Opinion - Sidi Bouzid : la portée d’un fait divers

Il y a quelques jours un drame survint dans la ville de Sidi Bouzid.

Mohamed Bouazizi, un jeune diplômé de l’Enseignement Supérieur au chômage, âgé de vingt-six ans s’est immolé par le feu devant la bâtisse du gouvernorat.

La raison de cet acte de désespoir extrême et ultime ?

Ce jeune de vingt-six ans, au chômage depuis quelque temps, et manifestement sans ressources familiales, est devenu marchand ambulant clandestin. Il a eu affaire à la police municipale au moins à une reprise sinon deux. Il avait voulu contacter des responsables au siège du gouvernorat. Il n’a pas pu le faire. La vie s’est assombrie et lui est parue sans horizon possible. Il a choisi la pire des solutions, s’immoler par le feu pour exprimer son mal-être et son désespoir total.

La ville était en émoi. Des manifestations spontanées de dizaines de jeunes ont eu lieu, des locaux symboliques et administratifs ont été visés. Heureusement que l’intervention avisée des forces de l’ordre a évité le pire, et le calme est revenu à la ville, même si les esprits sont encore sous le choc.

Les autorités locales ont vite secouru la victime et il est actuellement sous soins intensifs dans l’Institut des grands brulés de Ben Arous.

Que peut-on retenir de ce fait divers tragique ?

1- Tout d’abord qu’il est malhonnête d’instrumentaliser le malheur des gens pour des calculs politiciens sans envergure. Les malheurs individuels et collectifs ne sont l’apanage d’aucun pays et ne sont imputables (au sens de la responsabilité juridique) à aucun système de gouvernement.

2- Il n’empêche que les faits divers de ce type nous disent quelque chose sur notre société qu’il faut savoir écouter et analyser. D’immenses efforts sont faits actuellement en Tunisie en faveur de l’emploi, pour preuve le taux de chômage qui a été ramené de 13,3% à 13% pour cette année. Cependant la réussite quantitative de notre système éducatif (de plus en plus de jeunes accèdent à l’Enseignement supérieur et voient leurs études couronnées de diplômes) a fait que le taux de chômage chez les jeunes diplômés (18%) soit nettement supérieur à celui de la moyenne nationale. Il en résulte un paradoxe curieux : un jeune diplômé de l’Enseignement supérieur a 30% de chances de moins d’accès au marché de l’emploi que la moyenne des Tunisiens. Cela se vit douloureusement chez les 120.000 chômeurs diplômés, dont un nombre important le sont de longue date et dont plus du tiers sont quasiment inemployables sans passer par une nouvelle formation. Actuellement les études ne sont plus la planche de salut et cet ascenseur social qui fonctionnait merveilleusement bien jusqu’à il y a une dizaine d’années est en panne actuellement. Certes cette situation est temporaire et elle présente, sur le moyen terme, des atouts supplémentaires pour la Tunisie, mais il n’empêche qu’au jour d’aujourd’hui l’avenir n’est pas rose pour un nombre important de notre jeunesse.

3- Le communiqué officiel sur cette affaire fait état des efforts publics d’investissement dans le gouvernorat de Sidi Bouzid. De cela, les gens de bonne volonté n’en doutent point. Seulement les régions de l’intérieur du pays ont un tel déficit de développement, dû à une histoire séculaire, que les efforts immenses des pouvoirs publics ne donneront leurs pleins effets que dans deux ou trois décennies.

4- Les statistiques et les chiffres c’est extrêmement important mais c’est le ressenti des gens qui est fondamental pour eux. Que la plupart des indicateurs de notre développement économique et social sont au vert est une vérité bien établie, mais ce n’est pas cela que ressentent un certain nombre de nos compatriotes. C’est un peu comme l’histoire du réchauffement climatique. La moyenne de la température de la terre augmente, mais allez dire cela aux Européens qui sont en train de vivre l’un de leur hiver les plus durs ! Il en va de même à l’échelle du progrès d’une société. Les couches populaires dont les enfants sont les plus frappés par le chômage, même quand ils sont diplômés, ne perçoivent pas le progrès social chanté et louangé tout au long de la journée par les médias officiels.

5- Ces facteurs, de fond, qui expriment les mutations d’une société émergente doivent nous inviter à changer de discours médiatique et d’approche politique et psychologique de la précarité dans notre société.

