31/40 Implementation of Human Rights Council resolutions S-9/1 and S-12/1
Document Type: Final Report
Date: 2016 Jan
Session: 31st Regular Session (2016 Feb)
Agenda Item:
Human Rights Council Thirty-first session
Agenda items 2 and 7
Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights and reports of the Office of the
High Commissioner and the Secretary-General
Human rights situation in Palestine and other
occupied Arab territories
Implementation of Human Rights Council resolutions S-9/1 and S-12/1
Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Summary
In the present report, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
highlights issues of concern in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, with a focus on the use
of excessive force and unlawful killings, collective punishment, arbitrary and
administrative detention, torture and ill-treatment, and impermissible restrictions on
freedom of expression. The report ends with recommendations to all duty bearers, namely
the Government of Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the authorities in Gaza.
I. Introduction
1. The present report is the eighth periodic report of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory. It covers the period from 1 November 2014 to 31 October 2015.
2. The information contained herein primarily emanates from human rights monitoring
conducted by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
(OHCHR) in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, within the framework of Human Rights
Council resolutions S-9/1 and S-12/1. The report also reflects information from other
United Nations entities and from non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
3. The report should be read in conjunction with recent reports of the Secretary-
General (A/HRC/31/43, A/HRC/31/44, A/70/351 and A/70/421), which present additional
relevant information for the reporting period. As requested in Council resolution 29/25, the
status of implementation of the recommendations of the independent commission of inquiry
on the 2014 Gaza conflict and of the 2009 United Nations Fact-Finding Mission on the
Gaza Conflict is presented in an addendum to the present report (A/HRC/31/40/Add.1).
4. According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the reporting
period saw a dramatic rise in casualties in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, with 95
Palestinians killed (including 18 children) and 10,481 injured (including 1,489 children).
Twenty Israelis were killed and 127 were injured in attacks by Palestinians. At least 74
Palestinians were killed1 in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem — the highest number
of fatalities since 2007.
5. In November 2014, tensions continued over the status quo at the Al-Aqsa mosque
compound in East Jerusalem (see A/HRC/28/45, para. 57), with regular clashes occurring.
Despite some relative calm in the first half of 2015, the situation remained fragile, with
peace negotiations to end the long-standing occupation stalled.
6. On 31 July 2015, Israeli settlers set ablaze a Palestinian home in Duma village in
Nablus governorate, killing a couple and their 18-month-old child (see A/HRC/31/43, para.
35). The Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs emphasized that the attack had
occurred in the context of a chronic lack of adequate law enforcement in the West Bank,
adding that such violence was possible because of the environment created as a result of the
decades-long policy of Israel of illegal settlement activities.2
7. From mid-September 2015, serious confrontations between Palestinians and Israeli
security forces again erupted in connection with the Al-Aqsa mosque compound. These
were fuelled by Palestinian concerns over access restrictions imposed on Palestinians
seeking to enter the Old City of Jerusalem, and visits by groups belonging to the temple
Mount and Land of Israel Faithful movement groups and senior Israeli officials. Although
the Israeli authorities categorically denied plans to change the status quo, their decision to
ban from the compound the Murabitat and Murabitin, the groups of activists who seek to
protect it, and a raid by the Israeli security forces on the mosque itself on 13 September
were seen by many Palestinians as provocations.
8. Unrest, including protests and clashes, spread rapidly throughout the Occupied
Palestinian Territory. There was also a large number of stabbings and alleged attempted
stabbings by young Palestinians, many of whom were children. October 2015 saw a peak
1 Including four Palestinians (one child) killed by Israeli settlers.
2 Briefing to the Security Council on the situation in the Middle East, 19 August 2015.
in violence. OHCHR documented the killing of 65 Palestinians and 9 Israelis in the West
Bank.3 Palestinian casualties in October were the highest in a single month since the Office
for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs commenced recording casualties in 2005. The
Deputy Secretary-General highlighted that this wave of violence would not have erupted “if
the Palestinians did not still live under a stifling and humiliating occupation that has lasted
almost half a century”.4
II. Legal framework
9. International human rights law and international humanitarian law apply in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory. Israel therefore remains bound by its obligations as the
occupying Power, even though the State of Palestine has undertaken obligations by
ratifying several international treaties (see A/HRC/28/80, para. 66). Despite the existence of
a government of national consensus in the State of Palestine, authorities or groups exercise
government-like functions and control over territory in Gaza and are therefore also bound
by relevant human rights law in that territory (see A/HRC/8/17, para. 9).
III. Human rights violations by all duty bearers
A. Israeli authorities
1. Excessive use of force and unlawful killings, including possible extrajudicial
executions
10. The reporting period saw a sharp increase in apparent incidents of excessive use of
force, both in the context of clashes and in response to attacks or alleged attacks by
Palestinians against Israelis. Some of these responses strongly suggest unlawful killings,
including possible extrajudicial executions. As the High Commissioner has said, “in the
context of suspected attacks, several Palestinians have been killed by Israeli security forces,
sometimes allegedly acting with disproportionate force, to the extent that extrajudicial
killings are strongly suspected”.5
11. In one case monitored by OHCHR, 18-year-old Hadeel al-Hashlamoun was shot
dead by Israeli soldiers on 22 September 2015 at a pedestrian checkpoint in Hebron’s old
city, close to a number of settlements. According to two witnesses, one of whom
photographed the entire incident,6 Ms. Al-Hashlamoun was trying to walk away from the
checkpoint after a standoff with soldiers when one of them shot her left leg. She fell to the
ground, dropping her bag and, according to one witness, a knife. Both witnesses say that
after 10 or 15 seconds, the same soldier shot her in her right leg, then five to six times in the
abdomen and chest. He then moved closer, until he was only a metre away, and reportedly
fired a last bullet into the victim’s chest, even though the other soldiers were shouting at
him to stop, saying she was dead.
