Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Imprisoned for incitement on Facebook? Only if you're Arab

Racist and inciting Facebook statuses by Israeli Jews have become commonplace on the Internet. Yet not a single Israeli has ever been sent to prison for publishing a status on social media.

By John Brown* and Noam Rotem

We do not live in a state where people are equal before the law. This is a fact that shouldn’t surprise anyone. The Internet, on the other hand, has maintained a kind of facade where freedom and equality are set in stone. But no more. This week, 23-year-old Uday Biyumi from Jerusalem was sentenced to 17 months in prison for publishing Facebook posts “systematically and widely.”

The sentence is not something out of the ordinary. Sami Da’is received eight months for his posts on social media; Omar Shalbi was sentenced to nine months; and many others are still being held until the end of legal proceedings, waiting for a decision on their case. All of them for publishing statuses on Facebook.

Perhaps you have noticed that there is not a single Jewish person among those arrested—this isn’t a coincidence. The following article will compare some of these remarks to those made by Jews, who were never forced to spend seven months in jail. Not a single Jewish citizen of Israel has ever been sent to prison for publishing a status on social media.

These social media users are usually accused of the following clauses in Israeli law: “incitement to racism,” “incitement to violence or terrorism,” and sometimes “support for a terrorist organization.” The first clause is simple: anyone who publishes remarks “for the purpose of inciting to racism,” regardless of the probability that the remarks will lead to violence—is guilty. According to the second clause, incitement to violence or terrorism—or praising an act of violence or terror—is forbidden only if the content of the remarks and the circumstances in which they were published include a a real possibility to lead to an act of violence or terrorism. This requires finding out whether anyone who read the status was inspired to commit an act of terrorism or violence. As for the third clause, anyone who expresses support for a terrorist organization is guilty.

Eight months for 14 ‘likes’

The court takes into account how much exposure these statuses receive when determining the defendant’s sentence. Sometimes they have over 200 likes, other times they are far less popular. Such is the case of...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Jewish, Arab women establish protest tent outside PM's residence

One year after Operation Protective Edge, a group of 30 women are fasting for the next month to pressure Prime Minister Netanyahu to return to negotiations.

By Michael Salisbury-Corech

At the entrance to the prime minister’s residence in Jerusalem, nearly 30 women are sitting on mattresses, surrounded by banners calling for peace negotiations. One of their shirts reads “Women waging peace and stopping the next war.” Some of them hold signs that read: “Fasting!” Despite the uniform dress, the women come from different backgrounds: some are Arab, some religious, some Mizrahi, others Ashkenazi.

On Thursday, a year after Operation Protective Edge, the “Women Wage Peace” group has built a protest camp outside the prime minister’s residence, calling on the government to return to negotiations with the Palestinians. The movement was established during last year’s war by Israeli and Palestinian women from across the country who are hoping to prevent the next casualties of war. As part of their protest, the women will go on single-day fasts for the duration of 50 days, the length of last year’s war. The decision to fast stems from their desire to show solidarity with the pain and struggle of war, and because fasting requires making sacrifices and steadfastness, much like peace negotiations.

Yael Trader, one of the activists at the protest camp, explained to +972′s Hebrew sister site, Local Call, the reasoning behind the fast: “We wanted to do something significant, because since the last war there has been no process toward an agreement. The last war broke me because of the force that was used, as well as how strong the Israeli consensus was. It frightened me because the common conception here is that only force will solve our problems, and it was clear to me that this doesn’t work. I was close to asking myself whether I can continue to live here. The only remedy for my desperation was to get upend do something.”

Maysam Jaljuli, who heads the Na’amat (the leading women’s movement in Israel.) in the Lower Triangle region on behalf of Hadash, described the effects of last summer’s war:

I was very despondent and felt like there is no chance for peace. I am an activist for equal rights, and during the war I felt like everything we built was destroyed. Every instance of racism, every time an Arab was harassed at the...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Post-hunger strike, admin detainee Khader Adnan is re-hospitalized

Adnan, who is to be released in less than a week according to a deal reached with the state, is still being shackled to his hospital bed.

By Yael Marom

Just over a week after ending his 54-day hunger strike, administrative detainee Khader Adnan was re-hospitalized in recent days following a deterioration in his medical condition. Adnan reached a deal with Israeli officials last week to end his hunger strike in exchange for being released from custody on July 12. The state also agreed not to extend his administrative detention.

