By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

A Jewish settler stands over a Palestinian farmer [illustrative photo]. (Anne Paq / Activestills)

As the good civilians left their vehicle, some of them hooded, they started attacking the Palestinians. The assault, which included use of clubs and tear gas, went on for several long minutes, as the soldiers in the jeep did nothing. During history lessons, we used to call an attack by a group of civilians on others as the agents of the government did nothing “pogroms”; the Israeli media prefers the term “clashes.” In the end, the soldiers fired some rounds in the air and the attackers took the hint and retreated. It’s time to say, again, that IDF soldiers are, legally, both entitled and obliged to prevent such attacks and they are empowered to detain the rioters until police show up.

One might have expected the police would crack this case relatively easily. The Palestinians photographed their attackers, and one of the wounded recognized the people assaulting him. Furthermore, given the cordial greetings by the soldiers in the jeep, it’s reasonable to assume they soldiers were familiar with the gang members. Even so, no indictments were served in this case. Police only bothered to interrogate the main suspect after three months, and then were satisfied with answers to general questions. The suspect was not, for instance, asked to supply an alibi. Neither did the police bother to find the soldiers who witnessed the assault.

This isn’t the only case of its kind. In a series of documented cases, the police simply refused to lodge the Palestinians’ complaints. Rabah Hizme, also a resident of Turmusaya, on August 6, 2009 wanted to register a complaint against an Israeli citizen who fired at him and with a drawn weapon, chased him to his village; the police refused to accept the complaint, claiming the gunman was engaged in self defense. This is interesting: the police basically decided the result of the investigation even as it refused to open one. In other cases, when a Palestinian wants to lodge a complaint, he is systematically worn down: ‘come back tomorrow,’ ‘we don’t have an interpreter today,’ ‘there’s no investigator today,’ and ‘why didn’t you bring the documents we never asked you to bring.’ The goal, as with the robotic replies of a cellular company’s automated phone system, is to convince the victims that there is no point, that he’s wasting his time, that nothing will come out of this.

Even when the police deign to register the complaint, the likelihood that something will come out of it is smaller than a Wall Street banker returning his loot. Of the cases followed by Yesh Din, 94 percent were closed without indictment. In 92 percent of those cases, the reason was the failure of the investigators: either “unknown perpetrator,” meaning the police couldn’t find the criminal, or “lack of sufficient evidence.”

In the case of Hussein Abu ‘Aliya from Al Mughayer, whose trees were poisoned, when the police file was reviewed by Yesh Din, our people were astonished to find it contained just one document – Abu ‘Aliya’s complaint. The police simply did nothing. In 2008, Mahmud Mizmeh Muhammad Al’Arj, a resident of Turmusaya, registered a complaint about settlers invading his territory. The police spent quite some time trying to ascertain that the land did indeed belong to Al’Arj; and once satisfied he was telling the truth, and that the land did belong to him, the investigation ended abruptly. After all, why investigate a crime, once you realize one did happen? You might accidentally stumble on the guilty party.

This attitude is not limited to property crimes. On April 29, 2006, seven Palestinians trying to work their land near Adei Ad were attacked. About 15 armed Israelis coming out of Adei Ad assaulted them with their rifle butts, set a large black dog on them, and finally opened fire. A mare was killed in the shooting. Police didn’t bother to properly investigate, inter alia avoiding testing all the weapons in Adei Ad, or trying to find out who keeps a large black dog there. The case was closed with the police claiming lack of evidence.

Furthermore, the police do not fulfill their duties to inform the complainant about the results of the investigation; in about 70 percent of the complaints registered prior to the involvement of Yesh Din, no response was received. All of these are failures of the authorities resulting from complaints made by Palestinians. The reluctance of the authorities in the West Bank from enforcing laws on settlers is not limited to negligence in investigating their alleged crimes. All of the buildings in Adei Ad have demolitions orders against them. The great majority of those orders, particularly against homes, were not enforced.

And these are just some of the testimonies about the failure of the Israeli justice system to protect people it rules in the occupied territories. For further testimonies, I recommend reading the full report.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights. 

