^* This Report was written by Hassan Jabareen, Marwan Dalal, Rina Rosenberg and Suhad Bishara of Adalah. Adalah wishes to thank llan Saban, Haifa University, Faculty of Law; Dr. Hatim Kana'neh; Yosef Jabareen; Orna Kohn, Advocate; Association for Civil Rights in Israel; Dr. Hala Hazzan and Muhammed Dahleh, Chairperson of Adalah for presenting this Report to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Only the citations have been amended in order to accord with the standard used throughout the Year- book. Footnotes marked by an asterisk have been added by the editor. Reproduced with permission from Adalah.

^* Established pursuant to Section 8 of the International Convention on the Elimination ofAll Forms of Racial Discrimination, Jan. 4, 1969, 660 U.N.T.S. 195. -ed. ¹ STATE OF ISRAEL, THE COMBINED SEVENTH, EIGHTH AND NINTH PERIODIC REPORTS OF ISRAEL CON- CERNING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION. (1997) CERD/C/294/ADD.1 [hereinafter Israel's Report] - ed. ² See CENTRAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS, THE STATISTICAL ABSTRACT OF ISRAEL, 1996 (1996) in which it is noted that the Arabs in Israel constitute 19.03% of the total population, numbering 1,069.5 (thou- sands) of 5,619 (thousands). This figure includes Arabs who live in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, who have residency status but are not citizens of Israel. ³ See IAN LUSTICK, ARABS IN THE JEWISH STATE (1980). ^* G.A. Res. 181, UN GAOR, 2nd Sess.

⁴ I A_HRON BARK, THE INTERPRETATION OF LAw 38 (1994). ⁵ Noam Chomsky, Foreword to S_ABRI J_IRYIS, THE ARABS aa ISRAEL (1988). ^* Adalah's questions and sections of the Convention are not reproduced, herein.

^* Matriculation exam. - ed.

^* The Harari Resolution, 1951. See KIt_ETZmEa, infra note 8, at 7. - ed.

⁶ In 1995, the legislature amended the Equal Opportunity in Employment Law, 1988, 1240 S.H. 38 one of the labor laws which prohibited all forms of discrimination. It is true that the law is consid- ered progressive, however, it applies only to cases of discrimination in accepting applications in employment, and there is no positive decision taken by the Labor Courts against the discrimination of Arabs in Israel regarding this subject. Furthermore, the Government offices themselves still dis- criminate tremendously against Arabs in the employment field. See infra, Section XII. Social, Eco- nomic and Employment Rights, text accompanying notes 128 to 134. ⁷ See Women's Equal Rights Law, 1951, 82 S.H. 248; Equal Opportunity for Disabled, 1998, 1658 S.H. 152 statute passed February 1998; Section 1 of The Insurance for Official Health Law, 1994, 1469 S.H. 156 which provides equal access for health services. ⁸ See David Kretzmer, The New Basic Laws on Human Rights: A Mini Revolution in Israeli Constitu- tional Law?, 26 IsR. L. R_Ev. 242 (1992). ⁹ See Karp, The Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom, History and Power Game, 1993 M_1SHPAT Umimshal 342. ^l0 See I_SRAEL'_S REPORT, supra note 1, at 6, 7. ¹¹ D.K. (1992) 1532.

¹² See Justice Or in Hofert v. Yad Vashem, 38(3) P.D. 353 (HC 1992); Justice Matza in Shdulat Han- shim v. Israeli Government, 38(3) P.D. 526 (HC 1994); and Justice Barak in El Al v. Danilovitch, 38(5) P.D. 749 (1994). ^{1 3} See the opinions of Justices Hechin and Zameer in Mercaz Shilton Mikomi v. The Chairperson of the Knesset, 50(3) P.D. 485 (HC 1995); and Justice Zamir in Shdulat Hanashim, 38(3) P.D. 526 (HC 1994). ¹⁴ Barak, supra note 4, at 332-334. ¹⁵ Id. at 332.

16 Id. at 338. ¹⁷ See Ilan Saban, The Effect of the Supreme Court on the Status of the Arabs in Israel, 1996 M_lSHPAT UMIMSHAL 541. ¹⁸ See The Musical Festival in Abu Gosh v. The Educational Ministry, 25(2) P.D. 821 (HC 1971); Bourkan v. Minister of Finance, 32(2) P.D. 800 (HC 1978); Wattad v. Minister of Finance, 38(3) P.D. 113 (HC 1983). See also Avigdor Feldman, The Democratic State v. the Jewish State: Space Without Places and Time Without Continuity, 19 I_YOUtrt M_ISHPAT 717 (1994-95).

^* Jewish students who study religion. - ed. ¹⁹ See Wattad v. Minister of Finance, 38(3) P.D. 113, 115-123 (HC 1983). ²⁰ See I_SRAEL's REPORT, supra note 1, at 5. ²¹ See Bourkan, 32(2) P.D. II 800 (HC 1978). ^* THE STATE C_OMPTROLL_ER'_S REPORT, P_UB. No. 46, 3E>2-3EE> (1996). - ed. ²² See Agbariah v. The Minister of Education, 45(1) P.D. 222 (HC 1990). In 1991, the Government repeated this policy and the petitioners again brought the case which was dismissed, Agbariah v. The Minister of Education, 45(5) P.D. 742 (HC 199 1). ).

²³ (HC 99) (unreported). ²⁴ Re'em Contracting Engineers Ltd. v. The Municipality of Natseret Illit, 47(5) P.D. 189 (HC 1992). See IS_RAEL'S REPORT, supra note 1, at 6-9. ²⁵ Re'em Contracting Engineers Ltd. v. The Municipality of Natseret Illit, 47(5) P.D. 189, 215 (HC 1992). ²⁶ See supra text accompanying notes 6 to 16.

²⁷ See Amir Gilat, There Is a Double Chance for an Arab to Go to Prison, Ma'ariv, January 13, 1998, at 14. Z^g Id. ²⁹ See Haj Yahia et al., The Function of the Majesty Court on Minorities in Israel, 1996 PLILIM 151. 1.

³⁰ See Y_AIEL H_ASSIN, HivRA U_RVAHA (1997); Our Kishti, Different Justice for the Two People, Ha'aretz, July 28, 1997, at 132. ³¹ See Kishti, supra note 30. ³² The State of Israel v. Ashgoyev, (unreported, April 1988 D.C. (T.A.)). ³³ See e.g., Haim Ganz, How Much Is the Murder of an Arab Worth?, 13 1^yoNi Mtst-IPnT 5, 5-7 (1988) and Professor Feller's critique at 13 IvoNt MISHP_AT 231 (1988). ³⁴ See Uri Shtruzman, The Real and Imaginary Equality of the Law, 125 Hwot�tw 20, 20-27 (1996) where the author argues that it is morally and socially unacceptable to count on the votes of Arab Knesset members on questions of the existence of the State of Israel. Following the conviction and the sentence, both Ashgoyev and the Attorney General filed an appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court accepted the appeal of the Attorney General, vacated the sentence imposed by the District Court, and re-sentenced the defendant to three years imprisonment followed by a two year conditional discharge. See The State of Israel v. Ashgoyev, 42(2) P.D. 361 (Cr.A. 1988).

³⁵ In Hebrew, the term "Israel's heritage" means the "Jewish heritage" only. It differs when the term is "Israeli heritage" or "Israeli citizens' heritage." ³⁶ Ahron Barak, The Legal Acdvism, Interpretation, Lacuna and the Law Developing, 19 Hnriz�.rr 267 (1990); Prookatchah, The Foundation Act, 10 l^youni M_JSHPAT 145 (1984); Handels v. Kupat Am Bank, 35(2) P.D. 785 (HC 1984); Ahron Barak, The Lacunae in Law and the Foundation ofLaw Act, 20 M_ISHPATIM 282 (1991); Tadiski, The Abolishment of Section 46 of Palestine Order - in - Council, 8 MISHPATIM 180 (1977). ³⁷ The Law of Return, 1950, 51 S.H. 159. Section 1 provides that: "Every Jew has the right to immi- grate to IsraeL" Subsection 4A(a) provides that: "The rights of a Jew under this Iaw ... shall apply to the child and grandchild of a Jew, to the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of the child and grandchild of a Jew, except for a person who has been a Jew and has converted his religion voluntarily." ^3g Israel's argument is that the Law of Return deals with the immigration policy of the State, and there- fore it has nothing to do with the rights of the Arabs in Israel. The validity of this argument in a sep- arate context is irrelevant, this Report will focus only on the effect of this law within Israel. It is important to mention that some Israeli scholars argue that the Law of Return does not discriminate against any group; rather it privileges members of one group, the Jewish people, which is a privilege not granted to the minority, but to the majority. This argument - that a law is not discriminatory because it privileges any group, including the majority group, instead of discriminating against any group - is invalid. Using this logic, the meaning of the equality principle would be insignificant, and the tyranny of the majority would be considered non-discriminatory towards a minority group.