The rehabilitation process after such a long hunger strike is complicated, slow and entails serious medical risks. “Refeeding syndrome” can have deadly complications. A return to normal nourishment must be done gradually and under close medical supervision. The dangers increase for somebody like Adnan who has gone on more than one extended hunger strike.

After Adnan ended his hunger strike he was moved from a civilian hospital back to the Israel Prison Service’s medical center. His condition deteriorated when problems developed in his digestive system and he was brought back to a hospital for emergency care.

The Adnan family attorney visited Khader in the hospital on Monday after he underwent a medical procedure. His attorney was surprised to find that he was shackled to his bed — against medical ethics guidelines — and despite the fact he is under 24-hour watch.

Adnan is scheduled to be released from custody in less than a week. The state has not presented any evidence implicating him in a crime, and has refused to indict him.

Asked why Adnan was still being shackled to his bed, an Israel Prison Service spokesperson responded: “the shackling of a prisoner in hospital is done in accordance with the law and in according to an assessment that also takes medical condition into consideration.” The hospital responded that “the matter is not related to the hospital’s medical staff but rather to the Prison Service’s regulations.”

Just to be clear: Kaplan Medical Center is shackling a patient in poor condition, who is a detainee of the state only for a few more days, and whose guilt has never been proven. By treating a patient while he is shackled, the hospital’s medical staff is cooperating with unreasonable instructions by the Prison Service, the only point of which is to humiliate.

In two days the Lod District Court will hear a...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Hundreds march in memorial service for murdered Palestinian teen

‘Our only demand is that the murderers spend the rest of their lives in jail, so that everyone knows that what they did is unconscionable.’

By Michael Salisbury-Corech

Hundreds of Palestinians marched last Thursday in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Shuafat to mark one year since the abduction and murder of 16-year-old Muhammad Abu Khdeir. Participants waved Palestinian flags and held posters with Abu Khdeir’s face as they marched from the mosque where he was kidnapped, to the local girls elementary school where a memorial service was held.

Abu Khdeir was murdered in the early morning of July 2, 2014 by three Jewish men, purportedly as a random act of “vengeance” in response to the murder of three Jewish teenagers by Palestinians in the West Bank. The perpetrators kidnapped Abu Khdeir as he was walking to a neighborhood mosque for early morning prayers, took him to a Jerusalem-area forest, where they beat and burned him alive.

Thursday’s service included speeches from several public figures, including Theodosios (Hanna) of Sebastia from the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem, Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Sheikh Muhammad Hussein, and Adnan al-Husayni, the Palestinian governor of Jerusalem for the Palestinian Authority. The service passed without incident, despite warnings and threats by the Shin Bet and police toward the Abu Khdeir family to delay and even cancel the event altogether.

In an interview with +972′s Hebrew-language sister site, Local Call, Abu Khdeir’s cousin Said said the event was important, especially in light of the pressure to cancel it out of fear that Palestinian youth would throw stones:

“We knew that there would be no clashes, despite all the pressure that was placed on us by the security services. Shin Bet agents came two weeks ago and threatened me and several other family members that if something happens, we would be arrested that same night. The police also wanted us to sign a document promising that nothing would happen. We refused to sign and said that we are organizing the event and don’t want clashes. They pressured us to delay the event to Friday event, when the Jerusalem light rail no longer passes through the village and there isn’t much traffic in the area. We refused.

“The father of the martyr, Hussein Abu Khdeir, said that we would hold the ceremony on the exact date of the murder, and that if we do it on Friday, many people from the West...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Egyptian TV series shines light on the untold story of Arab Jews

A controversial new television show gives us a glimpse into Jewish-Muslim relations before Israel’s establishment, as well as a better understanding of those Jews who left Arab countries only to become Israel’s Mizrahim.

By Nadia Naser-Najjab

A recent controversy over a new Egyptian television series has served to highlight one of the central tensions at the heart of Zionist thought. This controversy has arisen in relation to “Haret al-Yahud” (“The Jewish Quarter”), a love story which depicts a romantic relationship between a male Egyptian-Muslim army officer (Iyad Nassar) and a female Egyptian-Jewish character (Mena Shalaby). The series, which is being broadcast during the month of Ramadan, has attracted both local and international media attention.