Related:
The quiet population transfer that dares not speak its name 

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

A new Yesh Din report reveals how despair causes Palestinians to abandon their villages, which settlers eventually turn into illegal outposts.

Yesh Din published one of most comprehensive reports, The Road to Dispossession (which has its own mini-site), dealing with the illegal outpost Adei Ad. The outpost sits between four Palestinian villages and robs them of their lands. The information we gathered shows a quiet phenomenon of the last decade: the dispossession of the Palestinians from their lands, which in turn increases their despair and leads them to abandon their villages. In other words, a quiet population transfer, paving the road to the annexation of Area C to Israel. The annexation is already in practice: Yesh Din recently received a letter saying the government intends to whitewash the outpost Derekh Avot, by declaring the Palestinian lands on which it sits to be public lands.

Yesh Din documented 96 criminal offenses carried out by Israeli civilians around Adei Ad, where 26 families reside. The number would look more impressive once one recalls that these are only the offenses the organization managed to record (Yesh Din was founded in 2005, Adei Ad in 1998 – Yesh Din’s ability to investigate events prior to 2005 is very limited). Thus, it should be stated that there are many undocumented offenses. Among these Yesh Din can track: 21 offenses deal with violence against Palestinians, 47 with property crimes, and 28 offenses of taking over land. The Israeli police closed almost all of the cases, and in 92% of the cases, the investigators failed to do their job and find the culprit.

As a result of several international obligations, the government has found it difficult to create new settlements since 1999. A government resolution from 1995 forbids the creation of new settlements. So the process of building new ones has, in effect, been privatized: a process which can be hardly considered as anything but a conspiracy between the government and the settlers. As the latter go off what would officially be considered illegal building of settlements, the government (which declared the action illegal) is swift to provide the outlaws with IDF protection, as well as all of the utilities the settlers need. The Sasson Report, which will celebrate its tenth birthday in a year, used a very harsh language:

It would appear, therefore, that violation of the law became a fixture, became institutionalized. We do not deal with a felon or a group of felons acting against the law. The picture is that of blatant violation of the law by certain state authorities, public authorities, local councils in the Judea and Samaria region, and the settlers – all while presenting a false image of an institutional system acting legally.

Almost all of the outposts were built – partially or fully – on private Palestinian lands, and each outpost has several rings of damage around it. The first ring is that of the outpost itself; entry to it is of course forbidden to Palestinians. As most of the outposts sit, at least partially, on private lands, forbidding access to them is a severe blow to the ability of the Palestinians to make a living. These rings tend to extend: when Adei Ad was created in 1998, it had five families which used 15,554 square meters of land. In 2002, the territory of the outpost was 140,902 sq. meters – almost ten times its original size. In 2003, it grew to 442,250 sq. meters (and contained 37 buildings, all built at large distance from one another), and in 2010, the lands of the outpost were enlarged to 465,321 sq. meers – about 30 times its original size. 26 families now live in the outpost.

The second ring is the outpost’s security perimeter, which is also closed to Palestinians. The third ring contains lands close to the security perimeters, which the Palestinians may enter only rarely, and only by permission of the authorities – the same authorities described by Sasson as allowing “ violation of the law to become a fixture, become institutionalized.” Often, such access is limited to several days or at most several weeks a year, with the IDF – which is for all practical matters the collaborator of the criminals here – using an unimaginable process. It informs the residents, orally and not in writing, that a certain portion of land is closed to them, but not to the settlers, of course. Everything goes according to the ill will of the local commander, without any practical way to appeal this decision. Try and tell the court “I was forbidden entry by Captain Danny”, without any documentation of the order. The IDF Spokesman was forced to admit no documentation of these orders was found.