Tous les médias de la presse écrite et de l’audiovisuel privé ont fait de la libération du jeune Montassar leurs Unes et des moments forts d’antenne. Cela se comprend et se justifie, car le fait divers est l’élément fondamental d’une information de proximité, même si on n’a pas beaucoup réfléchi sur la signification de ce nouveau type de criminalité dans notre pays. Quant au tragique fait divers de Sidi Bouzid, rien ! Silence radio ! Alors que l’aspect émotionnel, cherché par les médias, est aussi fort sinon plus dans ce cas de figure. Pourquoi cette attitude à la limite du mépris, pour cet enfant de la Tunisie qui n’a pas su maîtriser son malheur et son désespoir. Cela dit bien des choses sur la défaillance de notre système médiatique à être à l’écoute des petites gens quand ces malheurs touchent, pense-t-on, à la sphère du politique.

Le jeune qui s’est immolé ne l’a pas fait pour protester contre la politique de l’Etat, et même s’il l’avait fait dans ce sens cela justifie-t-il le silence des médias ? Ne disons-nous, nous tous, par là que le malheur et parfois le désespoir des Tunisiens qui n’arrivent pas ou plus à s’en sortir ne nous intéressent pas ? Voilà encore une occasion où nos médias ont totalement échoué pour retrouver une part de leur crédibilité perdue.

Que va penser de nous le lecteur lambda quand il découvre sur nos colonnes ce mardi 21 décembre la mise au point officielle sur ce drame, mais auparavant aucune information n’a filtré sur ce qui s’est passé à Sidi Bouzid.

On n’est plus dans les années soixante. La parabole et l’internet ont changé radicalement la donne de l’information. Dieu merci. Ne laissons pas à Facebook et autres chaines satellitaires l’exclusivité de parler des problèmes qui devraient être traités en premier lieu par nos propres médias. Ne crions pas à l’instrumentalisation quand nos médias sont, eux défaillants.

6- Le président Ben Ali n’a cessé de montrer, depuis son accession à la magistrature suprême, sa profonde sollicitude pour tous les enfants de la Tunisie et surtout pour ceux qui sont dans la misère ou le malheur. Les pouvoirs nationaux et locaux doivent faire de cette sollicitude leur devise première en étant davantage plus à l’écoute des citoyens les plus démunis afin d’anticiper les situations de crise. Il est incontestable que la police municipale de Sidi Bouzid n’a fait qu’appliquer la loi en interdisant l’installation d’un vendeur à l’étalage non agréé. Mais il y a la loi et la manière de l’appliquer. La police municipale, police de proximité par excellence, ne doit pas oublier que les milliers de vendeurs à la sauvette sont d’honnêtes citoyens qui cherchent à gagner leur vie à la sueur de leur front. Le rappel à l’ordre doit se faire avec humanité en cherchant des solutions de conciliation, tout en préservant scrupuleusement la dignité de ces pauvres gens. Je suis persuadé que les policiers de Sidi Bouzid, eux-mêmes enfants du peuple, vivent très mal ce tragique incident. Ils n’y ont aucune responsabilité juridique. Mais dans la vie il n’y a pas que les lois. Il y a aussi ce souci de l’autre et cette gentillesse qui est l’une des facettes de la noblesse de l’âme. Les gens de Sidi Bouzid et tous les Tunisiens prient pour que Mohamed Bouazizi se rétablisse avec le moins de séquelles physiques et morales et que cette tragédie ne se reproduise plus. Nous aussi.

Par: Zyed Krichen: le directeur de la rédaction du magazine Réalités d’où est extraite cette tribune.

Global boycotts of Israel intensify after bloody Flotilla attack

Israel's bloody attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla on 31 May killing at least nine and injuring dozens of activists carrying humanitarian aid to the blockaded Gaza Strip, has already intensified global actions for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel until it respects international law and human rights, including endorsement by major trade unions in several countries.

The Gaza Freedom Flotilla was on an honorable, peaceful mission in solidarity with the Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip, challenging the Israeli-imposed blockade that has deprived them of basic necessities and the ability to travel outside their densely populated enclave for four years.