3 An Israeli soldier was also killed in an attack in Beer Sheva, Israel. The Israeli Bedouin attacker and
an Eritrean bystander were killed by security guards.
4 Briefing to the Security Council on the situation in the Middle East, 22 October 2015.
5 Statement by the High Commissioner at a special meeting of the Human Rights Council, 28 October
2015.
6 See http://sanaud-voltaremos.blogspot.com.br/p/brazil-26th-september-2015.html?m=1.
12. According to the witnesses at the time of the first shot, Ms. Al-Hashlamoun was
static and at least 3 metres away from the soldiers, separated by a 1-metre-high metal
barrier. The witnesses stated that she did not make any aggressive movement and did not
get close to the soldiers. Reports stating the victim was carrying a knife indicated it had
fallen to the ground after the first shot, at which point she no longer posed an imminent
threat to the soldiers. Thus, the repeated shots to her upper body, while she was lying
wounded on the ground, seemed unnecessary and suggest an unlawful killing. Furthermore,
the last single shot to her chest, fired from close range, may be indicative of an extrajudicial
execution and a wilful killing.
13. The footage from the surveillance cameras at the checkpoint has not been released,
but an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) inquiry is reported to have concluded that the death of
Ms. Al-Hashlamoun was unnecessary and avoidable.7 No criminal investigation had been
opened in the case as of 26 November.8
14. A large proportion of attackers or alleged attackers have similarly been shot dead.9
OHCHR monitored several cases suggesting excessive use of force leading to arbitrary
deprivation of life.10 For example, on 14 October 2015, in East Jerusalem, Israeli security
forces personnel shot to death 19-year-old Basil Basim Sidir while he was running away
from them. Witnesses interviewed by OHCHR and a publicly available video of the
incident indicate that Mr. Sidir was shot repeatedly, at least 12 times, after the first shot had
brought him to the ground. He was apparently armed with a knife, but no longer presented
an imminent threat once shot. The killing of Fadi Alloun, in East Jerusalem, on 4 October,
may also amount to an extrajudicial execution. At least three different videos of the incident
show him walking, surrounded by a group of Israelis. Although some reports allege that he
had just stabbed someone and was holding a knife, this is not apparent on video. After
repeated goading from the crowd, a policeman shot him, although Mr. Alloun did not
appear to be presenting any imminent threat. Mr. Alloun was shot seven times, despite
having fallen to the ground after the first shot. OHCHR is unaware of investigations into
either of these apparently unlawful killings.
15. Law enforcement officials, including members of the armed forces acting in that
capacity, have the duty to protect the public and the right to protect themselves, but any
force used must be necessary and proportionate. The Basic Principles on the Use of Force
and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials specify that firearms may be used only when
strictly necessary to protect against the imminent threat to life or of serious injury and only
when less extreme means are insufficient to protect against that imminent threat. Loss of
life resulting from a failure to respect this principle amounts to a violation of the right to
life. In addition, when unjustified and illegal use of firearms by law enforcement officials
of the occupying Power is made against protected persons, this may, depending on the
circumstances, amount to an act of wilful killing.
16. OHCHR is further concerned about reports of deaths attributable to a delay in the
provision of medical assistance to wounded suspects, or owing to Israeli security forces’
intentional blocking of ambulances and first responders. For example, witnesses informed
OHCHR that an Israeli medic arrived 12 minutes after Hadeel al-Hashlamoun was shot, but
7 Gili Cohen, “IDF inquiry: shooting of Palestinian girl in Hebron could have been avoided”, Haaretz,
1 November 2015.
8 Information from a Military Police letter sent to B’tselem, dated 26 November 2015.
9 According to OHCHR documentation, 39 attackers or suspects were shot dead in October 2015 and
17 were arrested.
10 See article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. See also Steven Klein,
“Why Israel’s Unwritten ‘Shoot to Kill’ Policy Is So Dangerous”, Haaretz, 20 October 2015.
that she was not given first aid. Local media reports said Palestinian medics present at the
checkpoint were prevented from reaching Ms. Al-Hashlamoun, and she was left bleeding
for about 30 minutes. Similarly, regarding Basil Basim Sidir, two witnesses interviewed by
OHCHR stated that, although a medical team had reached the spot within a few minutes,
the Israeli security forces did not allow them to attend to the victim for around 15 minutes.
The Basic Principles require provision of assistance and medical report “at the earliest
possible moment” (principle 5 (c)).
17. Concerns over unlawful killings are underscored by some statements of government
officials at the time. For instance, the Minister of the Interior, Gilad Erdan, reportedly
declared that “every terrorist should know that he will not survive the attack he is about to
commit”, while Jerusalem police chief Moshe Edri reportedly declared: “anyone who stabs
Jews or hurts innocent people is due to be killed”.11 Knesset member and former minister
Yair Lapid told Israeli citizens not to hesitate to “shoot to kill anyone who pulls out a knife
or screwdriver”.12 Such statements may help explain why most recent attackers were shot to
death, contrary to similar incidents between November 1993 and November 2014, when
most knife-attackers were reported to have been apprehended.13 The above-mentioned
statements preceded a number of vigilante incidents, with persons (including Israelis) shot
by mistake or on the basis of mere suspicion.