³⁹ See Badr v. The Minister of Police, 8 P.D. 970 (HC 1954); A. R_UBINSTEIN, THE CONSTITUTIONAL L_AW OF ISRAEL, 888-889 (4th ed. 1996). ⁴⁰ al_Badawi v. The Military Governor of Galilee, 5 P.D. 1241 (195 1). ). ⁴¹ Abu Ayash v. The Military Governor of Galilee, 6 P.D. 221 (1951).

⁴² Section 3A states: "A person born before the establishment of the State is entitled to Israeli citizen- ship if the following five conditions are met: I. he did not become an Israeli citizen under any other provision of the law; 2. he was a Palestinian citizen before the establishment of the State; 3. on 14th July 1952 he was a resident of Israel and registered in the Population Register; 4. on the day the amendment came into force he was a resident of Israel and registered in the Popu- lation Register; 5. he is not a citizen of a country listed in the Prevention of Infiltration Law." See also R_UBINSTEIN, supra note 39, at 890. 43 _Ru_binstein, supra note 39, at 893. ⁴⁴ D.K.(1989)897. ⁴⁵ It should be noted that in recent months the Ministry of Interior declared that it has changed their policy toward an Israeli Jew who is married to a non-Jew. This declaration occurred during a Supreme Court hearing on a case in which the State refused to register a marriage between an Israeli Jew and a foreign non-Jewish spouse. During the hearing, the Ministry stated that a non-citizen, non-Jewish spouse will not be granted citizenship automatically but after a period of time in order for the Ministry to examine the veracity of the marriage. The Ministry bases its policy on the notion that the goal of the Law of Return is to bring Jews to Israel; not non-Jews. However, this policy is incompatible with Section 4 of the Law of Return. See Stamka v. The Ministry of the Interior, (unre- ported, file number 3648/97, HC).

⁴⁶ See Moustafa v. The Military Governor of the North, 7 P.D. 578 (HC 1953); Awad v. The Prime Minister, 42(2) P.D. 424 (HC 1988). For a discussion concerning the discretion of the Minister of the Interior, see also Kamiel, Absolute Discretion, 29 M_ISHPATIM 227 (1989). ⁴⁷ Under Section 4(a) of the Law of Entry to Israel, 1952, 111 S.H. 354 the Minister of Interior has absolute discretion to grant or deny the permit to enter Israel. ⁴⁸ MI1�1ISTRY OF THE INTERIOR, STANDARDS FOR _A PERMANENT RESIDENCY P_ERmjT-HOLDER TO SETTLE IN ISRAEL, filed in Kamellah v. Minister of the Interior (unreported, file number 3497/97, December 4, 1997 HC). ⁴⁹ Kamellah v. Minister of the Interior (unreported, file number 3497/97, December 4, 1997, HC). ⁵⁰ See R_UBINSTEIN, supra note 39, at 897-904.

⁵¹ Israel's Report lists Section 7(A) of the Basic Law: The Knesset, as a landmark law to comhat racism, and ignores the racist provision of the law discussed in this section. See I_SRAEL'_S REPORT, supra note 1, at 3. 52 D.K.(1985)3899-3900. ⁵³ Ben Shalom v. Central Election Committee, 43(4) P.D. 221 (HC 1988) reprinted in 25 1_SR. L. R_Ev. 219 (1991). Israel's Report mentions the Ben Shalom case as a landmark democratic case, supra note 1, at 5. ⁵⁴ Ben Shalom, 25 I_SR. L. R_Ev. 219, 275-276 (1991).

55 Id. at 240. 56 Id. at 272. ⁵⁷ DAVID K_RETZMER, THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE ARABS IN ISRAEL, 31 (1990). See also Y. PELED, 3 T_IAORYA O_BIKURT (1993). ^5g Izeskon v. The Registrar of the Parties, 50(2) P.D. 529 (HC 1996) where the Court refused to dis- qualify an Arab party because it asked for full equality for Arab citizens of the State. In 1965, before the enactment of Section 7(A)(1) when no laws existed which limited the right to participate in the election, the Court disqualified the Arab national party which challenged the ideology of the State. The party was disqualified despite the fact there was no evidence submitted to the Court relating to its activities. The Court, in a split 2-1 decision, declared that this party was not allowed to participate in the election process because it threatened the existence of the State. See Yardor v. Central Elec- tions Committee, 19(3) P.D. 365 (HC 1965).

⁵⁹ See Ganem Yaseen v. Yamin Israel, 50(2) P.D. 45 (HC 1995), discussed infra, text accompanying notes 159 and 160. See also Izeskon v. The Registrar of Parties, 50(2) P.D. 529 (HC 1996). ⁶⁰ These lands are managed by the Israeli Land Administration (ILA), a government body. The govern- ing council of the ILA is comprised of government representatives (50%) and representatives of the Jewish National Fund (which may appoint a member of the Jewish Agency). See The Israel Land Administration Law, 1960, 312 S.H. 56. ⁶¹ Two other laws enacted and used by the State to acquire land are: (1) The Law of the State's Proper- ty (1951), which provides that all property, previously belonging to the British Mandatory, now belongs to the State; and (2) The Land Ordinance (The Acquisition of Land for Public Purposes), 1943, (1943) Formal Journal, Supplement No. 1, at 32, which authorizes the Government to confis- cate private land for minimal compensation. ⁶² See Habab v. The Absentees' Property Guardian, 10 P.D. 912 (C.A. 1954) in which the Supreme Court of Israel rejected Mr. Habab's claim that he was wrongly considered as an absentee, and that his land was thus improperly in the control of the Absentees' Property Guardian. The Court stated that the Guardian is not a trustee of the absentees and that he had no duty of care toward the absen- tees, as they are regarded as foreign enemies who may be deprived of their property by the State.

⁶³ On September 29, 1953 an agreement was made between the Absentee's Property Guardian and the Governmental Development Authority. According to the agreement, the property which had been controlled by the Guardian was transferred to the Development Authority. In 1956, the two Govern- ment authorities, the Development Authority and the Absentees' Property Guardian were adminis- tratively unified. See STATE OF ISRAEL, Annul REPORT, 1956, 79 (1956). ⁶⁴ The World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency, and the Jewish National Fund are bodies which had functioned as the leadership and quasi-goverment of the Jews before the establishment of Israel. Their main goal was to fulfill the goals of the Zionist Movement for establishing a Jewish State in Palestine. Those bodies continued to function after the establishment of Israel. ⁶⁵ The Galilee Society, an Arab NGO which seeks equitable health conditions and development oppor- tunities for the Arab minority in Israel, conducted a survey in 1996 concerning the health services in 148 Arab cities and villages. The study yielded the results: (1) emergency health services exist in only 31 locations, while 116 locations lack these services; (2) except for three hospitals in Nazareth, all of which are funded by charities, no hospitals exist in Arab population centers; and (3) the aver- age distance of the closest hospital to an Arab community is over 21 km and the closest emergency clinic is close to 13 km. The Jewish Agency does not provide these services in Arab communities.

⁶⁶ K_RETZMER, supra note 57, at 95. Sewage is a major problem in Arab localities in general, and in the unrecognized villages in particular. The sewage problem, which affects the health status of the com- munity, is due, in large part, to the government's neglect of the general infrastructure in the Arab villages. Raw sewage from Jewish towns, such as Dimona in the Negev, poses an extreme health hazard to neighboring Arab villages, as it inundates stream beds through which residents must cross to reach their work places, their markets, their schools and their health services. Tractor-drawn tank- ers, which bring water to the unrecognized villages for drinking and household purposes, pass through raw sewage streams, a sure beginning step in the transmission of fecal-oral mode of disease and outbreaks of gastroenteritis, hepatitis and parasitic diseases. The Galilee Society's 1996 survey found that only 11 out of a total of 148 Arab communities in Israel had a functioning central sewage system. ⁶⁷ Kaadan v. The Administrative Land of Israel et al. (1995) case still pending in the Supreme Court. 68 Id.