The Israeli embassy in Cairo approvingly observed that the series, which is set in a mixed and multicultural neighborhood of Cairo—and which develops over the period 1948-1954—has broken with the established conventions of the Israeli-Arab conflict and portrays Jews as “human beings.” Nonetheless, after this initially positive appraisal, the series failed to sustain the embassy’s approval, and it subsequently expressed its disapproval of the implication that the foundation of the Israeli state established the basis for many of the hatreds and mutual misunderstandings between Israelis and their Arab neighbors.

Although the series is undoubtedly interesting in its own right, my interest was primarily elicited by its engagement with Mizrahi Jews—Jews who, in contrast to their Ashkenazi brethren—lived in Arab countries before Israel’s foundation. In a manner that to some degree is comparable to Israel’s indigenous Palestinian population, their status has historically been, and indeed remains, highly complex and contingent.

For instance, in an event which has clear echoes of the Australian state’s forced removal of aboriginal children, hundreds of Yemenite babies and children were abducted in the 1950s, as Shoshana Madmoni-Gerber documented in her 2014 book “Silencing the ‘Yemenite Babies Affair.” In 1994 Rabbi Meshulam stirred the issue of the Yemeni babies and was incarcerated. Institutionalized racism was also frequently a factor in the relocation of Mizrahi communities to slum dwellings and economically disadvantaged development towns.

These events underline the fact that Mizrahi Jews have always been in a problematic relation to mainstream Zionism, a point which is reiterated by the fact that Mizrahi academics and activists have frequently emerged as strong advocates of Jewish-Arab co-existence.

The complexities and contradictions which have accompanied the integration of Mizrahi Jews into mainstream Israeli society appear...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

In natural gas debacle, the Joint List just can’t win

The slate of Palestinian parties in the Knesset, aligned with neither the coalition nor the opposition, is quickly — and at times clumsily — discovering its own power. Lessons from Israel’s natural gas debacle.

By Samah Salaime

There’s an old joke about a tyrannical lion who abuses a monkey in the jungle. Every time the lion sees the monkey he gives him a hard, loud slap, and asks him, “why aren’t you wearing a hat?” After a few good, hard slaps, the monkey decides to fight back against these unprovoked injustices. He starts to organize, enlists some animal rights organizations, demands equal rights and citizenship in the jungle, the right to wear whatever he wants, autonomy over his own body, and all that jazz.

The lion’s legal advisor, the fox, of course, explains to the king of the jungle that certainly hitting the monkey is a matter of utmost strategic importance. The urge to hit him, he continues, is surely unavoidable and justified, but maybe he should do it in a way that won’t upset the international community. “So what should we do?” the lion asks. The fox suggests that the lion ask the monkey to start pulling his weight in the jungle: “ask him to bring you an apple, sir. If he brings you a green apple, hit him because you wanted a red apple. If he brings you a red apple, hit him because he didn’t bring you a green apple.”

So the lion summoned the monkey, let him know how things were going to work from then on out, and sent him off to carry out his mission. The poor monkey returned with a green apple and, with his hand shaking from fear, presented it to the lion. The lion was furious and yelled, “why green?” But before he could swing his arm around to deliver the slap his face, the monkey shouted, “I thought this might happen so I brought you a red apple, too.” It was then that an especially hard and loud slap reverberated throughout the entire jungle. “Why aren’t you wearing a hat?!” the lion yelled.


That is how it appears members of Knesset from the Arab Joint List are being treated these days, both in the Israeli parliament and the media. No matter what they do and no matter where they go, it’s not good enough. The commotion surrounding the vote...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Interview: Church-based BDS and the Jewish voices beside it

As more U.S. churches vote on divestment, Jewish Voice for Peace aims to provide key support to a movement often accused of anti-Semitism. An interview with JVP’s advocacy director Sydney Levy.

By Ryan Rodrick Beiler /

This week, three more U.S. churches are voting on resolutions to divest from companies complicit in the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory. A United Church of Christ (UCC) committee unanimously approved a divestment resolution Sunday night with a final vote by the church’s general assembly expected Tuesday in Cleveland, Ohio.

The Episcopal Church is debating no fewer than seven resolutions related to Israel and Palestine this week at their national gathering in Salt Lake City. However the head of the U.S. church, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, directly opposes divestment. A vote may come as early as Tuesday. The Mennonite Church USA’s national convention in Kansas City begins tomorrow, with broad institutional support for a resolution to withdraw “investments from corporations known to be profiting from the occupation and/or destruction of life and property in Israel-Palestine.”