18. Concerns of the excessive use of force also arise in respect of the policing by Israeli
security forces of protests. Most clashes during the reporting period involved Palestinians
throwing stones, fireworks or Molotov cocktails at elements of the Israeli security forces. In
response, the security forces extensively used tear gas, “skunk water”, stun grenades and
rubber-coated metal bullets. However, the frequent resort to firearms (including 0.22
calibre rifles) against demonstrators raises serious concern. OHCHR documented 18
Palestinians shot dead, and the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
reported 825 injured with live ammunition in the context of clashes.
19. IDF states that the use of live ammunition is only permitted when there is “an actual
and immediate threat to life, as the last option in the procedures for stopping a suspect, as
well as in certain circumstances to contend with the threat to life posed during violent
riots”.14 However, in many instances, people killed or injured by live ammunition did not
appear to present any threat to life or of serious injury.
20. In one incident monitored by OHCHR, 20-year-old Ihab Jihad Yousef Hanani was
shot dead by Israeli security forces on 16 October 2015, at Beit Furik village in Nablus
governorate. He was hit in the upper chest with live ammunition while apparently helping
to evacuate injured people during clashes. Six other protestors had also been wounded in
their legs by live ammunition. While some protesters were throwing stones, there was no
indication of any imminent threat to the soldiers who were standing over 100 metres away
from the crowd. The use of live ammunition therefore appeared unwarranted and unlawful.
21. Live ammunition has been commonly used in the access-restricted areas in Gaza,
particularly affecting farmers and fishermen (see A/70/421, para. 35, and A/HRC/31/44.
During the reporting period, the United Nations Department of Safety and Security reported
11 Ibid.
12 See BBC, “Hard Talk” interview. Available from www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7WeqyMI_GU (at
4:05).
13 Steven Klein, “Why Israel’s Unwritten ‘Shoot to Kill’ Policy Is So Dangerous”, referring to
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/victims.html.
14 Undated IDF spokesperson reply to B’tselem (“Crowd control: Israel’s use of crowd control weapons
in the West Bank”, 2013, p. 55). IDF open-fire regulations are confidential documents.
508 incidents in which IDF used live ammunition at the Israel-Gaza fence, and 316 at sea,
as well as 9 incidents of Palestinians shooting at Israelis.
22. As protests spread into Gaza in October 2015, there were several instances
suggesting the unwarranted use of live ammunition against demonstrators near the Israel-
Gaza fence, killing at least 13 people according to OHCHR. In addition, conservative
estimates by NGOs and local health authorities indicate that at least 350 people were
injured by live ammunition and rubber-coated metal bullets in October 2015 alone. Nine of
the deaths and at least 60 gunshot injuries took place on 9 and 10 October when IDF fired
at protestors in Al-Shuja’iya in eastern Gaza City and in the Al-Faraheen area in the eastern
Khan Younis. Shots appeared to have been fired at the upper body and heads of protesters,
although witnesses say that there was no imminent threat to life or serious injury to soldiers
who were positioned in towers, armoured vehicles or behind dirt-mounds, on the other side
of the fence.
23. An 18-year old was among those killed on 9 October. Witnesses told OHCHR that
he and a small group of friends were peacefully protesting and chanting approximately 150
metres from the fence in the Khan Younis area. A video of the incident shows that some
young men had burned a tyre when Israeli forces shot teargas canisters in their direction.
According to the witnesses, the victim was hit shortly after that; medical documents show
that he was killed by a single shot in the back, which lacerated his heart. The use of live
ammunition in such circumstances was unwarranted, as neither he nor other nearby
demonstrators posed any imminent threat.
24. Reportedly, IDF subsequently shifted its practice to use more tear gas, warning shots
and shots to the legs.15 Nonetheless, unwarranted use of live ammunition continued,
including in at least five incidents documented by OHCHR where peaceful protesters
carrying Palestinian flags were shot and wounded.
25. The extensive, often unwarranted, use of firearms by Israeli security forces in law
enforcement operations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, particularly since September
2015, raises serious questions as to whether the rules of engagement, which are
confidential, are in compliance with international law and whether such rules are adhered to
in practice. Documented instances of soldiers shooting at persons attempting to evacuate
the wounded raise similar concerns.
26. Concerns also extend to instances of excessive force through the use of less lethal
weapons, such as rubber-coated metal bullets, particularly when they appear to have been
fired in contravention of the regulations of the Israeli security forces, which forbid their use
at a range of less than 50 metres.16 The regulations further restrict their use to firing at the
legs of “inciters, key disrupters of order or individuals endangering the well-being of a
soldier or another individual”, and prohibit their use against women and children.17
However, the inherent imprecision of rubber-coated metal bullets in use — fired as a pack
of three cylinders or a canister of pellets — renders such safeguards largely meaningless
and invariably causes ostensibly unintended casualties. According to the Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, two Palestinians are reported to have been killed and
2,623 injured by rubber-coated metal bullets in the reporting period.18
15 “Southern Command attempts to contain border clashes without use of live fire”, Jerusalem Post,
13 October 2015.
16 B’tselem, “Crowd Control Report”, p. 22.
17 Ibid., p. 23.
18 This includes black sponge-tipped plastic bullets used instead of rubber-coated metal bullets in East
Jerusalem.
27. The United Nations country team and the International Committee of the Red Cross
raised concerns about excessive force and access to medical care after disruption of medical
services following an Israeli security forces raid on Makassed Hospital in East Jerusalem on
29 October.19 The Palestine Red Crescent Society has also reported large numbers of Israeli
security forces assaults on its staff and ambulances.20 Some of these incidents have been
documented on video.21
28. The Government of Israel has an obligation to respect and protect the right to life
and integrity of the person, and to act in accordance with relevant international standards.