⁶⁹ Four hundred Jewish lawyers attended the conference of the Lawyers' Association in Tel Aviv on February 7, 1946 to condemn the Regulations, Yaacov Shapira, who later became the first Attorney General in Israel, said of the Regulations: "The establishment order in Palestine since the Defence Regulations is unparalleled in any civilized country. Even in Nazi Germany there were no such laws and the Nazi deeds of Mayadink and other similar things were against the code of laws." See H_APRAKLIT, February 1946, at 58-64; BERNARD JOSEPH, BRITISH RULE irr P_ALESTINE 22 (1948) at 222; Sabri Jir^yis, THE ARABS IN ISRAEL 10-12 (1976). ⁷⁰ Lustick, supra note 3, at 137.

⁷¹ See Asslan v. Military Commander, 6 P.M. 134 (C.A. 1951); Asslan v. Military Commander, 9 P.D. 689 (C.A. 1951). See also Dahod v. The Minister ofDefence, 5 P.D. 1117 (HC 1951); Daoud v. The Military Committee ofAppeals for Galilee, 6 P.D. 229 (C.A. 1951); DAVID GROS_SMAN, CO_NVERS_A- _TI_ONS WITH P_ALESTI_NI_ANS IN ISRAEL 210-224 (Farrar et al. eds., 1993).

⁷² The Galilee Society for Health Research and Services, Israel v. The Government of the State of Israel, before the International Water Tribunal (February 1992), reproduced in, Denial of Clean Water Provi- sion to Unrecognized Arab Villages in Israel, 7 SECOND INTERNATIONAL WATER TRIBUNAL 17 (1992). ⁷³ Adalah v. The Health Ministry (File No. 7116/97, HC). ^* The Supreme Court heard the merits of the case in October 1998. At the hearing, the Ministry of Health agreed to establish six new clinics in the unrecognized villages in the Negev, while simulta- neously expanding existing clinics. By order of the Court to set a timetable for implementation, the Ministry represented that three new clinics would be established by March 1999, and the additional three clinics would be established by March 2000 or as soon as qualified personnel could be found to staff the clinics. The Ministry also agreed to immediately begin providing transportation services from the unrecognized villages to the clinics that currently serve them. To ensure that the Ministry comply with its commitments, the Court ordered that a hearing be held in March 1999 to monitor the Ministry's progress. - ed. 74 Id. ⁷⁵ Suuaid v. The Interior Ministry (File No. 3607/97, HC). See also U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, ISRAEL AND THE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES REPORT ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES FOR 1997, 14 (1998). ^. At the final hearing of the matter in late June 1998, Adalah demanded that immediate action be taken by the Ministry to update the regulations and include Husseinya on the list, thus permitting its resi- dents to list Husseinya on their identity cards and provide them with an address. The Court ordered the Attorney General to correct the regulations and include Husseinya as a registered locality by pre- senting the necessary amendment to the Knesset Constitution and Law Committee. In November 1998, the Committee passed the amendment, thus changing the status of Husseinya to that of a regis- tered locality in the records of the Ministry of the Interior. As of January 1, 1999, residents of Hus- seinya can now use the name of the village on their identity cards, marking the first time that Arab citizens have been permitted by Israel to list an unrecognized villagc as their official address. - ed.

⁷⁶ See B_ENNY MORRIS, THE BIRTH OF THE P_ALESTIN_IAN REFUGEE PROBLEM (1988). ⁷⁷ Reudy, Dynamics of Land Alienation, in THE TRANSFORMATION OF P_ALES_TINE: ESSAYS ON THE ORI- _GIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ARAB-ISRAELI CONFLICT 119, 134 (Abu-Lughod ed., 1971). ⁷⁸ The average density among the Jewish majority is 0.98 persons per room, whereas the average den- sity of the Arab minority is 1.63. See CENTRAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS, supra note 3, at 273. ⁷⁹ The registered area of the Arab town of Um-Elfahem before 1948 was 86,000 dunams. Today, the allowed jurisdiction is only 25,000 dunams. Around the town there are 15,000-20,000 dunams pri- vately owned but not used for building purposes because the State has classified them as agricultural lands. See THE ARAB COORDINATING COMMITTEE ON HOUSING RIGHTS, ISRAEL, HOUSING FOR ALL? THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RIGHTS TO ADEQUATE HOUSING FOR THE PALESTINIAN MINORITY IN ISRAEL (1996) [hereinafter ACCHRI]; THE ASSOCIATION FOR Civil RIGHTS IN ISRAEL, ISRAEL HUMAN RIGHTS Focus (1996). ⁸⁰ U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, supra note 75, at 14.

⁸¹ ACCHRI, supra note 79, at 63. ⁸² Ziv Magor, The National Distribution Plan Is Out in the Open, Ha'aretz (Nadlan Supplement), November 9, 1997, at 13. The Government has plans to distribute land freely to towns located on confrontation tines. Although there are Arab towns located on what the Government has defined as confrontation lines, none of them are recognized as being on the line, and thus, they cannot acquire land freely. On the other hand, some newly planned Jewish towns which are not located on confron- tation lines, are recognized as being on these lines and consequently receive land freely from the state. See Ziev Ma'or, The Administration Confirmed Discounts on Ground According to Regions: The Confrontation Is Free of Charge, Ha'aretz, February 11, 1998, at C3. Furthermore, land has been distributed freely by the Government to Jewish settlers in the Negev. This policy is blatantly discriminatory against the Arab Bedouins in the Negev who are engaged in a massive litigation effort against the State regarding disputed lands in the Negev, and particularly considering the Com- pensatory Statute (1980) which granted Arab Bedouins from the Negev only small undeveloped areas on which to live in relation to the large area of land they consider as their own. See Zvi Alush, Hot Land Discovery: The State of Israel Gives Away Free Land, Yediot Ahronot, October 15, 1997, at 39. Furthermore, in 1995 the Land Administrator took a major and economically influential deci- sion (number 727) granting significant compensation only to Jewish farmers in the Kibbutzim and the Moshavim, in exchange for changing the status of the land from agriculture to building. This decision excluded Arab farmers from receiving the same compensation as Jewish farmers through a set of definitions outlined in the decision. ⁸³ _ACCHRI, supra note 79, at 62. ⁸⁴ See S_AM Smtooxn, 1 Ars_ASS AND JEWS rta ISRAEL 17 (1990).

⁸⁵ See The Independence Day Law, 1949, 5 S.H. 10. ⁸⁶ According to the Work Hours and Rest Day Law, 1951, 76 S.H. 204, Section 7(b)(2), allows Mos- lems, Christians, and Druze to choose their rest day in workplaces. ⁸⁷ Section 82 of the Palestine Order-in-Council was left intact after the establishment of the State.

⁸⁸ K_RETZMER, supra note 57, at 22. ⁸⁹ See Festival Abu Gosh v. The Educational Ministry, 25(2) P.D. 821 (HC 1971). ⁹⁰ Justice Barak views Israel as a democratic state based on two principles: the notion of majority rule and the necessary protection of human rights. He also recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, as the State of the Jews, wherever they are, and as a State with values stemming from Zionism and Halachah (Jewish law). III APRON B�, INTERPRETATION OF L_Aw 331(1994). ⁹¹ A few attempts were recently made to publish in Arabic. In January 1994, the State's Civil Services Bureau published civil service employment bids in Arabic in a daily Arabic newspaper. In Decem- ber 1995, the Finance Minister promulgated a regulation providing that a governmental bid should also be published in Arabic. Pursuant to Section 82 of the Palestine Order-in-Council, laws and reg- ulations must be translated into Arabic.

⁹² See Re'em Contracting Engineers Ltd. v. The Municipality of Upper Nazareth et al., 47(5) P.D. 189 (C.A. 1992). In this case, the Court declared a local regulation, which requested each publisher to print at least two-thirds of an ad in Hebrew, unreasonable and void. See supra text accompanying notes 24 to 25. ⁹³ See R_UBINSTEM, supra note 39, at 101. 1. ⁹⁴ See Section 5(b) of the Citizenship Law, 1952, 95 S.H. 146 and supra text accompanying notes 37 to 50. ⁹⁵ Adalah v. The Minister of Infrastructure (File No. 4438/97). ^* At the hearing, held in November 1998, the Supreme Court stated that "Arabic is the language of the land, an official language of the State, and the native language of a large portion of the population," and therefore placing Arabic on national road signs has important symbolic siguificance. The Court order the Attorney General to submit, within thirty days, a timetable according to which Arabic will be added to traffic signs. In early January 1999, the Attorney General submitted a timetable provid- ing that Arabic would be placed on all signs along 4 major national highways within 2 years, but that other proposed deadlines (5 to 7 years to change all existing traffic signs) would remain unchanged. The Attorney General's proposal was rejected by Adalah on the grounds that the sug- gested timetable was incompatible with the Court's statement regarding the importance of the Ara- bic language. Adalah filed an expert opinion showing that, based on the information provided by the Transportation Authority, it is possible to include Arabic on all national road signs within 3 years. The Court will hold a hearing on this matter at the end of February 1999. - ed. ⁹⁶ Other communities in Israeli society, specifically one group with a pro-Zionist religious orientation such as the student community at Bar-Ilan University, is provided not only with a forum, but also with a university which supplies their needs.

