Three Preservations on The Corrie Verdict
By: Mohammad Zeidan, General
Director
Arab Association for Human
Rights -HRA
From a human rights perspective, this
verdict highlighted three major issues. These are not restricted to the
specific case of Rachel Corrie, but also display the low status that
international law and principles of human rights have in the Israeli Political
and legal institutions.
The first,
Judge Oded Gershon opened his verdict with an attack on the International
Solidarity Movement (ISM), of which Rachel Corrie was a member. Members of the
ISM travel to the OPT, where they attempt to prevent human rights violations
using their physical presence. The ISM ethos dictates that a civilian and
non-violent presence will, first of all, provide an eyewitness, and second,
that the physical presence of their members will prevent the violation from
occurring in the first place. The verdict stated, “The ISM provided physical,
logistical, and moral support to the Palestinians, including the terrorists and
their families.” Furthermore it said, “This
movement manipulates human rights and moral standards to cover their violent
actions.” By condemning the ISM in this
manner, the Israeli legal system joins the effort to demonize this
international, peaceful presence. This effort is part of broader campaign which
validates and legitimizes the attacks on, and even the killings of activists
(such as Tom Hurndall and James Miller) who are seen by this verdict as
“members of a terrorist organization” or “supporting terrorists.”
The second
issue was two major absences from the verdict. It made absolutely no reference
to international law, human rights conventions, or universal values. This absence is not an accident; neither is it
a result of Gershon’s personal views. Rather, it is a manifestation of the
political, military, and legal culture that dominates all Israeli institutions.
The prevailing majority belief is that international law does not apply to Israel and its
activities in the OPT. The verdict displays that universal values do not constitute
a credible reference for the Israeli legal system.
The other absence was sympathy
towards the Corrie family. They had dutifully attended every hearing of the
case and deserved human and moral consideration for the loss of their daughter.
The verdict essentially said to the
family bluntly that their daughter was a part of an organization that “supports
terrorists” and that by entering a “military area” she took full responsibility
for her own death.
The third issue
brought up by the verdict is a re-emphasis of a decades-old attitude that has prevailed
in the Israeli courts. The courts enforce no accountability for the army and
they maintain impunity for Israel ’s
security and military infrastructure.
The army operates without fear of consequence for their crimes and human
rights violations. The verdict not only
provided legal legitimization for the actions under review, but also
understanding for conspicuous efforts undertaken to destroy evidence. There were audio cassettes recorded during
the autopsy, but Judge Gershon accepted the state explanation which claimed, “The
tapes simply do not exist anymore because of financial problems at the Institute of Forensic Medicine
Finally, by observing these three issues in tandem, the
verdict has failed to accomplish the goals of its underlying motive. The
attempt to criminalize the ISM failed to prevent solidarity. In fact,
solidarity increased despite the killing.
Also, in failing to perform its sole function of providing justice, the
Israeli legal system has created the necessity for appeal in international
forums where there is no statute of limitation on war crimes.
To the Corrie family your nine year struggle to follow the
case has been an inspiration to the Palestinians and people around the world
striving for justice and defending human rights. The efforts to silence your
voices and deny you justice will only galvanize your supporters, inciting
greater efforts to the cause your daughter stood and died for.