Concerns of the excessive use of force by Israeli security forces resulting in the deaths and
injuries of Palestinians during the reporting period build on similar concerns raised over
many years (see A/HRC/28/80/Add.1, para. 12). Accountability in such cases is very rare.
Without rigorous regulation and effective accountability, the actions of the Israeli security
forces are likely to continue to cause unlawful deaths and injuries.
2. Collective punishment, including punitive demolitions and closures
29. Punitive demolitions, targeting the family homes of alleged perpetrators of attacks
on Israelis, resumed in mid-2014 (see A/HRC/28/80/Add.1, para. 8) and continued during
the reporting period. According to the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs,
six punitive demolitions (including “sealing” houses to render them uninhabitable) were
carried out in this period, displacing 46 Palestinians, of whom 26 were children.
30. OHCHR monitored the punitive demolition of the family home of Uday abu Jamal,
in East Jerusalem. Mr. Abu-Jamal and his cousin were killed when they attacked a West
Jerusalem synagogue in November 2014, killing six Israelis. His parents and four siblings
were evicted from their family home by Israeli security forces on 1 July 2015. All entry-
points to the house were welded shut and concrete was poured inside, virtually up to the
ceiling in most rooms, rendering the house uninhabitable. The family subsequently lived in
the backyard, in a tent donated by the International Committee of the Red Cross, which the
Israeli security forces confiscated on 7 July.
31. By their very nature, the demolitions of family homes punish the relatives of
attackers and alleged attackers, and therefore constitute a form of prohibited collective
penalty.22 The proposal by the Israeli Security Cabinet to revoke the residency rights of
family members of alleged attackers raises similar concerns.23
32. Furthermore, some punitive demolitions have caused collateral damage to houses
and property of neighbours, raising further concerns about the destruction of private
property and the right to adequate housing.
33. Punitive demolitions also violate the general prohibition of destruction of private
property contained in the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons
in Time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention, art. 53) and, in certain circumstances, may
19 See www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=52442#.VlwYv3YrKM8 and
http://blogs.icrc.org/ilot/2015/10/30/access-to-healthcare-is-non-negotiable/.
20 See www.palestinercs.org/en/details.php?nid=1080.
21 See http://972mag.com/photos-israeli-border-police-assault-pepper-spray-palestinian-
journalists/113402/.
22 Article 33 of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War
(Fourth Geneva Convention) and Jean-Marie Henckaerts and Louise Doswald-Beck (eds), Customary
International Humanitarian Law, Vol. 1: Rules, Cambride University Press, Cambridge, 2005 (ICRC
Customary Law Study), rules 102-103.
23 “PM to forward bill allowing state to revoke residency of terrorists”, Times of Israel, 22 November
2014.
lead to forcible transfer (art. 49). Punitive demolitions also violate a range of human rights,
including the right to adequate housing and prohibitions on forced evictions (art. 11 of the
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights).
34. On 14 October 2015, following the escalation in violence, the Israeli Security
Cabinet announced that, in addition to demolitions, the authorities would forbid any
construction on the sites of demolished houses. Moreover, the Prime Minister authorized
the police to “impose a closure on, or to surround, centres of friction and incitement in
Jerusalem” as a means of preventing further attacks.24 In the following days, virtually all
Palestinian neighbourhoods were closed off with roadblocks, checkpoints and earth-
mounds, affecting the daily life of over 300,000 Palestinians residents.25 In Al-Isawiah,
home to nearly 15,000 people, only one road was kept open, with a manned checkpoint,
obstructing residents’ access to work or school.
35. While Israel, as the occupying Power, can adopt security measures, these should be
proportionate to the threat. Disproportionate and discriminatory restrictions are inconsistent
with the obligations of Israel to ensure Palestinians enjoy the right to freedom of movement
and ensure public life.
36. In Gaza, the unlawful Israeli blockade, which amounts to collective punishment,
continued to affect the enjoyment of human rights, particularly economic, social and
cultural rights. Despite some positive developments in 2015, including an acceleration of
the entry of certain needed materials through the Gaza Reconstruction Mechanism, these
remained insufficient to address the overwhelming needs. According to the Global
Protection Cluster, as of November 2015, an estimated 95,000 persons remained internally
displaced26 since the 2014 hostilities; over 70 per cent of the population was aid dependent;
and 73 per cent were food insecure.27 The closure of Rafah crossing by Egypt since October
2014, which crossing had previously helped to alleviate the effects of the blockade, has
exacerbated the humanitarian situation. Only the lifting of the blockade would enable
improvement in the realization of human rights in Gaza (see A/HRC/28/45, paras. 34-42,
and A/70/421, paras. 15-29).
3. Detention, including administrative detention
37. With hundreds of Israeli security forces search-and-arrest operations every month in
the reporting period, Israel detains a large number of Palestinians. As of 31 October 2015,
5,683 Palestinians were “security prisoners”.28 Although there was a decrease in early 2015
after the spike in arrests in mid-2014, according to one NGO, the Palestinian Prisoners
Club, 1,500 were arrested in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem in October 2015.
38. In particular, there was a sharp increase in the number of children in detention: from
163 on 30 October 2014 to 307 as of 30 October 2015.29 This is the highest number of
detained children since April 2010, and appears largely due to the significant number of
24 Israel, Prime Minister’s office, “Security Cabinet Approves Series of Additional Measures to Deal
with the Wave of Terrorism”, 14 October 2015.
25 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, “New movement restrictions in East Jerusalem
as of 5 November 2015”. Available at www.ochaopt.org/documents/ej_2015oct21.pdf.
26 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, “Israel removes restrictions on the import of
aggregates”, November 2015. Available at http://gaza.ochaopt.org/2015/11/reconstruction-of-over-
one-quarter-of-totally-destroyed-homes-ongoing-or-about-to-start/.
27 Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Strategic Response Plan 2015. Available from
www.ochaopt.org/srp2015/.
28 See www.btselem.org/statistics/detainees_and_prisoners (accessed on 31 October 2015).
29 See www.btselem.org/statistics/minors_in_custody (accessed on 30 October 2015).
children arrested during the surge in violence in October 2015 — 177 according to the
Palestinian NGO Addameer.30
39. This situation raises questions as to whether the detention of minors is being used
only as a measure of last resort, as demanded by the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The Public Committee against Torture in Israel, an NGO, informed OHCHR that it has
documented between 40 and 50 children from East Jerusalem, some as young as 12, sent to
the Givon prison complex in Ramla, where conditions are reported to be poor.
40. During the reporting period, the number of Palestinian Legislative Council members
in detention decreased (from 25 to 5). Yet, the case of Council Member Khalida Jarrar is
emblematic of Israeli detention practices. She was arrested on 2 April 2015 and placed
under administrative detention by the military commander in the West Bank. On 15 April,
she was charged with a range of offences relating to membership of the Popular Front for
the Liberation of Palestine and incitement to kidnapping Israeli soldiers. Her trial in the
military court was monitored by diplomatic missions and human rights organizations,
including OHCHR, and there are serious concerns as to its fairness. The prosecution’s
evidence appears to be largely based on statements by former and current Palestinian
prisoners made after interrogation by the Israel Security Agency. Two witnesses retracted
their statements at the first hearing, stating they were made after ill-treatment, threats and
coercion. Nevertheless, the judge maintained the original statements as evidence. At a bail
hearing on 21 May, the military prosecution told the judge that even if Ms. Jarrar were to be
released on bail, she would be held under administrative detention. On 7 December, she
was sentenced to 15 months in prison, after she accepted a prosecution plea-deal, reportedly
because she did not believe she would be given a fair trial and was concerned that her
detention would never end.
41. According to official Israeli statistics, there were 429 administrative detainees (all
male) at the end of October 2015, compared with 462 a year before.31 A reduction during
most of 2015 was reversed by a sharp increase in detention orders in October 2015. For the
first time since December 2011, administrative detention was applied to children, with three
17-year-old boys from East Jerusalem detained without charge in mid-October for allegedly
stone-throwing.32 A 16-year-old boy from Hebron was detained on 31 October 2015 on
allegations of stabbing. In a rare move, three Jewish-Israeli men were also held in
administrative detention following the suspected settler attack in Duma village on 31 July.
42. The use by Israel of administrative detention has been widely condemned, including
by the Secretary-General and the Human Rights Committee, who called for its end (see
A/HRC/28/80, para. 33).33 This practice is inconsistent with the exceptional nature of
detention permitted under article 78 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
43. Most Palestinian detainees, including administrative detainees and many children,
are held in Israel. The prohibition of forcible transfer also applies to detainees to the extent
that they may not be deported outside the occupied territory (arts. 49 and 76). The actions
of Israel therefore constitute a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention (art. 147).
30 Addameer, “Israeli occupation arrests 1,195 Palestinians and issues 128 administrative detention
orders”, 2 November 2015. Available at www.addameer.org/news/addameer-israeli-occupation-
arrests-1195-palestinians-and-issues-128-administrative-detention.
31 See www.btselem.org/administrative_detention/statistics.
32 See www.dci-palestine.org/three_east_jerusalem_teens_held_in_administrative_detention.
33 See also OHCHR spokesperson, press briefing, 10 April 2015.
4. Hunger strikers, torture and ill-treatment
44. During the reporting period, some Palestinian administrative detainees resorted to
hunger strikes to protest against their unlawful indefinite detention without charge. For
instance, lawyer Mohammad Allan, who had been detained since 11 November 2014,
began a hunger strike on 16 June 2015. On 10 August, he was moved into intensive care at
a hospital, chained to a bed despite his obvious weakness. On 14 August, he lapsed into a
coma for four days, and was reportedly given minerals intravenously. On 20 August, he
ended his hunger strike after 65 days, when the Israeli High Court suspended his
administrative detention. The suspension was directed on the grounds that his MRI scan
showed extensive brain damage and that he could not be a security risk. However, he was
detained again on 16 September and resumed his hunger strike until his release, on 4
November, when the detention order expired.
45. Mohammad Allan was among the first detainees at risk of force-feeding after an
amendment to the Israeli Prisons Act, passed by the Knesset on 30 July 2015, permitted a
District Court President to authorize force-feeding of a detainee on hunger strike.34
Although its stated aim was to save the life of the detainee, the legislation allows the Courts
to factor into their decisions the State’s security and public safety. In a further similarity
with the administrative detention process — the root of many hunger strikes — the Court
may make its decision in a closed session and on the basis of secret evidence, not accessible
by the detainee’s lawyer. The bill included an important safeguard, namely the requirement
that a doctor certify that the patient would be in immediate, mortal danger were the hunger
strike to continue. However, the final text referred to the Hebrew term metapel (instead of
doctor),35 which, in Israeli law, encompasses medical trainees, midwives, physiotherapists,
occupational therapists, speech therapists and nutritionists (see Patients’ Rights Act, 1996).