⁹⁷ Last year, after receiving numerous requests from Arab law students, lawyers and Adalah, the Israeli Bar granted an extension of time for the bar exam for Arab students. The bar exam is given only in Hebrew. ⁹⁸ Letter from the Deputy Minister of Channel 2 to Adalah (December 9, 1996) (on file with Adalah). The letter specifies the number of hours of broadcasting time in Arabic and which programs are sub- titled in Arabic. ⁹⁹ See Ilana Shuhani and Smadar Dunitza-Schmidt, Positions, Stereotypes and Priorities of Jews Towards Hebrew and Arabs Towards Arabic, (1997) (unpublished Tel Aviv University). Israeli Jews consider English to be the most valuable regional language. Another indication of the inferior status of Arabic with Israel is the perception of Arabs that Hebrew, as opposed to Arabic, is the lan- guage necessary for general and financial success in Israel.

¹0⁰ THE STATE C_OMPTROLLER'_S REPORT, P_UB. No. 46, 367-368 (1996). 101 !d. ¹⁰² "Pioneer training" and "striving for agricultural work and handicraft" were part of the values empha- sized by the Zionist Movement in the pre-Israel era and at the time the Law was enacted.

¹⁰³ See A. Shalum, The Basic Guidelines of the Government, Ha'aretz, June 17, 1996, at 6A and David Rudge, The New Government's Guidelines, Jerusalem Post, June 18, 1996, at 3. ¹⁰⁴ See David Rudge, Israeli Arabs Concerned over New Government's Minority Guidelines, Jerusalem Post, June 20, 1996, at 12. In addition, the Education Minister has formed the Educational Values Bureau within the Ministry to promote Zionist and religious values, civic responsibility and commit- ment to the State. The Bureau allocates only 1% of its funds to Arab schools; see A_DVA CENTER, THE BUDGET OF THE EDUCATION MINISTRY (1998). 105 see S_AMI M_ARA'_I, ARAB EDUCATION IN ISRAEL (1978); M_AJID A_L-H_AJ, EDUCATION, E_MPO_WERMENT, AND CONTROL: THE CASE OF THE ARABS IN ISRAEL (1996). ¹⁰⁶ Zionist authors and poets include Bialik, Charnichovshky, Ahad Haam, Agnon, and Rahil. Palestin- ian authors and poets include Mahmoud Darwish, Sameh El-Qasem, Hanna Abu Hanna, Rashid Hussein, Moua'in Bsesso, Ghassan Kanafani, Emile Habibi, Tawfiq Zayad and others. ¹⁰⁷ The majority of the Knesset is comprised of political parties in the Likud-led Govemment's coali- tion. ¹⁰⁸ It is not difficult to conclude from the information provided that one of the State's goals is to control the education of Arab students. Further support for this conclusion is the fact that since the establish- ment of the Israel, all Arab teachers have been required to obtain security clearance in order to be hired.

¹⁰⁹ See, THE STATE C_OMPTRO_LLER'_S REPORT, supra note 100, at 363-364. ¹¹⁰ Development towns are localities considered by the Government to be weak socio-economically, and thus, the Government provides benefits and preferences to these areas. Despite their low socio- economic status, less than a handful of Arab towns or villages have been designated as development towns. ¹¹¹ In 1997, Adalah filed a petition to the Supreme Court against the Ministry of Education demanding that the Shahar programs be offered in Arab communities. See The Follow-Up Committee for Arab Education v. The Ministry ofEducation (File No. 2814/97, HC). The case is still pending. ¹¹² The Working Group on the Status of Palestinian Women in Israel, The Status of Palestinian Women Citizens of Israel 23 (unpublished, July 1997) (report on file with Adalah). This report was submit- ted to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women.

¹¹³ See CENTRAL BUREAU OF STATISTICS, supra note 2. 114 Id. at Tables 22.9, 22.15. ¹¹⁵ See Khamaisi and Atrash, A Field Study on the Physical Conditions of Arab Schools in Israel, in A REPORT ON THE EDUCATION OF THE ARABS trr ISRAEL (Follow-up Committee to Education Affairs for the Arabs in Israel ed., .1995) [hereinafter FUCAE]. ¹¹⁶ Figures cited in A Study: Half of the Arab Children Who Need Special Education Are not Studying in a Suitable Environment, Ha'aretz, April 11, 1997, at A7 from statistics complied by Bizchut, an Israeli NGO concerned with disability rights. ¹¹⁷ See FUCAE, supra note 115, at 9. ¹¹⁸ See A_DVA CENTER, INSIGHT ON THE BUDGET (1996). ¹¹⁹ A local governmental body, which helps to advance the educational level of the Arab Bedouin popu- lation in the Negev has approved the establishment of a pre-school. Despite the village's existence for decades, the Ministry of the Interior explains its refusal to allow the pre-school to open by stating that the village is illegal.

1²0 See FUCAE, supra note 115. ¹²¹ A_DVA CENTER, DATA ABOUT EQUALITY, HIGHER EDUCATION IN ISRAEL 21 (1997).

¹²² U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, supra note 75, at 9. ¹²³ See B_ARUCH B_RACHA, ADMINISTRATIVE L_AW 170-171, 180-181 (1986). ¹²⁴ Letter from the Ministry of Religious Affairs to Adalah (January 1997) (on file with Adalah). 125 See The Budget Laws of 1990-1998.

¹²⁶ See Adalah v. The Ministry of Religious Affairs (File No. 1276/97, HC). The petition was with- drawn. ¹²⁷ See Adalah v. The Ministry of Religious Affairs (HC File No. 240/98).

^* On December 3, 1998, the Supreme Court rendered reasons in this matter. Although the Court found that the 1998 budget constituted prima facie discrimination against the Arab religious communities in Israel, the petition was dismissed as there was insufficient information for "an examination of the religious needs of each particular community." The Court also ruled that the remedy requested by Adalah, on behalf of the petitioners (i.e. the invalidation of several articles of the 1998 Knesset Bud- get Law), would entail the appropriation, by the Court, of legislative powers, thus exceeding the Court's proper role and its practical capabilites. The Court declined to rule on the question of whether the principle of equality is guaranteed by The Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom (1992), stat- ing that although some justices supported Adalah's position, there was no majority agreement. - ed. ¹²⁸ See Asa'd Ganim, State and Minority in Isræl The Case of the Ethnic State and the Predicament of Its Minority, 21 ETHNIC & RACIAL STUDIES 428, 443 (1998). ¹²⁹ According to Section 19 of the Absorption of Former Soldiers Law, 1994, 1445 S.H. 45, former sol- diers are able to receive benefits for the first five years after discharge from the military. A nine year period is available in which to purchase an apartment. ¹³⁰ See supra note 29, Sections 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 18,.

¹³¹ Regarding the use of military service as a criteria for justifying discrimination against Arabs in Israel, see RuTH GAVISON, HUMAN RIGHTS IN ISRAEL 23 (1985); Ganim, supra note 128, at 433; R_UBINSTEIN, supra note 39, at 301-302. Cf. Gross v. The Educational Ministry, 46(2) P.D. 53 (HC 1991); See also U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, supra note 75, at 13 (mentioning Adalah cases in this regard); and A Released Soldier for Selling Ice Cream, Ma'ariv, July 24, 1997 (relating to Adalah cases). ¹³² Governmental Decision No. 3292. This decision designates a number of Jewish towns, specifically settlements in the Occupied Territories, as national priority areas. ¹³³ See Hagar Lahav, The Good Life in the Settlements, Ha'aretz, February 1 l, 1998.

¹³⁴ See Si_KKuy - THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY, EQUALITY AND INTEGRATION 28 (1997). ¹³⁵ See Arye Carmon, Political Education in the Midst of a National Identity Crisis, in ISRAEL D_EMOC- RACY UNDER STRESS 293, 300 (Sprinzak & Diamond eds., 1993); DAVID Bw.E, POWER AND POWER- _LES_SNE_SS IN JEWISH HISTORY 152 (1987).

¹³⁶ Relly Sa'ar, Survey: 44% ofJewish Teenagers Would Deny Rights to Israeli Arabs, Ha'aretz English Edition, January 20, 1998, at 3. ¹³⁷ Kul Al-Arab, May 30, 1997. See also Al-ittihad, December 4, 1996; Fasl Al-Maqal, December 6, 1996; and As-senara, January 20, 1998. ¹³⁸ The New Government's Guidelines, Jerusalem Post, June 18, 1996, at 3. ¹³⁹ Secular Teachers Don't Want More Judaism, Ha'aretz English Edition, February 23, 1998. ¹⁴⁰ /�DVA CENTER, THE BUDGET OF THE EDUCATION Minister, 1998 (1998). See also Our Kishti, The Public Education Administration Recommends Operating Forty Jewish Educational Centers in the Public System, Ha'aretz, February 12, 1997, at Al to A2.

¹⁴¹ Gaby Zohar, Peled Condemns Arab-Jewish School Initiative, Ha'aretz English Edition, March 1, 1998; Gaby Zohar, Peled Criticized for 'Racist' Remarks, Ha'aretz English Edition, March 2, 1998 in which remarks made by the former Minister MK Micha Goldman appeared. These remarks were critical of MK Peled's comments. MK Goldman stated: The reaction of the Deputy Minister of Education is puzzling and has racist implications. I can- not understand how such welcome activity for strengthening relations and coexistence between Jews and Arabs can hurt new immigrants or religious people. Unfortunately, the Education Min- istry is not only not doing anything to diminish the Jewish-Arab rift, it even rules out and con- demns such a welcome act. ¹⁴² The NRP and the Alternative, Ha'aretz English Edition, February 25, 1998. ¹⁴³ Harsh Criticism in the Knesset Regarding Suggestions to Permit Arab Candidates for Prime Minis- ter, Ha'aretz English Edition, February 3, 1997.

¹⁴⁴ Dan Margalit, When Azmi Bishara Bought a House, Ha'aretz, July 7, 1997, at B1. Racism against Arab citizens is acute in situations in which Arabs seeks to buy or rent homes from private individu- als. More often than not, Arabs are turned away from Jewish home-owners who blatantly tell Arab home-scekers that they will not rent or sell to Arab residents. In October 1997, an attempt was made to set fire to an apartment rented by three Arab-citizen university students in Jerusalem. One month later, a police bomb expert was injured when he touched a bag that has been placed in front of the door of the Arab students' apartment. See WASHINGTON POST, February 5, 1998. ¹⁴⁵ Orit Shohat, Quietly Suffering in rhe Name of Love, Ha'aretz English Edition, February 27, 1998. ¹⁴⁶ See I_SRAEL'_S REPORT, supra note 1, at 25-26. ¹⁴⁷ Beit Hagefen is a local cultural center which receives 50% of its budget from the Haifa Municipality (Haifa is a Jewish-Arab city), and less than 40% from the State. Neve Shalom/Wahat al-Salaam does not receive support from the State but is funded by the local council and receives foreign funds: Interview with the officers of these institutions with Basma Abu Jaber of Adalah (February 25, 1998). ¹⁴⁸ See the file of Re'ut-Sadakah at Adalah office. See also Youth Movement Council v. The Education- al Ministry (unreported, file No. 7142/97, July 26, 1998, HC). At the hearing in February, 1998, the Court commented that even if promoting Zionism is problematic for an organization, it must incor- porate the promotion of army service to fulfill the criteria.

¹⁴⁹ Rabbi Ido Alba v. The State of Israel, 50(5) P.D. 221 (Cr. A. 1995). The only other reported case under Section 144A involved an Arab citizen who was convicted for distributing a pamphlet in sup- port of Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War in 1991. See David Kretzmer, Racial Incitement in Israel, 22 I_SR. Y.B. Hutvt. R_TS. 243 (1992). ¹⁵⁰ Rabbi Ginsburg v. The Minister ofSecurity, 50(3) P.D. 221 (Cr. A. 1996). ¹⁵¹ Id. at 3-4.

¹⁵² See Kretzmer, supra note 149, at 259. ¹⁵³ Kahana v. The Broadcasting Authority, 41(3) P.D. 255 (HC 1987). ¹⁵⁴ Id. at 278-282.

¹⁵⁵ See Kretzmer, supra note 149, at 255. ¹⁵⁶ Kahana v. The Chairperson of the Knesset, 39(4) P.D. 85 (HC 1985). ). ¹⁵⁷ Id. at 93. ¹⁵⁸ Kahana v. Hillel, 40(1) P.D. 393 (HC 1985).

¹⁵⁹ Ganem Yaseen v. Yamin Israel, 50(2) P.D. 45 (C.A. 1995). ^* See supra text accompanying notes 51 to 59. - ed. ¹⁶⁰ See Yardor v. The Central Election Committee, 19(2) P.D. 365 (C.A. 1965).

* This report is an abridged version of a report entitled Crime and Punishment prepared by the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights. Reproduced with permission. Upon learning of the war crimes committed against Egyptian POWs, the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR) began its campaign to commit to trial those involved in these crimes. The EOHR sceks the following: 1. this matter to be put before an international criminal court; 2. an apology issued by the Israeli government for this erimes committed by Israeli troops during these wars; 3. a guarantee that such violations will never occur in future; 4. compensation for the victims of these crimes. Throughout this report, footnotes marked by an asterisk have been added by the Editor. ^* In his confession in 1995, Arye Biro explains that the crimes committed were collective in nature and not isolated incidents. In H_A-_ARETZ, August 17, 1995, Biro stated, "I do not like to say that the call to put me on trial makes me laugh but if I were to be put on trial for which I did then it would be necessary to put on trial at least one-half of the Israeli army which, in similar circumstances, did what I did." He later added, "But maybe a day will come and then I shall add the whole truth to the present version. Until now I have told the truth, but not the whole truth. I did not tell all about the affair. I do this because I am loyal to the brotherhood of fighters. I do not want people to get hurt. I protect them now but maybe soon 1 will start to protect myself and take care of myself." - ed.

^I BECKET, INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW: PRINCIPLES AND DEVELOPMENT 7 (1984) and A_L- ZEMALI, AN APPROACH TO THE INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW 7 (1993). ² H_AMID SULTAN _{ET AL}., INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC L_AW, 761 (4th ed. 1987). ³ S_ALAH A_L-D_IN A_MIR, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE LAW OF ARMED CONFLICTS I I (1976).

⁴ The first principle of the laws of war were found in the umbrella of religions in spite of their differ- ent attitudes towards war. As much as the Old Testament is characterized by cruelty and harshness with enemies, the New Testament is characterized by tolerance and tenderness. However, when Christianity became strong after Emperor Constantine embraced it and made it the official religion of Rome in 313 AD, clergymen began to seek religious justifications for war. This was the begin- ning of the theory of "fair wars" drafted by Saint Augustus and developed by Saint Thomas of Aqui- no. This theory nourished the idea of the pioneers of European international law such as theologians Vitoria and Suarez. It resulted in the atrocities of the eight Crusades, which took place over two cen- turies and, as reported by Arab and non-Arab Christians, caused devastation, damage and killings from which even oriental Christians could not escape. In the eleventh century, a military religious institution appeared. It called itself "Knighthood," which was a characteristic connected to the Cru- sades. The "Knights" formed an organization to fight Muslims. They bestowed themselves with firm qualities based on courage, faithfulness, loyalty and protection of the weak. They formed a class of nobles. Their tradition was confined to them and applied only in the Christian world. Its effects are manifested in the first manuscripts of the Law of European Nations particularly with respect to the law of war. On the other hand, Islamic Law put specific provisions and rules regulating the conduct of states and individuals in time of peace and war. Islamic jurisprudence established a comprehen- sive theory about law of war and Islamic jurist Mohammed Ben Al-Hassan Al-Shibani became the founder of the law of war. See A_L-Z_Etvta,Ll, supra note 1, at 8; Amir, supra note 3, at 9. ^* Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Certain Explosive Projectiles, 18 Martens Nou- veau Recueil (ser. 1) 474, 138 Consol. T.S. 297, entered into force November 29/December 11, 1868. - ed. ^* Project of an International Declaration Concerning the Laws and Customs of War, Brussels, August 27, 1874. - ed. ^* Hague Convention II with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Annexed Regula- tions of 18 October 1907, 36 U.S. Stat. 2227, Gt. Brit. For. St. Papers 1898-1899, at 988. - ed. ^. Hague Convention IV Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Annexed Regulations of 18 October 1907, 36 Stat. 2227, Gt. Brit. Tr. Ser. No. 9, Cmd. 5030 ( 1910). - ed. ^* Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, The Hague 14 May 1954. - ed. ^* Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Bc Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, Geneva 10 October 1980. - ed.

⁵ The following are the four Conventions of 1949: I. Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, 75 U.N.T.S. 31 [hereinafter First Geneva Convention]; II. Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, 75 U.N.T.S. 85 [hereinafter Second Gene- va Convention]; III. Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135 [hereinafter Third Geneva Convention]; IV. Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 287 [hereinafter Fourth Geneva Convention]. The two additional protocols are: Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1125 U.N.T.S. 3 entered into force December 7, 1978 [hereinafter First Protocol]; Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), 1125 U.N.T.S. 609 entered into force December 7, 1978 [hereinafter Second Protocol]. - ed. ⁶ CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS, [1945] C.T.S. 7. - ed.

⁷ First Geneva Convention, supra note 5. ⁸ Second Geneva Convention, supra note 5. ⁹ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5. ¹⁰ Fourth Geneva Convention, supra note 5. > > Supra note 5. 12 A_L-Z_EMALI, supra note 1, at 44.

¹³ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 12, paragraph 1. ¹⁴ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 13. ¹⁵ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 14. ¹⁶ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 15 ¹⁷ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 17. ¹⁸ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 18. ¹⁹ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 19. ²⁰ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 20.

²¹ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 22. ²² Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 25. ²³ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 26. ²⁴ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 27. ²⁵ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 29. ²⁶ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 30. ²⁷ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 34. ²⁸ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 38.

²⁹ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 49. ³⁰ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 52. ³¹ Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 72. ³² Third Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 71. 1. ³³ Fourth Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 32. ³⁴ Fourth Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 31. 1. ³⁵ Fourth Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 33. ³⁶ Fourth Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 34.

³⁷ Fourth Geneva Convention, supra note 5, Art. 27. 38 8 See A_MIR, supra note 3, at 21. 1. ³⁹ See SULTAN, supra note 2, at 821. 1 .

⁴⁰ Kamil Al-Said, Sanctions Resulting from the Violation of Human Rights, in I_NTEtt_NATtoNAt, HUMAN- _ITARIAN SYSTEM AND HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE ARAB WORLD 89 (The Arab Organization for Human Rights ed., 1 st ed.). ^* Nuremberg Rules in Agreement for the Prosecution and Punishment of the Major War Criminals of the European Axis, 82 U.N.T.S. 279, entered into jorce August 8, 1945. ed.

^* Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 78 U.N.T.S. 277, entered into force January 12, 1951. - ed. ^* International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, G.A., Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 UN GAOR Suppl. (No. 16) at 52, UN Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976. - ed. 41 461.L.R. 178.

⁴² Id. at 206. ^* Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Vienna 23 May 1969, entered into force January 27, 1980. - ed. ^* Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Vienna 23 May 1969, entered into force January 27, 1980. - ed.

43 Supra note 11. - ed. 44 Id. - ed 45 Id. - ed. 46 Id. - ed. ⁴⁷ Id. - ed.

^* Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 2I7A (III), UN Doc. A/810 at 71 ( 1948). - ed. ^* International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, G.A. Res. 2200A (XXI), 21 UN GAOR Suppl. (No. 16) at 52, UN Doc. A/6316 (1966), 999 U.N.T.S. 171, entered into force March 23, 1976. - ed. ^* G.A. Res. 39/46, annex 39 UN GAOR Suppl. (No. 51) at 197, UN Doc. A/39/51 (1984), entered into force June 26, 1987. - ed.

^* Gabby Bron, a joumalist, described the incident in the following manner: It was the publication of the claims made by Dr. Aryeh Yitzhaki about what really happened during the Six Day War that caused me to recall what had happened and what I and my comrades had seen during my reserve service. On the third day of that war we saw Egyptian POWs being executed after a "court martial." The explanation given to us was that those killed were "Fedayin" fighters from the Gaza Strip who had disguised themselves as soldiers in order to escape from our forces. I witnessed their executions with my own eyes in the morning of June 8, 1967 in the airport area in El-Arish, Sinai. This was where the headquarters of the brigade commanded by General Israel Tal, in which I had served, were located. On that morning, we heard that hundreds of Egyptian POWs were being held in the headquarters and we had time to go look at them. About 150 POWs were held in an open building serving as a cover for airplanes, surrounded on three sides by high sandbag embankments. They were densely crowded and sitting on the ground with their hands on the back of their necks. ...Every few minutes, the military police took one of the POWs from the prison compound and escorted him to the table. A short conversation, which we were not able to hear, was then conducted. Following it, the POW was escorted by two military policemen to a place behind the building. I followed the procedure. The POW was escorted to a distance of about 100 meters from the building and was given a spade. I watched the POW digging a big pit which took about 15 minutes. Then the policemen ordered him to throw out the spade. When he did so one of them pointed his Uzi gun at the POW inside the pit and shot two short bullet bursts, consisting of maybe three or four bullets each. The POW fell dead. After a few minutes another POW was escorted to the same pit, forced to go into it and was also shot dead. A third POW was brought to the same place and also shot dead. Since the process was repeated a number of times, the grave was 611ed up. I witnessed about ten such executions. The reserve soldiers who heard about what had happened were horrified and about noon, an officer whose identity I cannot recall, came to explain to the reserve soldiers that the men of the Military Intelligence were identifying "Fedayin" fighters of the Gaza Strip who had murdered Jews and dis- guised themselves. At that time of the continuing war, it seemed a reasonable explanation. - ed.

^* Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, G.A. Res. 2391 (XXIII), annex, 23 UN GAOR Suppl. (No. 18) at 40, UN Doc. A/7218 ( 1968). - ed.

⁴⁸ A_MIR, supra note 3, at 3. ⁴⁹ Al-Said, supra note 40, at 95.

_. Control Council Law No. 10, Punishment of Persons Guilty of War Crimes, Crimes Against Peace and Against Humanity, 3 Official Gazette Control Council for Germany 50-55 ( 1946). - ed.

^* Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, G.A. res. 2391 (XXIII), annex, 23 UN GAOR Suppl. (No. 18) at 40, UN Doc. A/7218 ( 1968). - ed.

⁵⁰ A_MIR, supra note 3, at 428.

51 Id. at 429.

⁵² S�TAN, supra note 2, at 300. ⁵³ A_MIR, supra note 3, at 37. ⁵⁴ Articles 129 and 132 of the Third Convention, and 146 and 149 of the Fourth Convention, supra note 16. ⁵⁵ Article 51 of the First Convention, Article 52 of the Second Convention, Article 131 of the Third Convention, and Article 148 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, supra note 16.

^* Principles of International Cooperation in the Detection, Arrest, Extradition and Punishment of Per- sons Guilty of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, G.A. res. 3074 (XXVIII), 28 UN GAOR Suppl. (30A) at 78, UN Doc. A/9030/Add.1 (1973). ed.

⁵⁶ Mohammed Abdel-Moniem Abdel-Khalik, The General Theory of International Crime, 37 (1988) (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Ain Shams University) (on file with EOHR).

^* Statute of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Viola- tions of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, LJN Doc. S/25704 at 36, annex (1993) and S/25704/Add.l (1993), adopted by Security Coun- cil on 25 May 1993, LJN Doc. S/RES/827 ( 1993). - ed. ⁵⁷ Mohammed Amin Al-Midani, The International Court ofJustice ofFormer Yugoslavia, Atias M_AG- AZINE FOR HUMAN RiGHTS 29 (1996). ⁵⁸ Ahmed Sobhi Al-Attar, The Limits of State Jurisdiction to Try Its Nationals for Crimes Committed Out- side Its Territory, in THE Lockerbie CASE AND THE FUTURE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER 237 (1992).

59 Id. at 238.

⁶⁰ A_MIR, supra note 3, at 325. ⁶¹ Mahmoud Hassan Al-Arousi, Extradition of Offenders, 30 (unpublished thesis). ⁶² SULTAN, supra note 2, at 371. 1.