While final results in all three church decisions may not be known for several days, one can anticipate the response from major Jewish American organizations. If last year’s divestment vote by the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) is any indication, expect accusations that the resolutions are “one-sided,” “divisive,” and “demonizing.”

While these same organizations have withheld public comment as of this writing, you can expect more of the same. There is no indication that the collapse of the peace process, the bloodshed in Gaza, and the brazenness of the Netanyahu government have in any way affected their response to the broad movement of boycott divestment and sanctions (BDS) to pressure Israel.

But there are other voices — Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) in particular — who are part of the conversations taking place within and about these church-based efforts. Over the past year, JVP’s Facebook “likes” have grown to more than 212,000—compared to 109,000 for AIPAC and 29,000 for J Street, both of which oppose BDS.

I recently spoke with Sydney Levy, JVP’s advocacy director, who is currently in Cleveland supporting the UCC divestment resolution.

What do you see as JVP’s unique role in supporting these church divestment efforts?

We support divestment from companies that are connected to the oppression of Palestinians. We support those efforts whether they happen on campuses, whether they...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

A vicious cycle of lawlessness in the West Bank

The IDF has all but refused to fulfill its obligation to hold Israeli settlers accountable under the law and to protect Palestinians from them.

By Eyal Hareuveni

For nearly 50 years the Israeli army has been treating settler violence against Palestinians as a decree of fate, some sort of force majeure that trumps it in the territories otherwise under its control and responsibility. In other words, the army has dealt with the phenomenon without actually dealing with it.

International law, however, is quite clear that the occupying power, the Israeli army in this case, has an obligation to preserve the rule of law and public order in those territories. In countless rulings, the Israeli High Court has even emphasized that it is a basic and fundamental obligation — but the IDF paid no heed.

Yesh Din published a new report this month, “Standing Idly By,” documenting the phenomenon of Israeli soldiers doing just that in the face of offenses by Israeli citizens against Palestinians in the West Bank. The report highlights how soldiers don’t detain or arrest Israelis involved in violent incidents, how they don’t secure crime scenes so that evidence can be collected, how they don’t document such incidents and how they don’t file complaints with the police. Numerous government-sanctioned and human rights NGO reports have addressed this phenomenon since the early 1980s, and yet, for some reason, the IDF has not eradicated it.

Read the full report: ‘Standing Idly By

In 2004, in response to an ACRI High Court petition demanding that the army protect Palestinian farmers in the olive harvest, the IDF was forced to answer for its refusal to fulfil its obligations to enforce the law and maintain public order. Then, too, the army tried to pass on its responsibility to the police. The High Court justices weren’t convinced by the army’s arguments. They expressed serious criticism of its “helplessness” and “oversights” in enforcing the law; the justices ordered the army to “immediately correct its distortions.”

However, the army once again dragged its feet. Only in 2009, three years after the ruling on the olive harvest, did the army’s legal advisor for the territories send — for the first time — a fact sheet to commanders clarifying soldiers’ obligation to intervene in crimes committed by Israelis. In 2013, four years after that, the state comptroller found that army’s Central Command had not made any...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

If nuclear deal fails, we can kiss Iran's moderates goodbye

Should Iran and the West fail to come to an agreement, the battle will no longer be between the right and left, but rather between democratic forces and totalitarian ones.

By Ahmad Rafat

There is no doubt that the negotiators, whom these days are working to achieve a comprehensive deal on Iran’s nuclear plan, do not want to drive a stake through these talks. Even France, which has been playing “bad cop” to the U.S.’s “good cop” in these meetings, is interested in reaching an agreement. It seems that the only country that stands nothing to gain is Russia (which protects the interests of Iran), although for reasons that extend beyond the scope of this article, it cannot publicly express its reservations regarding the deal.

A number of questions on this issue have arisen, and each one deserves its own analysis: should a comprehensive agreement be reached, what will be the consequences? Should talks fail, what will be the fallout? What are the pros and cons of each of these scenarios?