In response to the attack, civil society movements around the world organized protests in dozens of cities. In the Arab world, 285 civil society organizations united around a statement condemning the crime committed against the relief convoy, demanding an end to the blockade and the turning over of Israeli war criminals to international justice. In Palestine, the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions National Committee (BNC) declared 5 June 2010 an emergency Global BDS Day of Action, the 43rd anniversary of the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

The BNC called for increased pressure on governments to start implementing trade sanctions and arms embargoes, and asking trade unions to refuse to handle Israeli goods. The Swedish Port Workers Union decided to blockade all Israeli ships and cargo to and from Israel effective from midnight 15 June to 24 June. The union's chairman Bjorn Borg told media that it is unclear how many vessels would be affected, but that the most frequent cargos coming from Israel were fruit, while those going to Israel were often industrial products from Sweden.

The South African Transport and Allied Workers Union (SATAWU) also responded immediately. The union appealed for "an escalation of the boycott of Israeli goods and call[ed] upon our fellow trade unionists not to handle them." And, citing the lead of Swedish dockworkers, called on its own members "not to allow any Israeli ship to dock or unload in any South African port."

Also in South Africa, the South African Municipal Workers Union (SAMWU) decided, by a unanimous vote of its Central Executive Committee on 4 June, to "immediately work towards" making every municipality in South Africa "an Apartheid Israel free zone" by ensuring "that there are no commercial, academic, cultural, sporting or other linkages whatsoever with the Israeli regime." ("SAMWU Declares, Every Municipality an Apartheid Israel Free Zone!," 4 June 2010). UNITE the largest union in the United Kingdom voted unanimously at its conference in Manchester "to vigorously promote a policy of divestment from Israeli companies" and promote boycott of Israeli goods and services "similar to the boycott of South African goods during the era of apartheid" ("Unite votes to boycott Israel," The Jewish Chronicle, 4 June 2010).

The UN Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Richard Falk, also expressed his support for BDS against Israel for its "murderous behavior."

Roar Flathen, chairman of the largest Norwegian trade union federation (LO) responded to Israel's Flotilla massacre by calling on the Norwegian State Pension Fund, the third largest in the world, to divest from all Israeli companies, and demanded the recall of the Norwegian ambassador to Israel. Norwegian pension funds had previously announced divestment from certain Israeli arms companies.

Following the attacks opinion polls in Norway show a major increase in support for BDS. The number respondents planning to boycott Israeli products had increased from 9.5 to 43 percent. Norwegian minister of education and leader of the Socialist Left Party, Kristin Halvorsen, called for an international boycott of arms trade with Israel following Norway's existing policy.

There is also an intensification of the sporting boycott as Swedish young footballers refused to play in Israel, following a similar decision of the Turkish youth football team who were in Israel at the time of the Flotilla attack but canceled their planned match and returned home.

The Swedish Football Association (SFA) formally requested that European soccer's governing body UEFA cancel Sweden's under-21 match, because they felt morally compelled to do so. However, UEFA did not give in to the request, because there are no UN sanctions in place. SFA chairman, Lars-Ake Lagrell, told Swedish radio that he is not worried about reactions or demonstrations against Israeli players in the return match fixed at Old Ullevi Stadium in Gothenburg on 3 September 2010. But if precedent is a guide their could be large protests: thousands of Swedes protested the Davis Cup tennis match against Israel in Malmo in March 2009.

The civil society response has been accompanied by an unusually strong reaction from governments as well, which may indicate that public pressure is starting to force a change of policy. Denmark, France, Greece, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Egypt, and South Africa among others summoned Israeli ambassadors to express their condemnation of the attack. Due to "unforeseen circumstances," Israel's ambassador to Ireland postponed a planned appearance before the parliamentary foreign affairs committee which wanted not only answers about the Israeli actions, but also to question him about Israel's intentions concerning the Irish-owned ship the Rachel Corrie which is still en route to Gaza with humanitarian aid and several prominent peace activists aboard, including Irish Nobel Peace Prize winner Mairead Maguire.

Meanwhile, Greece suspended joint military exercises with Israel and postponed a visit by Israel's air force chief. Turkey withdrew its ambassador from Tel Aviv, and its deputy minister, Bulent Arinc, canceled three joint military drills. On 3 June, the energy minister announced that Turkey had suspended all energy and water projects with Israel.