46. Various United Nations bodies and experts have raised concern about the enactment
of this law, reiterating that force-feeding was tantamount to cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment, and a violation of the right to health.36 The Israel Medical Association stated that
force-feeding amounted to torture. In September 2015, several Israeli organizations
challenged the law before the High Court. The petition is currently pending.
47. OHCHR has received reports of ill-treatment of detainees generally. The Public
Committee against Torture in Israel submitted 23 complaints of torture to investigatory
bodies relating to the current reporting period.37 Most allegations refer either to assaults at
the time of arrest or beating and threats during interrogation, particularly by the Israel
Security Agency. Common means of ill-treatment include sleep deprivation, stress
positions, sexual harassment and physical assaults. The United Nations Children’s Fund
(UNICEF) and partner organizations also documented 58 cases of West Bank children
reporting ill-treatment by the Israeli security forces. Common complaints were physical
violence, being blindfolded with hands painfully tied, and strip searches, while some
reported being held in solitary confinement.
48. On 4 July 2015, the Knesset extended the temporary law exempting the
interrogations of Palestinian “security suspects” from audiovisual recording for an
additional year and a half; the latest in a series of continuous extensions since 2002. This
34 The bill was introduced at the time of the mass hunger strikes, in June 2014 (see A/HRC/28/80, para.
34).
35 Addameer, “Factsheet: Force-feeding under International Law and Medical Standards”, 16 November
2015.
36 Joint statement on new Israeli law on force-feeding of detainees, 8 August 2015; “UN experts urge
Israel to halt legalization of force-feeding of hunger-strikers in detention”, 28 July 2015.
37 Public Committee against Torture in Israel, “Update – November 1st, 2014 – October 31st, 2015”.
removes a key safeguard against torture, ill-treatment and the extraction of “confessions”
under duress (see CCPR/C/ISR/CO/4, para. 14).
5. Changes to laws affecting children’s rights
49. On 20 July, the Knesset amended the criminal law to increase the maximum
sentence for throwing stones or other objects at moving vehicles, to 20 years when the
intent to harm the occupants of the vehicle can be established (irrespective of the harm
caused), and 10 years when the intent cannot be proven. Throwing stones at a police vehicle
can lead to a sentence of up to five years, irrespective of whether damage or injury was
caused.
50. This was followed by a retrograde change in policy, in August 2015, by the State
Prosecutor, requiring all prosecutors to seek detention of suspects charged with stone-
throwing until the end of legal proceedings. This practice had already been used by the
Jerusalem District Attorney’s Office since July 2014, reportedly with the result that most
arrested children remained in detention for at least two to three months before release. The
prosecutorial directive is inconsistent with the presumption of release on bail under the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The measures invariably target
Palestinian children who tend to resort to such forms of protest, and therefore violate the
requirement that the detention of children be a measure of last resort (art. 37 (b) of the
Convention on the Rights of the Child).
51. On 2 November 2015, the Knesset passed an additional temporary order, valid for
three years, amending the Youth Law and the National Insurance Law, thereby providing
for the revocation of national insurance entitlements for children convicted of “security-
related” offences (including stone-throwing), and imposing a fine of 10,000 shekels
(approximately US$ 2,500) on parents of a child convicted of stone-throwing.
6. Human rights defenders and journalists
52. Physical attacks against, and harassment of, human rights defenders continued,
especially against the backdrop of the upsurge of violence since September 2015. Protective
presence organizations in Hebron faced repeated threats, assaults and arrests, by settlers and
Israeli security forces. In October 2015, posters appeared in Hebron with photos of staff of
these organizations, branding them as anti-Semitic “hostile anarchists” and calling for them
“to be dealt with”.
53. The Palestinian Centre for Development and Media Freedoms documented hundreds
of instances of journalists subjected to harassment over the reporting period.38 In a number
of instances, journalists reporting on protests were physically assaulted by elements of the
Israeli security forces, who also damaged or confiscated their equipment.39 Journalists and
human rights defenders have a vital role in society as they report on human rights violations
and abuses and promote accountability. Their harassment has a chilling effect on freedom
of expression.
7. Hostilities in Gaza
54. According to the Department of Safety and Security of the Secretariat, during the
reporting period, Israel carried out 31 airstrikes in Gaza, reportedly in retaliation for 24
rockets fired into Israel by Palestinian armed groups (a further 66 fell short). In one incident
38 See www.madacenter.org/reports.php?id=13&lang=1.
39 See http://972mag.com/watch-israeli-soldiers-attack-cameras-belonging-to-palestinian-foreign-
journalists/112049.
on 11 October 2015, an Israeli airstrike directly hit a Palestinian home in Zeitoun, west of
Gaza City, killing a pregnant woman and her 2-year-old daughter. IDF claimed they had
targeted a known “weapons production site”.40 However, OHCHR did not find any
indications of such facilities in the vicinity of the attack, which only impacted the family’s
home, a civilian structure, which, under international law, should not be targeted.
55. IDF also reportedly conducted 46 incursions, up to 300 metres into Gaza, levelling
the ground and compromising access of local farmers to their livelihoods.
B. Palestinian authorities
1. Arbitrary detention and administrative detention
56. During the reporting period, OHCHR documented cases of arbitrary arrests and
detentions, mainly of persons affiliated with opposition groups. In particular, mass arrests
of individuals with alleged links to Hamas and Islamic Jihad were carried out in early
March and early July 2015 in the West Bank.
57. An emblematic case is that of two Hamas activists who were arrested by the General
Intelligence Service (GIS) in early February 2015, in Hebron, on charges of money
laundering. GIS failed to respect a court order on 18 February for their release on bail and
the two men remained in detention on new grounds, namely for “inciting sectarian strife”.