The answers to these questions greatly depend on the geographical origin and political outlook of the person answering, and in practice may vary greatly. The response of an Iranian who opposes the Islamic Republic will be inherently different than that of someone from Tehran’s political echelon. The same can be said about a Russian diplomat whose response will likely be the exact opposite than that of an American diplomat. And we must take into account, of course, that the response of an Democratic American diplomat will be different than that of a Republican.

I write this only to clarify that the following analysis is the work of a journalist whose opinion differs from that of the Islamic Republic and who has worked for many years on issues of human rights, and thus analyzes the aforementioned questions from this angle.

The historical significance of a comprehensive agreement, which will put an end to the perpetual crisis surrounding Iran’s nuclear plan, is clear to all. But will this deal—if it is indeed signed, and more importantly if it does not turn into shreds within a few months time—truly solve the international community vis-a-vis the Islamic Republic? What about the countries in the region? Or most of all: the citizens of Iran themselves? There is no doubt that the answer to these questions are negative.

The Iranian authorities have stated...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

The only real danger of Gaza flotillas

Activists on the Freedom Flotilla must understand that the blockade on Gaza is constantly evolving, and that the tactics of yesteryear may no longer be relevant. Putting the spotlight on humanitarian supplies allows Israel to divert attention from the worst parts of the blockade.

By Itamar Sha’altiel

The truth is that after five years it’s getting a little old. Israeli naval commandos once again take over a boat to Gaza, and again, it happens without any fuss. The Israeli defense minister once again claims that there is no blockade on Gaza, and once again the prime minister tells the activists they should be sailing to Syria.

There is, of course, clearly a blockade on Gaza. It requires massive quantities of unabashed gall to claim otherwise. Israel forbids the entry and departure of boats to and from Gaza; it does not allow it to build an airport; it forbids anybody from entering a 100-meter no-man’s land inside Gaza; it decides what building materials can be imported to Gaza and for which projects; it permits trade with the West Bank, but only on restrictive terms that it sets; and it restricts the entry and exit of people in and out of the Strip. It could be that the Israeli defense minister believes all that is necessary to protect the security of the State of Israel, but let’s be honest — it’s a blockade, clear and simple.

But there is something else that must be said: the current flotilla is driven by actual changes in policy. When Israeli naval commandos took over the Mavi Marmara in May 2010, Israel had been irrationally and disturbingly banning the import of civilian goods and products into Gaza for three full years. Israeli soldiers were in charge of deciding whether or not toilet paper would be allowed into Gaza, whether chocolate would be considered a “luxury” in any given week or whether it would even be allowed in in the first, and there was the infamous ban on the import of coriander. That’s not the case any more. Not since Israeli commandos took over the Marmara. The blockade was altered.

Therefore, it should be no surprise that Israel gets so annoyed by these flotillas. They misrepresent the blockade. I am sure that the organizers of these flotillas are simply doing what they know to be effective. And indeed, these...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Khader Adnan reaches deal to end hunger strike, will be released

Adnan has been on hunger strike for over 50 days in protest of being held without charge, trial or being convicted of a crime.

By Yael Marom

Palestinian administrative detainee Khader Adnan will end his 50-plus-day hunger strike after reaching a deal with Israeli authorities that will see him released on July 12, according to members of Knesset who were privy to the negotiations late Sunday night.

The deal was expected to be signed in the early morning hours on Monday, according to Balad MK Jamal Zahalka. “The strike will be over the moment the deal is signed,” and Adnan will agree to receive medical treatment, MK Zahalka added.

Zahalka and other members of Knesset from the Joint List went to the hospital Sunday night at the behest of Adnan’s family, who were holding a vigil.

Adnan’s health seriously deteriorated in recent days and his family feared he might die at any moment. His father, mother and children arrived at the hospital Sunday evening and declared that they would not leave until an agreement for Adnan’s release was signed.

Adan’s wife was permitted to see him Sunday night in the hospital bed to which he has been shackled for weeks.

Dozens of activists joined the Joint List MKs at the hospital to support the family.

“This is not only a victory for Khader Adnan, the administrative detainee, it is a victory of human spirit up against forces of oppression,” MK Haneen Zoabi said of the agreement.

Under British Mandate-era emergency regulations kept on the books by Israel, authorities can hold Palestinians in administrative detention without charge, trial or conviction—indefinitely.

This was Adnan’s second extended hunger strike against his administrative detention. In 2012, Adnan won his release in a similar deal that ended a hunger strike.

