able to act in a spirit of cooperation to overcome confrontation. Switzerland regretted that the text could not be adopted by consensus. The text was not balanced as it did not take into consideration the violations of international humanitarian law by all parties and therefore Switzerland had abstained. The rocket attacks should have been addressed in the said resolution. Switzerland called on all the parties to exercise restraint. There was an urgent need to ensure a constructive engagement by all parties and the international community.

Debate

MOHAMMED LOULICHKI ( Morocco ) expressed Morocco's concern over the surge of violence in the region and the destruction of Palestinian infrastructure. Morocco condemned the violations of international human rights and humanitarian law in the Palestinian territories by Israel. These violations would lead to a worsening of the situation and would take them far from an end to the conflict. Morocco was deeply concerned about the worsening of the situation. It hoped that this Special Session would help find solutions to end the conflict.

IDRISS JAZAIRY ( Algeria ) said the Human Rights Council was for the third time holding a Special Session to deal with a matter that required the attention of the international community to deal with flagrant violations of human rights of the Palestinian people. The policy of collective punishment condemned by most countries of the world, including the European Union, had led to a humanitarian crisis. Israel was holding the Palestinian people hostage. This action threatened the lives of 1.5 million people in Gaza. The international community must urge Israel to allow delivery of urgent humanitarian assistance and take the necessary measures to allow Palestinians to restore all their rights.

ERNESTO MARTINEZ GONDRA ( Argentina ) said the Special Session was important because the current situation in the Palestinian territories was serious. Some of the measures taken by Israel could be considered as collective punishment. Israel was called on to put an end to any actions afflicting the Palestinian population. It was essential for the attainment of a lasting peace in the region to end the current military actions. All human rights should be respected and enjoyed by everyone. Argentina hoped that a consensus could be reached on the draft resolution.

OMER DAHAB FADOL MOHAMED ( Sudan ) said Sudan condemned the Israeli violations and these actions should be punished as they were banned by international law. The international community had seen indiscriminate killings perpetrated by Israel. The Council's mission was to preserve human rights and the Israeli occupation was the main reason for the violations of human rights. Sudan called on the Human Rights Council to establish the necessary machinery to implement the decisions called for in the draft resolution. The Council should also adopt a clear and precise plan binding in this area.

ASADOLLAH ESHRAGH JAHROMI ( Iran ) said this fourth Special Session of the Human Rights Council was once again witnessing a new wave of aggressions, military attacks and violations in Occupied Palestine, particularly the Gaza Strip and the West Bank town of Nablus, as a result of which, only during the past week, a large number of Palestinian civilians including women and children had been killed. There was much to be regretted about the inhumane policy of the Israeli regime to lay siege over the Gaza Strip and to interrupt basic supplies including fuel and electricity. These actions had further deteriorated the situation and if not stopped, could lead to a humanitarian tragedy. Regrettably, despite previous sessions, vividly expressed grave concerns over gross and systematic violation of human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories by the Israeli regime were ignored. Iran called for urgent international action to put an end to the violations, including those emanating from the series of incessant and repeated Israeli military incursions.

SAMIR LABIDI ( Tunisia ) said that the current Special Session was an important event, in the light of the actions carried out by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The blockade has been tightened in Gaza. An end had to be put to this crisis. The human rights situation in Gaza had worsened. Tunisia reiterated its call to the international community to make an immediate intervention to put an end to the situation and help the people of Gaza. The situation was a threat to the peace process. The Council already had had Special Sessions about the conflict and it was important that the Council adopt the draft resolution by consensus.

IBRAHIM SAID AL-ADOOFI ( Yemen ) said Yemen condemned the Israeli's aggressive siege on the Gaza Strip, and the collective punishment imposed on the Palestinian people. These violations had led to scores dead and wounded and severe humanitarian consequences. Gaza had been transposed into a large prison. What the Palestinian people had been suffering from had been faced by a total international silence. It was ironic that voices had been calling for justice. Yemen called on the Council to hold a real balanced and just Special Session that would not adopt any type of double standards and also called on the international community to shoulder its responsibility and put pressure of Israel to end its aggression and allow humanitarian supplies to enter Gaza.

BABACAR BA ( Organization of the Islamic Conference ) said that the fundamental rights of the Palestinians had to be protected. The serious acts against the civilians and innocent victims constituted a flagrant violation of humanitarian law. The Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference had condemned in strong terms the current situation. If Israel wanted peace and security it should show greater responsibility. It should adopt a more constructive attitude towards the international community. Commitment was important and necessary. Only so would peace and security be achieved.