⁶³ Al-Midani, supra note 57, at 25. ^. Charter of the International Military Tribunal (IMT), in Agreement for the Prosecution and Punish- ment of the Major War Criminals of the European Axis (London Agreement), August 8, 1945, 58 Stat. 1544, E.A.S. No. 472, 82 U.N.T.S. 280. - ed.

⁶⁴ Al-Midani, supra note 57, at 38.

⁶⁵ Al-Midani, supra note 57, at 29. See also Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an Inter- national Criminal Court on 17 July 1998.

^* By this resolution, passed 115 in favour to 2 against (Israel and United States) with five abstentions (Australia, Bahamas, Cameroon, Romania and Swaziland), the General Assembly reiterated its call for the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to convene a conference on meas- ures to enforce the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The conference will be con- vened on July 15, 1999 in Geneva. By other terms, the Assembly reiterated its recommendation that Member States cease all forms of support for illegal Israeli activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including Jerusalem, in particular settlement activities. The Assembly also reiterated its demands, as expressed in resolutions previously adopted during its emergency special session (Resolutions ES-10/2 of April 25, 1997, ES-10/3 of July 15, 1997, ES- 10/4 of November 13, 1997 and ES-10/5 of March 17, 1998). Those demands include the immediate and full cessation of the construction at Jabal Abu Ghneim and of all other Israeli settlement activ- ities, as well as of all illegal measures and actions in Occupied East Jerusalem; that Israel, as occu- pying Power, accept the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention on the protection of civilians in time of war to the territories occupied since 1967 and that it cease and reverse all illegal actions taken against the Palestinians in Jerusalem.

^I United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 75, Nos. 970-973. ² Ibid., No. 973.

^* On July 13, 1998, at the 3904th meeting of the Security Council held in connection with the Council's consideration of the item entitled "The situation in the occupied Arab territories," the President of the Security Council made this statement on behalf of the Council.

^* By this resolution, the General Assembly conferred upon Palestine, in its capacity as observer, addi- tional rights and privileges in the Assembly and United Nations international conferences, including the right to participate in the general debate of the Assembly; the right to speak under agenda items other than Palestinian and Middle East issues at any meeting of the plenary; and the right of reply. Palestine now has the right to co-sponsor draft resolutions and decisions on Palestinian and Middle East issues and to raise points of order related to the proceedings on Palestinian and Middle East issues. The sponsors of the draft were Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Comoros, Cuba, Djibou- ti, Egypt, Guinea, Indonesia, Jordan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mauritania, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, Vietnam and Yemen. The PLO was granted observer status by the General Assembly in 1974 (General Assembly Resolu- tion 3237 [XXIX]). In 1988, the Assembly decided that the PLO was entitled to have its communi- cations issued and circulated as official documents of the United Nations (document 43/160A). That same year, the Assembly acknowledged the proclamation of the State of Palestine and decided that the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organ- ization" (document 43/177). Calling the text "the wrong resolution at the wrong time," the representative of the United States said the text undermined efforts to get the peace process back on track and hurt everyone's interests, including those it was most intended to help. Overturning decades of practice and precedent govern- ing the participation of non-Members and observers might lead others to press their claims for enhanced status and disrupt the orderly conduct of United Nations business. Statements were also made by the representatives of Swaziland, Uruguay, Austria, Russian Federa- tion, Canada, Australia, Japan and Nicaragua. Below is a portion of the transcript of the session: Mr. Richardson (United States of America): The General Assembly meets today to debate once more a Palestinian proposal to enhance the status of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Observer Mission in the General Assembly. We will be casting our votes nearly seven months to the day after the General Assembly first considered this issue. At that time, the Assembly wisely deferred the issue on a procedural vote. That was the right thing to do then, and it is the right thing to do now. This is the wrong draft resolution at the wrong time. We have no doubt that most members of this Assembly are sincere supporters of the peace process in the Middle East. They want to see that process moving forward again and are frustrated by the fact that there has been a prolonged impasse. So are we. They want to encourage the parties to make rapid progress on the basis of agreements already achieved. They want to see these negotiations result, at long last, in an agreement that would lead to accelerated negotiations on permanent status. The Unit- ed States strongly endorses this aim as well. No one has been more energetic in the pursuit of an agreement than we. The fact remains, however, that by taking this action the General Assembly will have made it more difficult to accomplish this objective. Focusing on symbols likely to divide, rather than on steps to promote cooperation, will lead us nowhere. Supporting unilateral gestures which will raise suspicion and mistrust between negotiating partners will not take us closer to our goal.

^* continued If this draft resolution is adopted, it will undermine our efforts to get the peace process back on track and will hurt everyone's interests, including those it is most intended to help. Exchanging momen- tum towards real progress on the ground for symbolic progress in this Hall does not strike us as a good bargain. Moreover, if this draft resolution is adopted, it could also set a precedent. By overturning decades of practice and precedent in the General Assembly governing the participation of non-members and observers, others who do not enjoy full member status in the United Nations may well press their own claims for enhanced status. This would have serious repercussions for political relations among Mem- ber States and would have a deleterious effect on the orderly conduct of United Nations business. The Arab-Israeli peace process has come a long way since the Oslo accords were signed in 1993. Given the current stalemate, it may not seem so. But the historic gains of the past several years can- not be ignored. We in this Assembly should look for ways to consolidate those gains and help create the conditions in which the parties will find it easier to move forward. That means, at a minimum, that we should take no steps that could undermine the fragile climate of trust and confidence so nec- essary for the peace process to succeed. A vote in favour of this draft resolution will not contribute to this result and, in truth, may seriously undermine it. That is why we ask our fellow Members to join us in voting "no" on this flawed proposal. Mr. Gold (Israel): Israel opposes the draft resolution on participation of the Palestinian Observer Mission in the work of the United Nations because of both the preambular langnage, which serves as the basis of the draft resolution, and the operative elements proposed. The preambular part seriously misrepresents previous United Nations resolutions. For example, this draft resolution, which is spon- sored by 13 Arab States, makes reference to General Assembly Resolution 181 (11) of 29 November 1947. It is ironic that at that time, 51 years ago, every single Arab State, as well as the Palestinian leadership, rejected Resolution 181 (II). In a statement in the Trusteeship Council on 20 February 1950, Israel's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Abba Eban, underlined the fact that this was not just "the exercise of a legiti- mate right of non-compliance" with a non-binding resolution, but rather "the use of armed force to overthrow the recommendation of the General Assembly." [T/PV.230, p. 8] To come now as a group, insisting on an improvement in Palestinian participation in the United Nations on the basis of a United Nations resolution that they strongly resisted, simply misrepresents the experience of the United Nations in this matter. Further misrepresentation in the preambular part is evident in references to General Assembly Reso- lution 43/177 of 15 December 1988. While this resolution changed the designation of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), it clearly stipulated, in paragraph 3, that this change would take effect "without prejudice to the observer status and functions of the Palestine Liberation Organiza- tion within the United Nations system." Today's draft resolution conveniently overlooks this qualification. Finally, it must be added that reference to the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in parts of the West Bank and Gaza represents a transparent effort to create a political link between this draft res- olution and the status of the disputed territories. The clear purpose of this effort is to affect the out- come of the permanent status negotiations over this territory by abusing the United Nations system. Notwithstanding Israel's reservations about the intentions behind this draft resolution, it must be emphasized that both the preambular and operative parts make clear one central fact: there is no effective change of the status of the PLO in the United Nations. The PLO remains an observer organization in the United Nations system. Still, the attempt to achieve additional rights and privi- leges with the intention of obtaining a symbolic shift in status should be opposed, for it contradicts the bilateral basis of the Arab-Israeli peace process begun in Madrid, and it violates the principles of the Oslo agreements. Israel has been prepared, since the signing of the Hebron Protocol on 15 January 1997, to resume the permanent status negotiations. Israel again undertook this commitment in the Note for the Record, signed by the United States. The PLO has refused to resume these talks, in violation of the Note for the Record. Instead, it seeks to obtain symbolic elements of changed political status by means of

^* continued United Nations resolutions. The international community should deplore these efforts and encourage the parties to resolve their differences bilaterally, at the negotiating table, and not in the General Assembly. In this context it is important to recall the commitment given in writing by PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat to our late Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, on 9 September 1993: The PLO commits itself to the Middle East peace process and to a peaceful resolution of the con- flict between the two sides, and declares that all outstanding issues related to permanent status will be resolved through negotiations. The United Nations has a choice of reinforcing this commitment, or undermining its content and weakening the Arab-Israeli peace process. I call upon Member States to oppose this initiative and thereby strengthen the Arab-Israeli peace process. After the vote, explanations for supporting the resolution were provided by a few of the delegates. Below are excerpts of the statements made by some of them: Mr. Sucharipa (Austria): I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union. In addition, the Central and Eastern European countries associated with the European Union: the Czech Repub- lic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia and Slovenia; and the associated country Cyprus, as well as the European Free Trade Association countries members of the European Economic Area, Iceland and Norway, align themselves with this statement. The General Assembly has just decided to confer upon Palestine, in its capacity as observer, additional rights and privileges of participation in the work of the General Assembly. By doing so, the Assembly has responded positively to a concern of the Permanent Observer of Palestine, who had repeatedly argued that he was experiencing practical difficulties in his daily work at the United Nations. The European Union recognizes the potential for practical difficulties resulting from the fact that nei- ther the Charter nor any text of a general nature codifies the rights and privileges of observers at the United Nations. These rights and privileges have indeed been granted over the decades on a case-by- case basis. This resolution is therefore not regarded by the European Union as creating a precedent. After the General Assembly suspended consideration of this item last December, the European Union had the opportunity to carefully study different modalities on how best to facilitate the practi- cal aspects of the work of the Palestinian observer delegation. In this context, the European Union's aim was to ensure clear formulations and to avoid any ambiguities. Since the text as contained in document A/52/L.53/Rev.2 met these requirements, the European Union was in a position to cast a positive vote. The European Union hopes that, through the imple- mentation of the practical measures as contained in the aunex, the future work of the Permanent Observer of Palestine will be facilitated. Mr. Lavrov (Russian Federation) (interpretation from Russian): The Russian delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution entitled "Participation of Palestine in the work of the United Nations." As members know, this item was the subject of lengthy and difficult consultations among interested countries. This is understandable, as a change in the status of any delegation to the United Nations is no ordinary matter, and requires a carefully considered decision that accords with existing rules, tradi- tions and practices relating to the work of the Organization. Nor can wc fail to be mindful of the fact that in the present very difficult circumstances surrounding the Middle East settlement, the effort of the Palestinians to bring the status of their delegation into line with the serious political changes that have taken place in the Palestinian territories over recent years deserves serious consideration. We appreciate the fact that, during work on the draft resolution, the sponsors showed flexibility and took into account virtually all the comments, advice and amendments that were offered by a number of delegations, including our own. The adoption of this resolution conferring additional rights upon the Palestinian delegation: first and foremost with respect to Palestinian and Middle East issues, it does not in fact contradict that delegation's observer status, and therefore sets no undesirable prece- dent for other similar situations. As we express our satisfaction at this constructive outcome, wc reaffirm our readiness to engage in further cooperation with the delegation of Palestine in the United Nations.

♦ continued Mr. Fowler (Canada): Canada voted in favour of Resolution 52/250 because we believe that it will permit the Palestinian delegation to better participate in the work of the United Nations. It is Canada's view that the resolution adopted today states in precise terms the modalities of granting additional rights and privileges for Palestinian participation as an observer at the United Nations. Negotiations removed some of the difficulties which we had identified in earlier drafts of the text, such as the suggestion that the Palestine Liberation Organization was acquiring rights reserved only for Member States. Canada's policy regarding Palestinian statehood has not changed, and our vote in favour of this reso- lution does not alter that policy. Canada continues to strongly support the Middle East peace process and the negotiations currently under way, which seek the full implementation of the Oslo accords. Mr. Konishi (Japan): Japan shares the grave concern expressed by an overwhelming number of the States Members of the United Nations over the deadlock in the Middle East peace process. We par- ticularly regret the announcement by the Government of Israel of its plan to strengthen its control of Jerusalem by extending that city's boundaries. This unilateral action taken by the Government of Israel may precipitate a crisis of confidence that would destroy the very foundation on which the peace process rests. As a country that has been actively contributing to that process and has continuously played a lead- ing role in providing eeonomic assistance to the Palestinians, Japan urges all parties involved to return to the negotiating table and to act to restore the atmosphere of mutual trust that is the sine qua non for progress in this area. We supported the resolution before us, which provides a more detailed description of the additional rights and privileges conferred on Palestine, in its capacity as observer, with regard to its participa- tion in the sessions and work of the General Assembly than was provided by draft resolution A/52/L.53, which was submitted to the General Assembly in December 1997. On this occasion, my delegation wishes to make two comments. First, from a political perspective, the Government of Japan has no doubt that the efforts most critical to the Middle East peace process are those to be made by the parties most directly involved. The adoption of this resolution must not be permitted to adversely affect those efforts. Secondly, from a legal perspective, the General Assembly has not discussed in the past the additional rights and privileges that are given to observers, such as those we see in the resolution before us. In this connection, the delegation of Japan thinks it might be appropriate for the General Assembly to review, as and when necessary, the rights and privileges enumerated in the annex of the resolution on the basis of the information the Secretary-General will provide in accordance with operative paragraph 2. Following these statements, the Observer of Palestine made the following comments: Mr. A]-Kidwa (Palestine): I thank you, Sir, for presiding over today's meeting and for giving us the floor in order to speak for the last time from this seat. Today is an important day for Palestine and the United Nations, which has dealt with the question of Palestine since its inception. Today, the General Assembly decided to upgrade the Palestinian repre- sentation through the adoption, by an overwhelming majority, of the resolution entitled "Participa- tion of Palestine in the work of the United Nations," in spite of pressures, campaigns and even threats. I would like to begin by expressing gratitude to our Arab family and to friendly States that have sponsored the resolution sinee last December, as well as to friendly States Members of the Organiza- tion of the Islamic Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement, whieh decided, at the ministerial level, to support the Palestinian endeavour in this regard. Without the support of these brothers, sis- ters and friends, we would not have been able today to succeed in our achievement. I would also like to extend our thanks to the States Members of other groups, in particular members of the European Union, with which we worked and exerted efforts to reach an agreement on the text of the resolution, which we believe has great political importance. The support of each State Mem- ber of the United Nations that supported this resolution today is something we highly appreciate and we thank them on behalf of the Palestinian people and the Palestinian leadership. The overwhelming majority that voted in support of the resolution makes us feel proud, strengthens our conviction of

^* continued the justice of our cause, and increases our confidence that right can still be achieved in our contem- porary world. I do not wish to enter into a discussion of some of the views raised today, which we obviously reject. However, 1 would like to note that it is indeed astonishing when a party claims that a certain act constitutes a "unilateral action" at a time when 124 states supported this act. Unilateral actions are those illegal actions which violate international law, United Nations resolutions and binding existing agreements; they are not actions based on international legalities, even if those parties dis- agree with such actions. 1 have said that 1 do not wish to enter into a discussion of some views which we reject, because the first and last answer to these, actually, the decisive answer, is the overwhelming majority of Member States which supported the resolution today. A small victory was achieved for Palestine today and we thank everyone for that. However, we do want to say that it is our hope that our reliance on the resolution adopted today will not last long, as we hope that the United Nations will accept Palestine as a Member State in the near future, maybe, God willing, during the fifty-third session of the General Assembly. That shall be the big victory.

* On 25 March 1999, the European Union issued a statement in support of the peace process and the rights of Palestinians. In its statement, the EU reaffirms its support for a negotiated settlement that would be reflective of the principle of "land for peace." Additionaly, the EU reaffirms its support of the Palestinian right to self-determination, "including the option of a State."

Editor's Note * This report was written in April 1999 by the Independent Judiciary Unit of LAW - Palestinian Society for the Protection of Human Rights and the Environment. The independent judiciary unit examines criminal justice and rule of law issues in the autonomous areas of the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

This abridged report is reproduced with consent of LAW. ¹ Israel-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, September 28, 1995, 8 pal- _ESTINE Y.B. I_NT'_L L. 353 (1994/95). ² Agreement on the Gaza Strip and the Jericho Area, May 4, 1994, 7 P_ALESTINE Y.B. I_NT'_L L. 243 (1992/93). ).

³ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, G.A. Res. 217 ( 1948).

⁴ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dec. 16, 1966, UN Doc. A/6316, entered into force March 23, 1976.

⁵ Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, Adopted by the Seventh Crime Congress, Milan, 26 August - 6 September 1985, endorsed by the General Assembly, G.A. Res. 40/32 (1985). ⁶ Basie Principles on the Role of Lawyers, Adopted by the Eighth Crime Congress, Havana, 27 August - 7 September 1990.