He was re-arrested by Israeli authorities last summer in a massive arrest raid conducted in the aftermath of a deadly kidnapping of three Israeli teens in the West Bank. Authorities accuse him of being an active member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, but have not charged him with any related crime.

According to Palestinian prisoner support organization Addameer, Israeli authorities were holding 414 Palestinians in administrative detention as of April 1, 2015, including a number of elected members of the Palestinian parliament.

The Israeli government made a number of concessions to end a mass hunger strike of Palestinian prisoners in 2012, including promises to reduce Israel’s...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Who's afraid of Israeli hate crimes?

What the government calls ‘nationalist crimes’ are not random acts of violence—they have a clear goal: dispossessing Palestinians of their land.

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

From time to time, this country is shaken by a particularly severe wave of nationalistically-motivated hate crimes against Palestinians, often in the form of arson or desecration of a religious site. After each such incident, we are faced with the usual ritual: senior government or police officials stare into the cameras with a determined gaze; they call the acts unconscionable; they say they take the incident with a full measure of responsibility and severity; they claim that this is not how a Jewish state acts; they promise that zero tolerance will be shown. These rituals usually appear against a backdrop of fear that this time the cup will finally runneth over, shattering the sacred “quiet” in the West Bank. After a short while, however, everything is back to normal.

We can see just how seriously the government takes hate crimes from the following case. On July 26, 2010, a large group of Israeli marauders, whom eyewitnesses said came from the direction of the settlements of Yitzhar and Har Bracha, allegedly made their way to land belonging to the nearby Palestinian village of Burin. According to witnesses, the marauders burned hundreds of olive trees, some of them older than a century. They then attacked the villagers with stones and, in a few cases, with clubs, after which they stoned the houses of the village. On that same day, some of the victims lodged a complaint with the Israeli police.

In August 2011—more than a year after the incident—the police informed Yesh Din that the case was turned over to the attention of a prosecutor; that is the last the organization heard of the story for two years. In August 2013, the Shomron Prosecution Unit bothered to update Yesh Din that they had closed the case back in December 2012. Three months later, we received the investigation material of a three-year-old incident, and attempted to see whether there is any point in appealing the decision to close the case.

To the utter surprise of Yesh Din’s attorneys, who were under the impression that the police closed the case for lack of evidence, the files contained quite a bit of evidence. At the same time and place of the incident, three Border...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Ban Ki-moon and the detention of Palestinian children

The connection between settlements and the military regime that detains some 1,000 Palestinian each year is becoming harder and harder to ignore.

By Gerard Horton

In recent weeks some media attention has focused on whether Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon would, or would not, include Israel on the UN’s list of states responsible for violating children’s rights in armed conflict. This follows the receipt of a draft report in which Ban’s special envoy for children and armed conflict, Leila Zerrougui, recommended that Israel should be listed, citing as one reason, the high proportion of children killed during last summer’s war in Gaza.

In the end, Ban opted not to include Israel or Hamas on the list following what media sources described as intense pressure from the U.S. and Israel.

The list in question is attached to a report submitted to the Security Council by the secretary-general around this time every year. The report considers 23 conflict situations which heavily impact children, including Israel/Palestine. For the third consecutive year the report has included a section on the treatment of Palestinian children detained by the Israeli military in the West Bank.

According to the report, the UN has obtained 122 affidavits from children detained by the Israeli military in 2014. The report confirms that the information “has been documented, vetted and verified for accuracy by the United Nations.” According to the secretary-general, the children reported being subjected to “ill-treatment, such as beatings, being hit with sticks, being blindfolded, being kicked and being subjected to verbal abuse and threats of sexual violence.”

As we approach the 50th anniversary of Israel’s military rule over the West Bank, it is worth considering these allegations in the wider context. According to UN sources, since June 1967, approximately 760,000 Palestinian men, women and children have been detained by Israeli forces. Some of these individuals were released within hours or days, while others continue to be prosecuted in military courts and imprisoned. The military authorities acknowledge that around 1,000 Palestinian children from the West Bank are currently detained each year, of which those 12 years and above, can be prosecuted in military courts. Most are accused of throwing stones.

Read +972′s full coverage: Children Under Occupation

These recent allegations do not come out of the blue. In 2013, UNICEF published a report following a review of over 400 affidavits in which it...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article
© 2010 - 2015 +972 Magazine
Follow Us

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website powered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel