Israel celebrates the Universal Human Rights Day, by breaching Human Rights Law

By Mohammad Zeidan

Director General of the Arab Association for Human Rights

Just as mankind celebrates the International Day for Human Rights, as part of the annual commemoration of the UN resolution which approved the 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights' —one of the most important universal declarations affirming that Human Rights are universal in essence and liability—, respect of Human Rights in Israel this year is in serious decline. Official attempts to marginalize —distress really— these rights have been on the rise, mostly through racist law proposals whose core and premises are against all and every ethic and legal standards laid down and defended by the Universal Declaration.

The fast decline of Human Rights in Israel this year leaves us with a dim panorama. The surprise doesn't only come from the number of violations, but also from the numerous attempts to organize, legalize, legitimize and perpetuate these violations creating racist and distinctive laws. This practical and direct violation of Human Rights lays legal grounds that could leave the door open for political authorities and the Judiciary to violate HR as they wish.

'Human Rights are for every human being, and human beings shall be entitled to them on the simple basis of their humanity.' This is the basic principle in every international pact for Human Rights, specially the Universal Declaration for Human Rights. However, some law proposals and laws already passed by the Israeli Parliament clearly contravene Human Rights keystone and give the impression that Human and Civil Rights exist only for the State to content some citizens, 'good citizens.' Thus, liberties and rights are considered as a grant or a gift that the State awards to its citizens; they are a privilege, not their fundamental rights. Therefore, the State (meaning the Government, the Parliament, and the Judiciary) could now withdraw these rights; to take the “gift” back, if circumstances are no longer politically suitable according to its vision—the current basis of these law proposals.

Because of that, the Parliament has approved during this year a package of laws —some have been passed, most of them are to be approved— that define the concept of 'good citizen,' the one who 'deserves' these rights —from the State's point of view. The limits of this concept have been narrowed so it only fits Jewish/Zionist citizens —those serving in the military or in any other security institution—, leaving Arab nationals of this country separate from the definition set by Israel's political 'generosity.'

Despite the fact that the State of Israel has always had a racist and discriminatory character against the Palestinian minority living in the country and that the political and legal concepts of the 'Jewish State' were laid from its foundation, the last period was characterized by the systematization of this campaign, as well as the delimitation of its goals, as was never done before. Restrictions in the democratic space, the main channel of dialogue about Human Rights, appeared in the form of new definitions for this space and the creation of restrictive conditions and limits concerning its contents. This is the origin of these laws limiting the instruments and the framework of the institutions that would stand for and defend these rights in any democratic system of the world —mainly civil society (pro Human Rights associations) and the Judiciary (the Supreme Court of Justice). Besides, censorship's sword hits the media with fines, in order to prevent them from complying with their duty, i.e. to criticize authorities and denounce their violations.

This year 2011 saw a package of law proposals intended at restricting freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of thought and belief. Among these, the Knesset passed the 'Boycott Law', that prohibits civil society associations, especially those related to Human Rights, from collaborating with the global campaign to boycott economically Israel, which started in many countries to protest against Israeli repressive practices against the Palestinian people under its occupation. Covered by the same principle the 'Nakba Law' was passed by the Knesset last March 2011, in an attempt to control individual and collective memories and to impose its political agenda on all ‘non Jewish’.

Also targeting at restricting Human Rights organizations' freedom were the law proposals to limit the funds donated by international Governments to these organizations. These proposals strengthen the control (already existing) over funding, in addition to some proposals of imposing a tax above 45% on this concession. If these measures are adopted, it would lead to the breaching of the basic regulations that human rights organisations are working in accordance with.

On the other side, Israeli right wing is focusing its efforts on gaining control of the Supreme Court, after achieving control of the legislative and the executive, in order to control all the State organs, with the support of public opinion (not less racist) and the backing of the majority of the Israeli people. These attacks, in the form of law proposals, allow the political apparatus to interfere practically and clearly in the judicial system, through law proposals that would bring the appointment of judges in the Supreme Court under the approval and consent of the Knesset. Moreover, the composition of the committee responsible for appointing the judges will change, as well as the criteria for the appointment of President of the Court, something that will guarantee the presidency of the court to candidates supported by the rightist wing, both in politics and the Judiciary.

In order to complete its ring of power over all the State's organs, the press has also been the target of this attack, so freedom of press can also be restricted. Laws that permanently raise the sword to threaten the press with costly economical sanctions under the argument of 'defamation' are good proof of it. These are directed at silencing local press and preventing it from playing its role as the Fourth Power, the one which controls the legislative and the executive powers, the one acting as a window that defines local and international public opinion about what happens between these two powers.

Just to make this picture even more obvious, some law proposals were presented to widen the scope of the executive organs when announcing the 'State of Emergency', which leaves in the hands of the Government unfettered authority to constrain civilians' liberties and fundamental rights, giving at the same time broad powers to the different Security apparatus when dealing with civilians. This measure would expand the extent of the 'emergency' already declared in the country for 'security reasons', elevating executive authorities' powers above the laws passed by the Knesset itself.

What is happening now in Israel reflects the attempts of the Jewish rightist forces to win control over the guardians of Human Rights and close the door to fundamental liberties, already existing and defined. This is done by gaining control over the Judiciary, the Legislative and the Executive with the assistance of the people, who endorse the supportive atmosphere towards this approach, drawing a dim picture for Human Rights organizations. This situation can never be considered democratic, no matter what Israel tries to sell to the rest of the world, or how hard it tries to embellish it.

We witness here the collapse of all lies about the 'Israeli democracy'. The international community sees now the serious challenges faced by Israeli official and civilian associations, deeply in need of a rapid movement that denounces this reality and portrays Israeli racism, not only because of its practices in the Palestinian Occupied Territories since 1967, but also for its organized, legal and official practices against its Palestinian Arab citizens, practices that contravene Universal Human Rights standards, the very same rights we commemorate on the 'International day for Human Rights.'

Last but not least, this picture should imply that the role of the international community is not restricted to the denunciation of racism. It must make a practical move to change criticism and condemnation into effective actions in order to stop these violations, fight against racism and lay down the rules to respond to them, as dictated by Human Rights Law itself.