The fourth ring is the most fiery: what is left of the agricultural lands of the Palestinian villages and towns that the Israeli authorities have yet to completely steal. Their residents suffer from regular attacks by settlers, particularly on the agricultural lands. These attacks include burning houses of residents, stealing of their property, assault on animals and men, and sometimes even poisoning of animals. Many of these attacks are carried out under the aegis of the IDF, with the soldiers preventing the Palestinians from defending themselves or actively participating in the assault on them, contrary to international law, which says the occupying power has to defend the occupied population. And then comes the law enforcement apparatus of the police and closes the circle: A Palestinian can expect nothing but injustice from the occupation forces.

The expected result was not long in coming. The villagers residing near Adei Ad – those of Jaloud, Al Mourayer, Kraiut and Thurmusia – understood that their livelihood is less stable than ever. The young people began abandoning them. Kraiut was mostly abandoned: six thousand have left, and only 2,800 residents remain. Out of the thousand residents of Jaloud, only 400 remain. The numbers from the other two villages are less clear, but reports from Thurmusia say a large number of residents left for foreign countries, and the money they send home is now the main source of income for the village.

All this is done in our name and with our funds, but the government and its operational arm, the outpost hoodlums, make certain Israelis remain ignorant of the facts. The lack of knowledge, partially a result of the decision by the media, is what makes dispossession possible, is what prevents a public outcry when each and every one of us is turned into a partner in stealing the fruits of the labor of people who are poor as it is.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights. 

Related:
Report: How settlers turn Palestinian lands into illegal outposts

Between 1998 and 2011, the Civil Administration issued 81 demolition orders against buildings and construction work in the outpost. The vast majority of the orders have not been enforced and the outpost remains intact. Yesh Din has documented 96 separate incidents involving criminal offenses committed in the vicinity of Adei Ad. Approximately 92 percent of the files were closed due to failings on the part of the investigators.

The report highlights the connection between the failure of the bodies responsible for enforcing the law and protecting Palestinian persons and property and the seizure of Palestinian land. This process begins with the failure to ensure effective law enforcement against Israeli civilians in the criminal and administrative spheres, and ends when Palestinian landowners are no longer able to farm their land and make a living from its fruit.

Check out the interactive website explaining how illegal outposts are born: here

Yesh Din is a volunteer organization working to defend the human rights of the Palestinian civilian population under Israeli occupation.

Related:
The quiet population transfer that dares not speak its name

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

Jewish settlers in Hebron [illustrative photo] (Yotam Ronen/Activestills.org)

As “I.” would later tell the police, he thought that “B.” would pass his house with a few curses – that he would “curse and go on his way, as usual,” as he put it. That’s life in occupied Hebron (Al Khalil) for you. Not this time. “B.” went into “I.”‘s yard, while the accompanying settlers stayed outside. “I.” Demanded “B.” leave, and in response the latter immediately punched him in the face, and kept on attacking him.

“I.” refrained from hitting the invader back: “Even though I know that by law, I may defend myself from an attacker who enters my yard,” he would say later, “I didn’t strike back because I knew B. would use it against me.” “I.” managed to push “B.” out of the yard, and shouted to the soldier in the nearby post.

As the soldier moseyed over, some of the settlers who accompanied “B.” began stoning “I.” and his friends. They knew, of course, they stood a snowball’s chance in hell of being indicted for attempted murder. They threw stones at the Palestinians with a soldier in plain sight, knowing this stalwart of the rule of law won’t do anything. They’re Jews, after all. As the incident unfolded, “I.” called the police and reported the stone-throwing.

As the soldier watched, “B.” kicked “I.”, while telling the soldier: “You see? He’s kicking me.” The soldier, naturally, arrested “I.”, and “B.” and his gang sneaked off. The detainees were suspected of throwing stones. When “I.” insisted that “B.” and the settlers must also be detained, since he reported the incident, the policemen shrugged: “It’s already Shabbat’” they told him, “We can’t take “B.” and the settlers.”

This particular incident ended relatively well. “I.” was interrogated under suspicion that he attacked “B.” – who, as you recall, didn’t bother to press charges but sauntered off – but told the investigator that his friends recorded the incident on video. Upon examining the video, the interrogator dismissed “I.” on bail, but even though he told I. he would not supply him with the number of the complaint.