The following day, the prosecution introduced an additional indictment for possession of an
unlicensed weapon. On 22 February, the two men were granted bail by the court on all
charges. Despite the rejection of the prosecution’s appeal, they remained in detention until
3 March.
58. OHCHR inquiries into a number of similar cases revealed that, although the
detainees were expecting to be released on bail, their continued detention was sanctioned
by administrative orders issued by provincial governors (see A/HRC/28/80, para. 46).
Administrative detention also appears to be regularly used to cover the initial days after the
arrest, effectively sidestepping the important safeguard of being promptly brought before a
judge (art. 9 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights). The
Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights thus registered 75 complaints of
administrative detention during the reporting period.41 A majority of detainees interviewed
by OHCHR also appear to have been held administratively at some stage, while
international human rights law stresses the exceptional nature of such detention.
59. OHCHR is concerned about the practice by Palestinian security agencies of
detaining people “for their own security”. For instance, Islam Hamed was not released after
the completion of a three-year sentence, despite an order from the Palestinian High Court,
on 24 November 2014, that his continued detention was illegal. GIS informed OHCHR that
the continued detention was for Mr. Hamed’s own safety, as he was under threat from the
Israeli security forces. He was eventually released on 21 July 2015, after a two-month
hunger strike, when his family had signed a waiver absolving the Palestinian Authority of
any liability for his safety. OHCHR has documented other cases where detentions are
reported to have taken place “under the order of the Head of Agency”, referring to GIS and
the Preventive Security Service. The legal basis of such detentions is unclear.
40 See www.idf.il/1133-22784-he/Dover.aspx (available in Hebrew only).
41 Monthly reports on website.
2. Torture and ill-treatment
60. Torture and ill-treatment are prohibited under Palestinian law. OHCHR has enjoyed
the cooperation of the Palestinian authorities in gaining unannounced and unrestricted
access to Palestinian Preventive Security and GIS detention facilities (see A/HRC/25/40,
para. 44). In some instances during the reporting period, the Office was refused access to
detention centres run by GIS. In March 2015, the Independent Commission for Human
Rights denounced the decision of the Palestinian police prohibiting its staff from visiting a
detainee in the Ramallah Rehabilitation and Correction Centre.42 Such restrictions are
particularly concerning as OHCHR continued to receive reports of ill-treatment and the
Independent Commission for Human Rights registered 194 complaints of torture and ill-
treatment during the reporting period. In some instances documented by OHCHR, detainees
reported ill-treatment but were unwilling to share details owing to threats and fear of
reprisal by the authorities. In a few instances, detainees denied being ill-treated despite
visible injuries.
61. Opposition activists, including students, appeared to be particularly targeted by
Palestinian security agencies. Between 17 December 2014 and 26 February 2015, seven
Hamas-affiliated students held a sit-in at Birzeit University, which they refused to leave for
fear of arrest and ill-treatment as they had previously been detained and allegedly ill-treated
on several occasions. OHCHR intervened with the authorities who repeatedly gave
assurances that ill-treatment would not be condoned. On 28 February, one of the students
was arrested by the Preventive Security Service and detained until 2 March. After his
release, he informed OHCHR that he had been kept in shabeh (a stress position for an
extended period of time) for nearly six hours: he had been made to stand face to the wall
with arms lifted and had been told not to touch the wall. In the interrogation that followed,
he was reportedly slapped on the face five times. He stated that, at the end of the session,
his hands were tied to the top of a ladder with his own belt and he was left suspended. He
told OHCHR that, when he cried out in pain, the officers told him they had high-level
clearance to kill him. They reportedly later put him in shabeh again until the next morning,
checking every half hour whether he was willing to talk.
62. In another case documented by OHCHR, the detainee had been transferred many
times to different GIS detention centres and reportedly repeatedly tortured over many
weeks. He reported being held in shabeh for hours at a time, blindfolded, with his hands
tied behind his back and pulled up, and tied to a rope fixed to the ceiling, with toes barely
touching the ground and the weight of his entire body on the shoulders. He testified in
detail to being slapped, punched, kicked and beaten with a baton on his palms and the soles
of his feet, and with an electric cable, on the lower part of his body. Medical reports
examined by OHCHR, along with bruises on his body were consistent with his testimony.
3. Excessive use of force
63. OHCHR received allegations of unwarranted or excessive force, gratuitous violence
and abuse of power by Palestinian security forces. For instance, on 2 December 2014, in
Al-Yamon village, members of the Palestinian special police force reportedly used batons
to beat dozens of unarmed people at a condolence meeting, after accusing them of shielding
wanted individuals. On 2 January 2015, in Misliya village, the Palestinian Special Police
Force and the Palestinian National Security Forces allegedly assaulted several people,
largely bystanders, after family members of a detainee attacked a police car and released
him from custody. Under the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law
42 Independent Commission for Human Rights, press statement, 4 March 2015.
Enforcement Officials, it is required that arbitrary or abusive use of force should be
punishable as a criminal offence.
64. On 18 September 2015, near the Azza refugee camp, Bethlehem, the Palestinian
National Security Forces used live ammunition, tear gas and stun grenades against
demonstrators throwing stones. They reportedly assaulted some of the young men in their
custody with batons.43 The use of live ammunition in the absence of imminent threat to life
or serious injury, and the violence against detainees are inconsistent with the international
obligations of the State of Palestine, notably under the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights. Although the Prime Minister and the Commander of the Palestinian
National Security Forces promptly announced the establishment of two committees to
investigate the Bethlehem incident, accountability for instances of excessive use of force
generally remains rare.
