Written evidence submitted by Gisha: Legal
Center for Freedom of Movement
RE: GLOBAL
SECURITY, MENA—ISRAEL'S
CLAIM THAT
GAZA IS
NO LONGER
OCCUPIED
1. On the occasion of the Committee's inquiry
into Global Security, Middle East, we wish to update you on a
position by the Israeli government that it no longer occupies
Gaza and no longer bears responsibility for the welfare of Gaza
residents. As an NGO concerned with the human rights of Palestinian
residents, we ask that you raise the issue of Israel's occupation
of Gaza in your reports, with a recommendation to take measures
to assure compliance with international humanitarian law, especially
the Fourth Geneva Convention, to which the UK is a party.
ISRAEL CLAIMS
THAT IT
DOES NOT
OCCUPY GAZA
AND OWES
NO RESPONSIBILITY
FOR THE
WELFARE OF
GAZANS
2. Since removing Israeli settlements and
evacuating permanent military installations from Gaza in September
2005, Israel has taken the position that Gaza is no longer occupied
and that completion of its "disengagement" extinguishes
its legal obligations towards Gaza, thus leaving the running of
Gaza and the fulfillment of obligations vis a" vis
Gaza residents—to the sole responsibility of the Palestinian
Authority.
3. While Israel has refrained from stating
the above position in public international fora, domestically,
especially in proceedings before the Israeli Supreme Court, the
State of Israel has declared an end to its occupation of Gaza,
has declared the crossings with Gaza to be international border
crossings, and has expressed the position that Gaza residents
have no right to enter the West Bank.
4. In response to requests to allow Gaza
residents to receive imported goods and export finished products,
to travel to the West Bank, and to leave and enter the Gaza Strip,
Israel's response has been that it no longer occupies Gaza and
therefore bears no responsibility for the welfare of Gaza residents.
5. Israel has all but cut off travel between
Gaza and the West Bank. It treats Gaza residents as "foreigners"
who have no right to enter the West Bank, which Israel considers
to be a "closed military zone" under the control of
the IDF. The restrictions on travel between Gaza and the West
Bank separate families, block access to jobs, medical services
and educational opportunities, and further isolate Gaza, whose
1.4 million residents are living in poverty and unemployment.
6. We note that there are obviously significant
political implications to the claim that Gaza is no longer occupied
and that it can be cut off from the West Bank.
GISHA'S
POSITION: ISRAEL
OWES HUMANITARIAN
OBLIGATIONS TO
GAZA RESIDENTS
BECAUSE OF
CONTINUED CONTROL
7. In a recently released comprehensive
position paper, Disengaged Occupiers: The Legal Status of Gaza,
Gisha argues that Israel has not relinquished control over Gaza
but rather removed some elements of control while tightening other
significant controls. Far from improving the economy and welfare
of Gaza residents, Israeli actions since September 2005—including
severe restrictions on the movement of people and goods in and
out of Gaza and an economic stronghold on the funding of civil
services—have contributed to an economic and humanitarian
crisis in Gaza not seen in the 38 years of Israeli control that
preceded the withdrawal of permanent ground troops.
8. Gisha takes the position that Israel
continues to owe legal obligations to residents of Gaza in the
significant areas in which their lives are subject to and affected
by Israeli control. That responsibility exists under human rights
law, Israeli law, and the international law of belligerent occupation,
primarily the Hague Regulations of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva
Convention of 1949. Israel is bound to respect the rights of Gaza
residents in its control of Gaza's borders, population registry,
tax system, and other areas, and it also owes positive duties
to permit and to facilitate the proper functioning of civilian
institutions in Gaza, pursuant to international humanitarian law.
9. Gisha's position is based on continued
Israeli control over life in Gaza. Israel continues to control
Gaza through:
— Substantial control of Gaza's
land crossings;
— Control on the ground through
incursions and sporadic ground troop presence ("no-go zone");
— Complete control of Gaza's airspace;
— Complete control of Gaza's territorial
waters;
— Control of the Palestinian population
registry (including who is a "resident" of Gaza);
— Control of tax policy and transfer
of tax revenues;
— Control of the ability of the
Palestinian Authority to exercise governmental functions;
— Control of the West Bank, which
together with Gaza, constitute a single territorial unit.
10. Gisha takes the position that Israel
does exercise effective control over significant aspects of life
in Gaza, and thus, in the areas in which it exercises such control,
Israel owes obligations to Gaza residents under the international
humanitarian law of occupation. Gisha specifically recommends
that Israel fulfil its obligations toward the people of Gaza under
the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Hague Regulations, and Israeli
and international human rights law, namely:
— To open Gaza's borders to the
free passage of people and goods;
— To permit Gaza to build an airport
and seaport for the passage of people and goods;
— To transfer the tax money it
collects on behalf of the Palestinian Authority to the use and
benefit of Palestinian civil society;
— To permit adequate supply of
goods—humanitarian and commercial—to Gaza;
— To allow the free movement of
people and goods between Gaza and the West Bank, which constitute
a single territorial unit under internationally-recognised agreements;
— To refrain from inflicting damage
on Gaza's infrastructure, including sources of water, electricity,
fuel, and transportation;
— To uphold its responsibilities,
under the Fourth Geneva Convention and Article 43 of the Hague
Regulations, to allow the people of Gaza to conduct normal lives,
including the ability to engage in commerce, to travel abroad,
and to access humanitarian goods and supplies.
THE ROLE
OF THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY
IN ENFORCING
THE FOURTH
GENEVA CONVENTION
11. Responsibility for the enforcement of
the Fourth Geneva Convention, which protects residents of an occupied
territory, lies with the High Contracting Parties to the Convention,
including the UK.
12. Gisha believes that there is a contradiction
between continued Israeli control over Gaza and claims that Gaza
is no longer occupied. We believe that inquiries and statements
of position from foreign governments regarding the status of Gaza
and the application of the Fourth Geneva Convention regarding
occupied territory will have the effect of moderating Israel's
position and encouraging it to comply with its international legal
obligations.
13. We respectfully request that you investigate
this issue and take appropriate measures. In particular, we encourage
you to request that Government representatives make inquiries
among their Israeli interlocutors regarding the status of Gaza
and call upon Israel to respect its obligations under international
humanitarian law.
14. I respectfully refer you to Gisha's
position paper, Disengaged Occupiers: The Legal Status of Gaza,
available at our web site, www.gisha.org or at the link: http://www.gisha.org/english/reports/Report_for_the_website.pdf
15. Gisha is an Israeli not-for-profit organization,
founded in 2005, whose goal is to protect the freedom of movement
of Palestinians, especially Gaza residents. Gisha promotes rights
guaranteed by international and Israeli law.
16. I welcome a chance to discuss these
issues with you. A signed copy of this letter and a copy of our
position paper will follow by mail.
26 February 2007
| 