The critical words here are, however, “It’s already Shabbat, we can’t take ‘B.’ and the settlers.” This is how a vanquished force, which lost all faith in its ability, sounds. In Israel, the police do work on Saturdays. If a noted felon in Haifa would have assaulted a man and escaped, it’s hard to believe the police would say “well, it’s a Saturday, we can’t detain him.” But coming to deal with B. on his home turf, the cops know they are moving in hostile territory, and that such an arrest would cause a huge mess, and who really needs all these troubles for the sake of some Palestinian who was merely assaulted and stoned in his own yard? The police know it is the settlers who set the rules in Hebron and Kiryat Arba, and that they themselves are there only to provide the façade of the “rule of law.”

The police know and understand this; the Israeli public prefers to stay blissfully unaware.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights. A version of this post was first published on Yesh Din’s blog.

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

A masked Jewish settler uses a slingshot to throw stones at Palestinians [illustrative photo] (Oren Ziv/Activestills.org)

K. said he encountered a group of about 10 men, who he thought were settlers. They were not hooded. Another person at the scene, Y., noted that some of the settlers were armed; Y. is certain he can identify them.

The settlers began throwing stones at K., hit him in the head, and he collapsed. Y. saw them approaching K. and throwing another stone at his head, even after he fell. This shouldn’t be surprising: a similar incident was documented in June, 2005 (Hebrew). Settlers threw one stone after the other at the head of an unconscious Palestinian boy, while IDF soldiers on the scene did little. This incident, noted mostly because it was captured on film, caused some outrage at the time; then, as usual, it was forgotten. Israelis are good at forgetting such incidents.

Y. rushed to help K., since he feared for the latter’s life. As a result, he says, the settlers began stoning him too. He retreated and the settlers used the opportunity to try and drive some of his sheep towards Adei Ad, an outpost adjacent to the pasture land. Some of them preferred killing the sheep: one of the settlers threw stones at the heads of the sheep, while another slaughtered some with a blade. Some of K.’s sheep were stabbed to death; some of Y.’s were wounded by stones, and may die.

The villagers rapidly reached the scene. K. was evacuated to a hospital, and a scuffle broke out between the pogromchiks and the Palestinian residents. As soon as police arrived, the settlers fled. It should be noted that when the police and the IDF reached the scene, they used tear gas and other crowd-dispersal weapons – against the Palestinians, of course. Some of them were hurt.

About two weeks ago, Israel was enraged when a brave military judge, Amir Dahan, ruled that throwing stones is not necessarily attempted murder. He chose to convict the Palestinians arraigned before him of stone-throwing, and not with the inflated charge of attempted murder, as submitted by the military prosecution. For the judge’s trouble, he was publicly reprimanded by a brigade commander, who has probably never heard of the principle of independence of the military justice system (Hebrew).

Throwing stones can indeed in some cases, for instance, when a person is lying down and a hoodlum is throwing stones at his head, be considered attempted murder. We can rest assured, however, the Shai District Police will manage to botch this investigation as well. In this, there is certainly experience.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights. A version of this post was first published on Yesh Din’s blog.

Related:
Settlers accuse ‘Haaretz’ of calling for violence against them 

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

IDF soldiers and police return a donkey stolen from Palestinians by settlers in Tapuach. (Photo: Yossi Gurvitz)

One of the problems with reporting what happens in the West Bank to the Israeli public is that it has grown accustomed to thinking that Palestinians lie. All of them. All the time. Without taking a break. This isn’t the place to examine this social construct – one suspects it exists because it is so convenient. Because it makes it easy to ignore every complaint with a shrug – and certainly Palestinians have been known to exaggerate claims from time to time. On the other hand, the Israeli tendency is to accept every testimony coming from an Israeli, particularly if he is in uniform. This unfortunate tendency, common also on the part of the courts, has no legs to stand on. There’s probably nothing less trustworthy than a group of partners in crime, be they settlers or uniformed officials, trying to cover for each other. An Israeli board of inquiry, the Orr Committee, already noted that “a culture of lies” is endemic in the police, and former general Uri Sagi referred to the IDF Spokesman as “lying, as is his habit.”