Nicaragua responded to the attack with the suspension of diplomatic relations with Israel. The country reiterated its support for the Palestinian people and urged an end to the blockade on the Gaza Strip. South African president Jacob Zuma said in radio interview that if any other country had undertaken action like the attack on the aid flotilla it would be regarded as a pariah. On 3 June, South Africa recalled its ambassador from Israel to demonstrate its strongest condemnation of the attack.

All these actions indicate growing support for the sentiment expressed by Scottish writer Iain Banks who emphasized the need for academic and cultural boycott of Israel. Writing in The Guardian the renowned science fiction author argued that the best way for international artists, writers and academics to "convince Israel of its moral degradation and ethical isolation" is "simply by having nothing more to do with this outlaw state."

Adri Nieuwhof is a consultant and human rights advocate based in Switzerland.

Statement by Richard Goldstone on behalf of the Members of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict before the Human Rights Counci

Human Rights Council 12th Session – 29 September 2009

Check against delivery

Mr. President,
(Madame High Commissioner)
members of the Council,
ladies and gentlemen

My colleagues and I are here today to present to the Council the final report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.

Since the release of the advance version of the report two weeks ago, we have witnessed many attestations of support, but also a barrage of criticism towards our findings as well as public attacks against the Members of the Mission.

We will not address these attacks as we believe that the answers to those who have criticised us are in the findings of the report.

I have, however, to strongly reject one major accusation levelled against the Mission; the one that portrays our efforts as being politically motivated.

Let me repeat before this Council what I have already stated on many occasions:

We accepted this Mission because we believe deeply in the rule of law, humanitarian law, human rights, and the principle that in armed conflict civilians should to the greatest extent possible be protected from harm.

We accepted with the conviction that pursuing justice is essential and that no state or armed group should be above the law. Failing to pursue justice for serious violations during any conflict will have a deeply corrosive effect on international justice.

We accepted out of a deep concern for the hundreds of civilians who needlessly died and those who suffered injury and dislocation of their lives.

We accepted because we believe that the perpetrators of serious violations must be held to account.

We do not claim to be immune from error. After the release of the report we have received a number of comments from people who are sincerely interested in the truth.

We have considered them and where relevant redressed inaccuracies in the final version of the report which is today before you.

We regret that the response to date of the Government of Israel avoids dealing with the substance of the report.

Mr. President

As you all know, the Mission was established in April of this year with the mandate to investigate “all violations of International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law that might have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations that were conducted in Gaza from 27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009, whether before during or after”.

Ambassador Uhomoibhi and I announced the establishment of the team at a press conference in April and he brought the mandate of the Mission before this Council in June.

The mandate of the mission was to look at all parties: Israel; the Palestinian Authority; Hamas, which governs Gaza; and armed Palestinian groups.

Soon after its establishment the Mission was faced with one of its major challenges: the decision of the Government of Israel not to cooperate with it and its implicit refusal to give us access to Gaza, the West Bank and to southern Israel.

We decided not to allow this lack of cooperation to prevent the Mission from discharging its mandate.

The Mission is grateful to the Government of the Arab Republic of Egypt for having facilitated its entry into Gaza through the Rafah crossing.

The Mission also wishes to express its gratitude to many, without whose assistance its task would have been impossible to fulfil.

It would be difficult to name all of them here. We attempt to do so in the acknowledgement section of the report.

We wish, however, to pay our respect to the many civil society organisations, in Gaza, in the West Bank, in Israel and elsewhere, which – often under difficult and challenging circumstances – continue to play a crucial role in upholding the universal principles of human rights.

We would respectfully suggest that this Council should recognize and support these organizations.

The first field visit by the Mission Members was conducted in the Gaza Strip from 1-5 June 2009, during which we held meetings, conducted interviews with victims and witnesses and visited the sites of incidents.

The Members of the Mission were in Gaza again from 26 June to 1 July, during which time we continued our investigations and held the Mission’s first round of public hearings. Mission staff maintained a presence in Gaza until early July.

Members of the Mission also travelled to Amman, Jordan, from 1 to 4 July to interview witnesses and meet with people and organizations from Israel and the West Bank.

As part of its investigation process, the Mission held a second set of public hearings. In the two rounds of public hearings, 38 witnesses, victims and experts gave testimony.

The aim of holding the hearings publicly was to give a voice to those who had direct experiences and expertise that related to the mandate of the Mission.

The Mission reviewed reports produced by various organizations and institutions as well as submissions on matters of fact and law relevant to its inquiry.

The Mission consulted with a wide range of interlocutors. They included victims and witnesses, Palestinian, Israeli and international NGOs, United Nations and other international organizations, community organizations, human rights defenders, medical and other professionals, legal and military experts, authorities and other sources of reliable information relevant to the Mission’s mandate. These interlocutors were both within and outside Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory.

The Mission conducted 188 individual interviews, reviewed over 10 000 pages of documentation and viewed some 1200 photographs, including satellite imagery and video-tapes.

The Mission was supported by an outstanding Secretariat provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). We are grateful to the High Commissioner for providing this support, without which the Mission could not have carried out its mandate.


In making findings of fact, we relied primarily on our own evaluation of the people who spoke to us and from what we saw with our own eyes.

We relied on reports from others where they corroborated the views we had formed.

The exception to that approach was in respect of some facts relating to the West Bank and to Israel in light of the refusal by the Israeli Government to allow us into Israel or to visit the West Bank.

On 15 September the Mission released an advance version of its report.

Mr. President
Members of the Council

Our report is before this Council for its consideration. Allow us, however, to focus the Council’s attention on a number of points.

Let me immediately say that the report reflects the unanimous views of all four of its members.

For practical reasons, the Mission decided for the most part to restrict its fact finding to the period from 16 June 2008 to 31 July 2009. The 16th June 2008 was the date on which a cease fire between Israel and Hamas came into effect.

The Report contains an analysis of 36 specific incidents in Gaza as well as a number on the West Bank and in Israel.

In Chapter XI of the Report, for example we detail a number of specific incidents in which Israeli forces launched direct attacks against civilians with lethal consequences. These were, with only one exception, where the facts establish that there was no military objective or advantage that could justify the attacks.

You will find details of the other 35 incidents in the Report. Some of them relate to the use by the Israel Defense Forces of human shields in violation of an earlier ruling by the Israel Supreme Court outlawing such conduct.

The Mission investigated in some detail the effects on the civilian population in Southern Israel of the sustained rocket and mortar attacks from Palestinian armed groups in Gaza. We detail the suffering of victims and the highly prejudicial effects of these acts on the towns and cities that fall within the range of the rockets and mortars.

The Mission decided that in order to understand the effect of the Israeli military operations on the infrastructure and economy of Gaza, and especially its food supplies, it was necessary to have regard to the effects of the blockade that Israel has imposed on the Gaza Strip for some years and has been tightened since Hamas became the controlling authority of Gaza.

The Mission found that the attack on the only remaining flour producing factory, the destruction of a large part of the Gaza egg production, the bulldozing of huge tracts of agricultural land, and the bombing of some two hundred industrial facilities, could not on any basis be justified on military grounds. Those attacks had nothing whatever to do with the firing of rockets and mortars at Israel.

The Mission looked closely and sets out in the Report statements made by Israeli political and military leaders in which they stated in clear terms that they would hit at the “Hamas infrastructure”.

If “infrastructure” were to be understood in that way and become a justifiable military objective, it would completely subvert the whole purpose of IHL built up over the last 100 years and more. It would make civilians and civilian buildings justifiable targets.

These attacks amounted to reprisals and collective punishment and constitute war crimes.

The Government of Israel has a duty to protect its citizens. That in no way justifies a policy of collective punishment of a people under effective occupation, destroying their means to live a dignified life and the trauma caused by the kind of military intervention the Israeli Government called Operation Cast Lead. This contributes to a situation where young people grow up in a culture of hatred and violence, with little hope for change in the future.

Finally, the teaching of hate and dehumanization by each side against the other contributes to the destabilization of the whole region.


Mr. President
Members of the Council

Let me come to some of the recommendations.

The Mission debated long and hard on whether this was a case, like Darfur, where the Security Council should consider referring the situation both in Israel and Gaza to the International Criminal Court.

The Mission is highly critical of the pusillanimous efforts by Israel to investigate alleged violations of international law and the complete failure by the Gaza authorities to do so in respect of the armed groups. That notwithstanding the Mission came to the conclusion that both Israel and the Gaza Authorities have the ability to conduct open and transparent investigations and launch appropriate prosecutions if they decide to do so.

We therefore recommended that the Security Council should require Israel to report to it within six months, on the investigations and prosecutions it is carrying out with regard to the violations referred to in this Report and any others that may come to its attention.

The Mission recommends further that the Security Council should set up a body of independent experts to report to it on the progress of the Israeli investigations and prosecutions. The committee of experts should similarly report on investigations and prosecutions undertaken by the relevant authorities in Gaza with regard to crimes committed by the Palestinian armed groups.

In both cases, if within the six month period there are no good faith investigations conforming to international standards, the Security Council should refer the situation or situations to the ICC Prosecutor.

The Mission was concerned at the use made by the Israeli army of certain munitions and especially white phosphorous, flechettes and certain heavy metals such as tungsten. Their use is not presently banned by international law.

The Mission has recommended that the General Assembly should promote an urgent discussion on the future legality of the use of these munitions.
As appears from the Report the manner in which those munitions were used in Gaza caused unacceptable and unnecessary human suffering as well as environmental damage – not only in Gaza but probably also in southern Israel. The situations arising from the latter should be monitored by the United Nations.

Since the issue of the advance copy of the Report it has been rejected in vehement terms by the Government of Israel. The call for transparent investigations has been rejected. The Government of Israel wishes to restrict its investigations to secret inquiries by the Military investigating itself. That would clearly not satisfy the legitimate expectations of the many victims of the Israeli military operations.

A word about accountability. It has been my experience in many regions of the world, including my own country, South Africa, that peace and reconciliation depend, to a great extent, upon public acknowledgement of what victims suffer. That applies no less in the Middle East. It is a pre-requisite to the beginning of the healing and meaningful peace process.

The truth and accountability are also essential to prevent ascribing collective guilt to a people. Many people in Gaza deplore the firing of thousands of rockets at civilians in Southern Israel and the terror that it has caused to innocent children, women and men. And many in Israel, Jews and Palestinians, deplore the actions by the Israel Defense Force that caused unjustifiable civilian deaths and injuries on a very large scale. They do not approve of the damage to the food and commercial infrastructure of Gaza that will take many years to repair.

Support for many of the recommendations contained in the Report has come from Gaza, the West Bank and Israel.

People of the region should not be demonized. Rather their common humanity should be emphasized.

It is for this reason that the Mission came to the conclusion that it is accountability above all that is called for in the aftermath of the regrettable violence that has caused so much misery for so many.

The Mission calls upon the HRC to accept the Report and adopt its recommendations.

Mr. President

Now is the time for action.

A culture of impunity in the region has existed for too long.

The lack of accountability for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity has reached a crisis point; the ongoing lack of justice is undermining any hope for a successful peace process and reinforcing an environment that fosters violence. Time and again, experience has taught us that overlooking justice only leads to increased conflict and violence.

In conclusion, may I say that the Mission hopes that the substance of this report will be used to strengthen initiatives for peace in the region. The mission is convinced that the international community must confront the realities highlighted in this report and that by doing so find a meaningful basis for the pursuit of peace and security for all the people of the region. Only in that way will the human dignity and security of these people be realised.

By appointing this Fact Finding Mission, the Human Rights Council raised expectations for action and for justice: we call on the Council and on the international community as a whole to take up our recommendations so those expectations will not have been raised in vain.

Thank you.

Geneva, 29 September 2009

Human Rights Council considers two major reports on the Gaza conflict

The Human Rights Council at its Special Session in January requested that the UN Human Rights Chief report regularly on the “Grave Violations of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly Due to the Recent Israeli Military Attacks against the Occupied Gaza Strip”. The Special Session of the Council was convened in response to Israel’s military operation in Gaza. This first report from the High Commissioner has as its main focus the impact of the conflict on civilians and respect for international humanitarian law and international human rights law by all the parties involved.
In her presentation to the Council, High Commissioner Pillay urged an end to the impunity for human rights violations. She said the international community must ensure that any solution to the impasse is anchored “in international law, in particular international human rights and humanitarian law, including the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice.”
The High Commissioner’s report notes significant prima facie evidence of gross violations of international human rights law and serious breaches of international humanitarian law by both Israel and Hamas during the military operations. It recommends that all allegations of breaches – whether through attacks on civilians and civilian objects in Gaza or indiscriminate rocket attacks into Israel – be thoroughly investigated by credible, independent and transparent accountability mechanisms. Pillay also regards the right of victims to reparation as equally crucial.
In her statement to the Council the High Commissioner said conditions on the ground in Gaza continue to deteriorate. “With very few exceptions, Gaza’s one point five million inhabitants are trapped. They cannot exit the 45 kilometre long strip.” Specifically, Pillay referred to; “the almost unbearable curtailment of Gazans’ right to work, their right to access to water, food, adequate housing and education, and their entitlement to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. These conditions impair the life and dignity of the people of Gaza.”
The second report before the Council also follows from January’s Special Session. Justice Richard Goldstone led the UN Fact Finding Mission in Gaza after the Council resolved “to dispatch an urgent, independent international fact-finding mission… to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law”.
In his statement to the Human Rights Council, Justice Goldstone noted that the Government of Israel has a duty to protect its citizens. However, he said, “That in no way justifies a policy of collective punishment of a people under effective occupation, destroying their means to live a dignified life and the trauma caused by the kind of military intervention the Israeli Government called Operation Cast Lead. This contributes to a situation where young people grow up in a culture of hatred and violence, with little hope for change in the future.”
The Mission reported evidence indicating serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel during the Gaza conflict, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity. The Mission reported too that Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity, in their repeated launching of rockets and mortars into southern Israel.
“The teaching of hate and dehumanization by each side against the other,” Justice Goldstone told the Council, “contributes to the destabilization of the whole region.”
The Fact Finding Mission has recommended that the Security Council require Israel to report to it within six months, on the investigations and prosecutions it is carrying out to address the violations described in the Report. It recommends too, that the Security Council establish a committee of experts to report on the progress of investigations and prosecutions by both Israel and the relevant authorities in Gaza.
“The lack of accountability for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity has reached a crisis point,” Justice Goldstone told the Council. “The ongoing lack of justice is undermining any hope for a successful peace process and reinforcing an environment that fosters violence.”
The High Commissioner said Justice Goldstone’s report and recommendations have her full support; “The prevailing impunity for human rights violations in the Middle East conflict must end.
“Such impunity encourages and engenders the perpetuation of abuse. Bringing perpetrators to account is not only necessary to ensure justice and protection to the affected populations, but also to enhance prospects of peace in the region.”
29 September 2009

Darfur?

Darfur is a region about the size of France located in Western Sudan. A little over half of the six million people who live there are black Africans while the rest are Arab. It is a region that has faced severe underdevelopment and neglect from the central government.
In early 2003, two loosely allied rebel groups began a rebellion in Darfur, Sudan calling for the redress of social and economic grievances and demanding greater political power. Sudanese authorities saw the rebellion as a threat to the viability of the entire country, fearing other neglected regions would similarly rise up and demand larger degrees of autonomy. Thus, the government decided to respond by carrying out a deliberate policy of extermination against the African tribal peoples of Darfur, Sudan from which the rebels are drawn.
A large Arab militia known as the Janjaweed has been the main group employed by the government to implement this policy of genocide in Sudan. They are armed by the government and sent into various African villages where they proceed to kill civilians of all ages, burn down houses, destroy crops and livestock, carry out mass executions, target vital infrastructure, and commit wide-scale rape. Reports coming out of the region speak regularly of such brutal acts as men being chained together and thrown into burning huts, women being raped in front of their loved ones, and children being kidnapped from their families. To date, over 400,000 people have died as a result of the Sudan genocide campaign and 2.5 million have been internally displaced.
Despite the denial of involvement with such crimes by the Sudanese government, the facts show that high ranking officials are coordinating the Sudan genocide. Sudanese intelligence forces are known to be in close communication with the militias and air force planes regularly conduct bombing raids on villages and fleeing civilians prior to Janjaweed invasions. In July of 2004, Human Rights Watch released a report revealing internal government documents showing that the central government both armed and coordinated the Janjaweed to carry out the Sudan genocide. In addition, the government has gone to great lengths to make sure that no news reporters or humanitarian personnel are allowed into the villages being targeted in Darfur.