ABDHURMAN BENOMRAN ( Libya ) said the inhabitants of Gaza had been undergoing a terrible humanitarian situation likely to lead to a genuine humanitarian disaster. The murdering of innocent civilians, the closing of border posts and the cessation of electricity and fuel, were all part of maneuvers aimed at punishing the Palestinian people. This situation posed the Human Rights Council with a choice to put an end to these violations or otherwise lose credibility before it was able to complete two years' work.

CHOE MYONG NAM ( Democratic People's Republic of Korea ) strongly condemned the recent military attacks by Israel against Palestinian civilians. The siege of Gaza was creating a serious humanitarian crisis. This was only one of the many examples of many human rights violations carried out by Israel in the occupied territories. Three Special Sessions of the Human Rights Council had taken place over the last one and a half years on the violations carried out by Israel. The escalating violations constituted a violation of several international treaties, including the United Nations Charter and the Fourth Geneva Convention. The human rights violations in the Palestinian territories had to cease. An end should be put to the illegal occupation by Israel.

MOUNINA MINT ABDELLAH ( Mauritania ) said Mauritania was following with great concern the grave situation in the Gaza Strip due to the siege imposed by Israel. This tragic situation would lead to an escalation of violence which would in no way serve to create stability and peace in the region and would do nothing to serve the interests of the Annapolis conference. Mauritania called on the Israeli Government to put an end to this punishment and abide by international humanitarian and human rights law and also abide by the outcome of the Annapolis conference which aimed to resume dialogue, build trust, and establish a Palestinian State.

ASLIGUL UGDUL ( Turkey ) said that the Israeli Palestinian conflict remained at the core of all problems in the Middle East. The Annapolis conference had created momentum with a view to resuming negotiations after years of interruption. The success of this process depended on the improvement of the living conditions of the Palestinians. However, the humanitarian situation in Gaza had become alarming. The situation could undermine the peace process. All parties should stand by their international commitments. Turkey also called for an end to rocket attacks against Israel.

KRISTINN F. ARNASON ( Iceland ) said Iceland remained greatly concerned over the surge in violence in the Gaza Strip, which undermined international efforts to create the conditions for a permanent peace solution. Actions by Israel must be proportionate and within international law. Both sides had the responsibility to show restraint and abide by international humanitarian and human rights law. Iceland urged Israel in the strongest terms to alleviate the humanitarian situation and urged both parties to move the peace process further. Iceland also called on international partners to work together to build a peaceful and lasting solution between the two parties as well as for the entire Middle East region.

ABDUL GHAFOOR MOHAMED ( Maldives ) said that Maldives had always strongly supported the rights of the Palestinian to an independent homeland in which they could live in peace and prosperity. In order for that dream to be realized it was imperative for the international community to intensify efforts to work with all sides. Until peace was realized, all parties should respect international human rights and humanitarian law.

GABRIEL IGNACIO SALAZAR PINEDA ( Venezuela ) said Venezuela deplored the flagrant violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, occupied by Israel. Venezuela strongly condemned the inhumane treatment of the Palestinians by Israel. A just a lasting peace must be ensured to lead to the prosperity of the people in the region. The Israeli blockade amounted to a collective punishment and was against the principles of the peace process. Venezuela considered that the Human Rights Council and the United Nations, as a whole, must send an unambiguous message of their commitment to peace. Venezuela supported the Palestinian people to establish their independent State based on the borders of 1967.

SADIQ MARAFI ( Kuwait ) said that once again they had to meet in a Special Session about the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. It was important for the prestige of the Council to take immediate and direct action to fulfil its responsibility and mandate. The situation in the Occupied Territories required urgent action. Deep concerns were expressed at the practices of the occupying forces. Kuwait appealed to the Council to play its role, in order to ensure the success of the peace process. Israel was called upon to cooperate with United Nations machinery without delay.

ADEL ESSA HUR AL MAHRI ( United Arab Emirates ) said collective punishment imposed on over 1.5 million inhabitants in Gaza and others in the West Bank was considered an example of the most heinous of crimes in international humanitarian law. The international community should not stand silent before such crimes. The Council must remind Israel that the root of the problem in the region was this occupation of Palestine for decades. The situation in Gaza and the West Bank was very serious and must be taken into account by the Council. The Council must make efforts to allow for the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza. The Council must condemn the occupation by the Israel authorities and protect Palestinians civilians against Israeli aggression in the future.

LAURA THOMPSON CHACON ( Costa Rica ) said that Costa Rica felt that the Human Rights Council could not remain silent in the light of the current events. Israel should fulfil its obligations and respect its international engagements. The restriction forced on the civilians in Gaza was contrary to international humanitarian and human rights law. Israel should respect its engagements and obligations as a member of the United Nations. Palestinian people should also restrain from carrying rocket attacks on Israel. The Human Rights Council should reach consensus on the matter. It was hoped that a peaceful solution could be achieved.

NAJLA RIACHI ASSAKER ( Lebanon ) said the military escalation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, particularly in Gaza, the closing of border crossings and roads, and the effective closing off of the Palestinian people, constituted a flagrant violation of human rights. There was no justification to such actions. Israeli practices demonstrated their intention to destroy the will of the Palestinian people to live in a separate State in full dignity. Lebanon called on the international community and the Council to take immediate measures to put an end to this situation and to prevent further such actions from taking place.

CAROLINE MILLAR ( Australia ) urged all parties not to let recent developments threaten the progress which had been made since the Annapolis conference. Australia was concerned that the decision to hold another Special Session on Palestine would contribute nothing to the progress of negotiations on the ground. All sides were called to make every effort to end the recent violence. Such Special Sessions of the Human Rights Council did not make a positive contribution to improve the humanitarian conditions. The Human Rights Council was encouraged to protect human rights in a balanced and evenhanded way. The singling out of one side was unhelpful. The excessive focus on one region demonstrated a lack of balance.

ALMA VIVIANA PEREZ GOMEZ ( Colombia ) said Colombia supported all efforts to build a peace process, particularly those put forward in the framework of the Annapolis conference and the International Donors Conference for Palestine held in Paris. Colombia considered that the Palestinian population should not be subjected to violence and there was a need for Israel to uphold and fully respect international humanitarian rights.

JUAN HOLGUIN ( Ecuador ) while recalling the death of a 20-year old Ecuadorian volunteer who was killed by a bullet on 15 January in the Gaza Strip, said this fact underlined how the victims of war could belong to any country of the world. The Human Rights Council must guarantee and protect human rights. Ecuador called on all parties to cease the violence and promote dialogue against the hostilities.

BENTE ANGELL-HANSEN ( Norway ) called on all parties to end the violence. The measures taken by Israel to punish all civilians in Gaza were counterproductive. The armed groups continued fighting and receiving funds. Gaza was dependent on Israel for vital supplies. The closure regime around Gaza was destroying its economy. The only solution was a credible political process. All parties should continue supporting this process. It was important for the Human Rights Council to take relevant decisions on human rights situations as and where they occurred. It was thus important to work towards consensus.

JUAN MARTABIT ( Chile ) appealed to the two parties to act within the principles of international humanitarian and human rights law, as pointed out by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Palestinians had the right to live in safety and therefore Chile condemned any disproportionate use of force by Israel. Chile appealed for all resolutions to be fulfilled, especially those of the Human Rights Council. The crisis not only affected Arabs and Israelis but all the people of the world. It was hoped that the outcome of the Annapolis conference would soon be realized.

SAAD ALFARARGI, of League of Arab States , expressed the discontent of the League of Arab States about the situation in Gaza, which was severely affecting its population. These acts violated international humanitarian and human rights law. The Israeli forces were justifying their action because of rocket attacks, but the current situation was killing innocent civilians. Israel continued to occupy Arab territories, despite its international obligations. The Council was called to face the situation accordingly.

NIRAJ KUMAR PABARI, of North-South XXI , said the only solution was an end of the Israeli occupation in full respect of international law. Nothing else could achieve justice. According to the principles of international law, Israel's occupation of Palestine was unambiguously illegal and so were the actions that Israel took to sustain this illegal action. The suffering in Palestine was mainly the consequence of Israel's occupation of Palestine. Israel had carried out its killing and destruction in violation of no less than sixty-five United Nations resolutions, but still the United Nations had failed to take effective action to stop the carnage and suffering visited upon the Palestinians people.

DAVID LITTMAN, of World Union for Progressive Judaism , noted that in four days the victims of the Holocaust would be remembered by the United Nations with the theme "remembrance and beyond". But it was important to remember the Hamas charter that the World Union had warned about before. All international conferences were a waste of time in the light of this Charter.

CLAUDE CAHN, of Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions , said the Israeli Government had imposed a range of sanctions on the Gaza administration. It had justified these with reference to ad hoc rocket attacks emanating from the Gaza territory as well as because of the fact of a Hamas-led government of Gaza, an entity with a track record of hostility to the State of Israel. A number of border crossings had been closed by Israeli authorities since June 2007, restricting the movement of people and goods into and out of the Gaza Strip. Due to a lack of fuel, since 5 January the Gaza Power Generating Company had had to reduce the power supply, leaving Gaza's 1.5 million people with daily power outages of up to eight hours. The Centre of Housing Rights and Evictions called on all States to lift banking restrictions imposed on the Gaza administration in order to permit the funding of necessary public services and called on donor countries and agencies to immediately resume funding in the water and waste water sectors to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe from occurring.