The problem with taking testimonies of what happens in the West Bank is that the questioning often takes place with a considerable delay after the events, and the police do not like investigating incidents. The ability to capture events in real time is limited; the attacks come suddenly, and most Palestinians – particularly the farmers – do not habitually carry a camera on them.

Sometimes, however, everything falls into place. Some two weeks ago, your humble servant went to the West Bank along with a Yesh Din volunteer, Edna, and our field researcher, Firas. We were supposed to go someplace else, but Firas received a report of an attack which just took place in Yasouf, so we galloped there.

We reached the place at about 11:30 a.m., and started taking testimonies. The story was simple, humdrum, and depressing. The farmers of Yasouf received a very limited permit to work their lands adjacent to the Tapuach settlement: it was limited to two days. When the farmers came early on the first morning, they found two settlement security vehicles blocking their way to the lands, as IDF soldiers watched on, doing nothing. An officer from the IDF’s Civil Administration intervened, and the settlers left.

About half an hour later, five men came out of the settlement’s north gate – it’s locked, so how they opened it is a mystery – and one of them was hooded. They started throwing stones at the farmers working their land, who retreated. Three of the attackers advanced while throwing stones at the farmers, and the two others grabbed their donkey, which carried some agricultural equipment, and pulled it through the gate in Tapuach.

As we were taking testimonies, I noticed some movement near the gate, which is some 200 meters from the place where we stood. I went there, and saw forces of the Police, the Border Police, the Civil Administration, as well as a settler looking very angry, who were holding a donkey. For once, the policing forces were doing their job, and returned the stolen donkey. A few minutes later, a stolen plowshare – which originally was on the donkey – was also found and returned, and it too passed through the gate from Tapuach to Yasouf. I heard the Civil Administration officer saying they found the donkey “inside the settlement.” The Palestinians said that other equipment carried by the donkey was still missing.

IDF soldiers and police return farm equipment stolen from Palestinians by settlers in Tapuach. (Photo: Yossi Gurvitz)

So, this time, there was a camera at the right place at the right time, and it provides us with the proof we are not willing to accept when it is backed only by the words of Palestinians. The police, this time, have all the evidence they need: there are security cameras on the gate to Tapuach. The attack and the theft ought to be thoroughly documented.

And still, I have full faith in the ability of the Israeli police to botch its job and not catch the criminals, even when documentation exists. After all, some of the policemen live in the settlements, and they, too, are exposed to the “price tag” culture. But this time it will be spared: the Palestinian residents, who know well what they can expect from Israel’s finest – a big bowl of nothing, with an added bonus of more molestation – have decided not to ask for an investigation. Even though the evidence is clear.

Another day in the West Bank, another day of injustice, endorsed by the State of Israel.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din - Volunteers for Human Rights. A version of this post was first published on Yesh Din’s blog.

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

Graffiti in village of Yasouf, reading ‘Price tag; stone terror’, February 18, 2013 (Photo: Abed Al-Karim a-Saadi/B’Tselem)

Yesterday morning a “price tag” pogrom took place in the Palestinian village of Yasouf. If the name Yasouf is vaguely familiar to you, it’s probably because in 2009 it became the target of the most famous price tag attack: the burning of its mosque. It’s worth mentioning the response of the Shomron local settler council at the time (Hebrew): it called the attack an “act of madmen or a provocation,” piously adding that it hoped the police would find those responsible. That was two years before Shahar Ginossar wrote in an investigative report for Yedioth Ahronot that the Shomron local council created the “price tag” policy, and even funded it. The “price tag” people are the military arm of the settlement establishment, the hoodlums who are used when violence and plausible deniability are necessary. “Price tag” attacks have become so common that they’re barely reported; they used to make headlines, but the attack in Yasouf yesterday was barely worthy of a newsflash.

The choice of Yasouf as a repeat target of “price tag” attacks becomes more understandable when you realize that the village is now fighting against the taking over of its lands by settlers, who are aided and abetted by the IDF in doing so. The village dares to fight for its rights, so it gets a small dose of terror as a reminder of the price for messing not only with the military arm of the government of Israel, but also with the military arm of the settler movement, which is far more ruthless.

In December 2010, the villagers petitioned the High Court of Justice, represented by attorneys Michael Sfard, Shlomi Zecharia, Avishar Lev and Muhammad Shqayer of Yesh Din’s legal team. The petition was against the army and the Civil Administration and demanded the villagers receive access to their lands. Since early 2001, the army has prevented the villagers from accessing thousands of dunams of its lands. Later, “Tapuach West,” an outpost illegal even according to the government of Israel, was established on some of those lands,. “Tapuach West” blocked the villagers’ access to their lands, as did the illegally paved road running between Tapuach – a settlement created by Kahane supporters – and its outpost, “Tapuach West.” Is the local council responsible both for the settlement and the outpost? After all, it’s the Shomron local council.

At first, the settlers prevented the villagers from reaching their lands with the usual violence. Then the army got involved and erected a gate that is never open, thus turning what was a lawless land grab into something semi-official. Later, the army declared much of the territory a closed military zone, thus officially preventing the villagers – not the invading settlers – from reaching what is, without any legal contest, their land from which they live.

Some two years after the petition was filed, in November 2012, the court first debated it – hey, it’s just some Palestinians robbed of their livelihood, what’s the rush? In the hearing, the justices were sharply critical of the behavior of the army and civil administration. Justice Naor said: “The balance here derives first of all from the starting point, that they are entitled to reach their lands. If there are lawbreakers, it is the duty of the military commander to deal with them. His job is to ensure their access, and if there are lawbreakers he must deal with them. If anyone uses violence the state must confront them. It is the state’s job to maintain order.”

So, until the government enforces order, which it is loath to do when Jews are involved, the terrorists residing in the Shomron local council will try to make it clear to the petitioners that they’re messing with the wrong people. Luckily, the petitioners refuse to bend. In addition to law enforcement officials’ poor record in defending the Palestinians in the occupied territories from the theft of their lands and violence against them – which, again, is basically all the army is allowed to do there, legally – we can add their pathetic inability to capture the “price tag” pogromchiks. Their proven record of inaptitude has already led the local residents to tell us they are unwilling to press charges, since the way their complaints are dealt with is a bad joke and the process is a waste of their time.

In that regard, the terrorists have already won, with the quiet support – both by action and inaction – of the IDF, the Shin Bet and police.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights. A version of this post was first published on Yesh Din’s blog.

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

New construction taking place in the Beit El settlement, February 5, 2013 (Photo: Ahmad Al Bazz/Activestills.org)

One of ancient Greece’s sages, legend says, mocked the Athenian lawgiver Solon for writing his constitution and laws. He told Solon laws were like fishing net: It stops the weak fish, but the larger, stronger ones will simply tear it to bits.

Ynet reported earlier this week that the government intends to reward the evacuees from the illegal settlement of Givat Ha’Ulpana for their blatant violation of the law by building them 90 new apartments in the settlement of Beit El. Unfortunately, no lands are available in Beit El for such purposes.

The only land available in Beit El is land that was confiscated by the army in the 1970s, and it can only be used for military purposes. There was a short period in which the army and the settlers worked hand in hand in arguing that the settlements are a “security necessity,” but those halcyon days were over after the HCJ decision of Elon Moreh. Since then, the government and the settlers had to find new and innovative ways of stealing land, the most prominent of which is designating Palestinian land as “state land”, and then, strangely enough, giving it away to people residing in another country. But that’s a whole new story.

So now the government says that it intends to build houses for individual settlers on land that was confiscated solely for security reasons. One may, of course, see it as yet another way for the government to stick its thumb into Obama’s eyes, seeing as this declaration comes a month before the president’s visit, but that’s barely the tip of the iceberg.

For starters, the next time the government confiscates land or a structure on grounds that it is essential for “security” purposes, we should doubt it. The purpose of the confiscation may well be transferring the land from private Palestinian hands to private Jewish hands without the hassle of having to pay for it. After all, if there was a true security need in confiscating the Beit El lands, then there are two possible outcomes. Either the government would avoid using them to house civilians (who can imagine using civilians as human shields to protect a military facility?), or, assuming there is no longer any military purpose for those lands, they would revert back to their owners, along with some compensation. Since neither happened, we can safely assume there was never any real military need for the confiscation of these lands.

Secondly, the state is, with a high degree of certainty, about to lose in court. There will almost certainly be an appeal to the HCJ, which has already ruled on the issue. So either the government thinks it can convince the HCJ to rewrite a 35 years old decision (and thereby remove whatever remains of legal protection Palestinians still enjoy), or it intends to ignore the ruling altogether.

The government is playing a double game. If the HCJ does not intervene, thereby rendering its earlier decisions void, the government will proclaim victory. If the court does intervene, the government will turn around and tell the settlers that “we tried, but the evil judges wouldn’t let us. We need more power in order to pack the court.” Basically a win-win.

Of course, this concept is false. The only reason the HCJ even deals with petitions related to the occupation is because of a 45-years old decision by Meir Shamgar, the former attorney-general. This is not a government decision, much less a Knesset decision; this is a decision by a bureaucrat which is simply beneficial to the government. Had the government truly wanted to change the situation, it would just have to legislate a simple law: “The HCJ shall not deal with petitions of foreign residents who do not have either residency or citizen status within the State of Israel.” And that would end HCJ’s oversight over the occupation. Given the minuscule number of times the court actually does anything, it’s doubtful whether anyone but the lawyers would notice.

Yet the government doesn’t do it. Why? It would have no problems getting the votes. Why? Because the current situation, in which the HCJ pretends to provide oversight but doesn’t is ideal as far as the government is concerned. Officially, there is judicial oversight, so everything it does is hanky-dory. In practice, this oversight barely exists. The court approves just about everything, from land confiscation under dubious pretenses to the expulsion of 400 suspects without trial, and is notorious for admitting secret evidence. The judges often agonize over their decisions – but, with hardly any exception, once their ordeal is over, they approve whatever the government wants. Without the HCJ, which provides the occupation with its Kosher stamp, it may well have collapsed earlier.

And if the HCJ does deny, for the time being, the building of the new apartments in Beit El, it will save the government – not for the first time – from the consequences of its own actions. This will not make the government view the court favorably; it will continue to wave it abroad as reason to leave Israel alone, while at the same time attacking it at home.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights. A version of this post was first published on Yesh Din’s blog.

By Yesh Din, written by Yossi Gurvitz

IDF soldiers clash with demonstrators in Nabi Saleh, December 11, 2011 (Oren Ziv/Activestills.org)

The most significant fact in our new fact sheet about law enforcement on IDF soldiers in the Occupied Territories is that although 240 complaints were registered in 2012, they resulted in not a single indictment. It is possible indictments will be filed in the coming years based on the complaints of 2012, but so far the percentage of complaints maturing into indictments is a fat, round zero. 2012 is somewhat problematic in this regard, but the average rate is not much better: around five percent.

Another less obvious point is also of importance. Out of 240 complaints, all of which deal with allegedly unlawful conduct – from violence to looting to unlawful killing – only six, about 2.5 percent, were made directly to the Military Police Criminal Investigative Division (MPCID), which then made only a desultory effort to investigate them. This rate was somewhat higher in 2008-2009, though still minor – nine percent (see pg. 35-46 here). The rest of the complaints made it to MPCID by Palestinians registering complaints with Israeli policemen in the DCOs [District Coordination Offices], but the majority came through human rights organizations, either directly (in 42 cases), or indirectly (when the NGOs went to the Military Judge Advocate, in 90 cases).

Only four complaints were made directly to MPCID by military officers, even though IDF orders make it clear that when a suspicion of certain offenses arises, MPCID must be informed. One single complaint came from the Shin Bet’s ombudsman responsible for examining detainee complaints, which given the notoriety of this department in closing complaints about torture, means that some soldier must have been spectacularly out of line. A similar number of complaints came from the Let the Animals Live NGO (an animal rights group), and another came from a righteous person, an individual Israeli citizen.

Anyone filing a complaint through an Israeli cop at a DCO – assuming one is actually present – is sometimes surprised to find that the complaint was lost on its way to MPCID. Sending your complaint via a human rights NGO has an added benefit: they do a good job. If the ratio of complaints coming from the police developing into an investigation is a lowly one in six, which is still much higher than those coming from an interrogation facility (1 in 18), the rate of complaints coming through NGOs and leading to investigations is one in 2.5 or 1:3.

Why is the rate for direct complaints so low? The answer is simple. MPCID does not have bases in the West Bank (and obviously, not in Gaza). The IDF and Border Police have a large number of bases in the West Bank, as well as plenty of training areas; recently, using the excuse for expelling Palestinians from their lands because they are in a “firing zone” has become depressingly common. The West Bank has bases of various ground forces, regimental bases, brigade bases expressly intended for occupation purposes (the Kfir Brigade), which has six battalions. The IDF has been in the West Bank since 1967, and never stopped building in it. And yet, MPCID has not a single base in the West Bank.

What this means in practice is that a Palestinian who wants to register a complaint against a soldier who hurt him or her needs a permit to enter Israel, because MPCID that is where its only bases are. Most Palestinians do not have such a permit. This means that there is no practical way to directly register a complaint, making certain that only the most obdurate will be able to register theirs. This certainly reduces the workload for MPCID, and saves some trouble for soldiers. One must wonder if this is truly accidental.

During the first years of the occupation, complaints about soldiers’ violence were rare. This changed immediately when the First Intifada broke out in late 1987. Between the two intifadas, complaints were supposed to travel from the Palestinians to MPCID via the Palestinian Police. This was, one could say, an unstable arrangement that collapsed when the Second Intifada broke out – but even in the 12 years since, MPCID hasn’t built a single base in the West Bank.

In certain respects, MPCID is an early example of privatization: it outsourced the system for receiving complaints to human rights NGOs. Those NGOs do MPCID’s work for it without it being forced to spend its own resources. When it comes to investigating those complaints, however, it does a totally unacceptable job. Yet, this is appears to be one public service the government of Israel won’t be in a hurry to privatize.

Written by Yossi Gurvitz in his capacity as a blogger for Yesh Din, Volunteers for Human Rights. A version of this post was first published on Yesh Din’s blog.

By Yesh Din

In the wake of recent events, Yesh Din has published a new data sheet about criminal accountability of IDF soldiers in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The data indicates a clear downward trend in the rate of indictments served: in the years 2009-2011 indictments were served following 2.5% of the investigations opened into alleged offenses committed by Israeli soldiers while in 2012 not a single Military Police Criminal Investigations Division (MPCID) investigation resulted in an indictment.

The data sheet, based on information provided to Yesh Din by the IDF spokesperson, as well as the organization’s ongoing research, shows the following:

• In 2012 the MPCID received 240 complaints and various reports of suspected crimes allegedly committed by IDF soldiers against Palestinians and their property in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
• The MPCID opened criminal investigations into 78 of the 240 reports it received. Another 25 investigation files were opened that year into reports received in 2011. The MPCID opened a total of 103 criminal investigations in 2012.
• Data for the last years indicates a significant drop in the rate of indictments served. The data for the years 2009, 2010 and 2011 shows that 14 investigation files out of the 534 opened during those three years produced indictments; i.e., only 2.62%.
• Not a single investigation file opened by MPCID in 2012 yielded an indictment. Only one indictment was served in 2012 against an IDF soldier accused of hurting a Palestinian, and that followed an investigation that had opened in 2011.
• The absence of an MPCID base in the West Bank led to only six Palestinians managing to submit their complaints directly to the MPCID in 2012. The others had to seek the help of various intermediaries such as human rights organizations and the Israel Police.