JULIE DE RIVERO,of Human Rights Watch , said that Israel remained an occupying force in Gaza, even though it withdrew its forces in 2005. Israel had an obligation to protect the civilians in Gaza. The strict restrictions by Israel aimed at harming Hamas were a collective punishment of the civilians. The closure of Egypt's border until yesterday also had contributed to the deterioration of the humanitarian conditions in Gaza. Israel was urged to respect the right of the Palestinians. Palestinian armed groups were urged to end their rocket attacks on Israel.

RAJI AL SOURANI, of International Federation of Human Rights Leagues , recalling the story of an 11-year old Palestinian girl who was left alone after her family was gunned down by Israeli gunships, said Palestinian and Israeli human rights organization had gone to the courts to ask that the Israeli guns stop shelling the civilian population. The Israeli occupation was denying more than 100 medicines and basic food and rations to the Palestinian people. UNRWA as well was denied to bring in supplies into Gaza. There was a 65 per cent unemployment rate in Gaza and nearly 90 per cent of the population living under the poverty line as a result of the Israeli occupation. There was nothing on earth that could justify the Israeli actions.

LAURA TORRE, of International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations , speaking on behalf of several NGOs1, said that the hope that a more peaceful future was in the making had been shattered by the Israeli attacks. Once again Israel had displayed its utter contempt for international treaties and standards. The comfort offered to Israel in the United Nations produced only continued defiance of international law. Popular demonstrations were taking place around the world. All members were called to put pressure on Israel. It was only through such actions that respect of international law could be upheld.

KLAUS NETTER, of B'nai B'rith , speaking on behalf of Coordination Board of Jewish Organizations, said the resolution placed before the Council ignored article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which gave each State the right of self-defence. Its one-sidedness was reflected by the total absence of any reference, much less condemnation of the incessant rocket and mortar attacks launched by the terrorist organizations based in the Gaza Strip against Israel's towns and cities located within the so-called Green Line, i.e. outside the occupied territories. If the Council continued to allow itself to be maneuvered time and again into an on-going anti-Israeli stance, even as peace negotiations were being conducted after a lapse of seven years, it would head for the same inglorious destiny as its discredited predecessor.

HILLEL NEUER, of United Nations Watch , said that the proposed draft resolution constituted a case of psychological projection. It was Hamas which deliberately fired rockets into Israel. They were the ones rejecting the very notion of distinction between combatants and civilians. Israel did the opposite by protecting its citizens. It should also be considered who had initiated this session. They included the lowest possible rated States in the annual world survey released by Freedom House. Were these the arbiters of human rights in the world today?

ELIAS KHOURI, of Union of Arab Jurists , said the siege imposed on the Palestinians in Gaza and on the innocent civilian victims had continued for over eight months. These barbaric practices not only constituted war crimes but also crimes against humanity, since they were premeditated and disproportionate. The security of Israel could only be achieved by the end of occupation and by Israel recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. The major powers supporting Israel must take this into consideration in support of peace in the region. The Union of Arab Jurists called on the Human Rights Council to address a clear message to Israel to abide by its obligations and uphold international humanitarian law.

LUCAS MACHON, of International Commission of Jurists , said the International Commission of Jurists was deeply concerned over the deteriorating situation in Gaza. Israel had to respect the human rights of all civilians and abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention. Civilians in Gaza were denied their basic economic, social and cultural rights. The continuous closure of the crossings only escalated the volatile situation in Gaza. Israel was urged to respect its international obligations. All parties were urged to abide by fundamental principles of international law. The Human Rights Council was called upon to reinvigorate the action by the international community to achieve a fair solution to this conflict.

DENISE ALLEN, of World Vision Jerusalem , said World Vision Jerusalem was increasingly concerned about the isolation and consequential steady deterioration in the living conditions of Gaza's civilian population. The current isolation had generated a serious crisis for the people of Gaza, particularly as a result of a rapidly deteriorating health situation and a worsening food crisis. Maintaining the current isolation and limited access drove the population into deeper poverty, increased dependency on external aid and placed civilians in life-threatening situations. Among other things, World Vision Jerusalem called for an end to the fuel cuts and restrictions of humanitarian goods due to their unduly impact on innocent civilians in Gaza and urged the international community to take its responsibility to urgently work for a diplomatic solution to the crisis.

Right of Reply

SAMEH SHOUKRY ( Egypt ), speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement of Human Rights Watch about the crossing of individuals into Rafah, said the closure of the crossing on the Gaza side was an Israeli decision, not an Egyptian one. Israel had on numerous times posed hindrances to entering supplies. Egypt did not object to the flow of thousands of refugees into Egypt in the light of the current urgent humanitarian crisis.

JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS ( Cuba ), speaking in a right of reply in response to the statement of United Nations Watch, said the organization was a lucrative organization amply funded by the CIA and Mossad aimed to degenerate certain States on the Council. There was nothing more barbaric than the occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
__________