65. On 23 May 2015, GIS officials in Jenin shot a man in the leg after having restrained
him. His brother was severely beaten to the extent that his genitals were crushed and
required partial surgical removal. The brothers filed a complaint with Military Intelligence,
but OHCHR was informed that the victims were repeatedly pressured to withdraw their
complaint because the main GIS official they accused is a senior Fatah leader. OHCHR is
not aware of any investigation into the incident.
4. Freedom of expression
66. OHCHR has received reports of violations of the right to freedom of expression,
particularly regarding people critical of the Palestinian Authority leadership. The case of
Lama Khater, a writer known for supporting Hamas, is emblematic. She and her family
have been subjected to repeated threats and harassment by the security forces for her
writing and her organization of peaceful demonstrations. One instance monitored by
OHCHR took place late at night on 22 March, when Ms. Khater’s house in Hebron was
raided by GIS. They did not show any arrest or search warrant. They allegedly used force
against Ms. Khater’s husband and detained him for one night.
67. Information received by OHCHR indicates that Palestinian security agencies appear
to be monitoring Palestinians’ social media activity. OHCHR documented some cases
where journalists and civil society activists were threatened or arrested for comments made
online criticizing the Palestinian leadership. Such harassment and unlawful restrictions have
a general chilling effect on freedom of expression.
5. Death penalty
68. No executions were reported between 1 November 2014 and 31 October 2015, in
accordance with the President’s policy. However State prosecutors continued to seek death
sentences and courts issued them in two cases. On 11 January 2015, the Permanent Military
Court in southern West Bank condemned to death for treason a 27-year-old man from
Jenin. On 16 September 2015, the Ramallah Court of Appeal sentenced a man to death for
murdering his sister-in-law and her two children, after a successful appeal by the
prosecution. As of November 2015, both cases were under appeal.
43 See video published by Middle East Eye. Available at www.youtube.com/watch?v=-
uOpsGV6isc&feature=youtu.be.
C. Authorities in Gaza
1. Due process violations, torture and ill-treatment
69. Arbitrary arrests and other due process violations, as well as torture and ill-treatment
by security forces, remained issues of concern in Gaza. During the reporting period, the
Independent Commission for Human Rights registered at least 708 complaints of arbitrary
detention and violations of due process guarantees, and 462 allegations of torture or ill-
treatment. The majority of allegations were against local police forces, but corrections
officers and members of the internal security apparatus also stand accused.
70. Information collected by OHCHR indicates that security forces often arbitrarily
summon and sometimes unlawfully detain citizens for prolonged periods of time, often
incommunicado. Reported violations included excessive use of force upon arrest, denial of
the right to remain silent, and to have legal representation and contact with family.
71. Reports of torture or ill-treatment described beatings with belts, water pipes and
sticks, verbal abuse and intimidation, sensory deprivation, shabeh, waterboarding and
prolonged solitary confinement. The level of violence employed during certain
interrogations required detainees to be hospitalized, including owing to open wounds,
internal bleeding and fractures. OHCHR suggests that particularly harsh interrogation
techniques appear to be used against detainees suspected of treason or of belonging to
Salafi groups. Relatives of detainees were also reportedly targeted for harassment and arrest
by security officials.
72. Members and supporters of Fatah in particular have reported a consistent campaign
by security forces, in particular the internal security apparatus, of summons and arrests and
torture or ill-treatment. For example, a senior Fatah official and his colleagues were
reportedly warned by senior security officials, on 31 December 2014, not to mark Fatah’s
fiftieth anniversary that week. On 4 January 2015, the official was summoned to Ansar
police station and driven to an undisclosed location along with another Fatah member. He
was allegedly forced to undress, was interrogated and was denied the opportunity to pray.
He was also beaten, forced to endure shabeh and hung from the wall for almost an hour. No
arrest warrant was produced and charges were never levelled against him. He claimed that
he has been detained and interrogated over 40 times by local security officials owing to his
affiliation with Fatah.
2. Rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly
73. Reportedly, Gaza authorities have increasingly sought to silence political opposition
or critics, and failed to protect persons from third-party attacks due to their beliefs and
opinions. Internal security forces (as well as unidentified armed individuals) have allegedly
employed excessive use of force and gratuitous violence to disperse peaceful assemblies.
74. Among the rallies disrupted were those of political opponents, gatherings
denouncing the deteriorating economic situation, failing public services or protesting
actions by security forces. Several individuals were detained in connection with these
gatherings and forced to sign “moral codes of conduct” or declarations that they would not
disturb peace again.
75. On a few occasions, security forces stated they had intervened during
demonstrations because prior authorization had not been sought. Nevertheless, under
international human rights law and the Palestinian Public Meetings Law No. 12 of 1998,
the prior consent of authorities is not required to hold peaceful assemblies.
76. Palestinian human rights organizations have noted a marked increase in attacks on
freedom of the press, either by local authorities or unidentified armed individuals. The
Palestinian Centre for Development and Media Freedoms registered at least 45 such cases
in the first six months of 2015, compared to 24 cases in 2014.44
77. OHCHR found several instances where journalists were prevented, often through
force, from covering events deemed critical of Hamas. Others have been questioned at
police stations about social media posts or articles critical of Gaza authorities.
78. On 29 April 2015, in Al-Shuja’iya neighbourhood, security officials and members of
different Islamic factions in the Gaza Strip interrupted a student gathering calling for
Palestinian unity. Participants were reportedly beaten with clubs and metal bars and shot at,
including by plain-clothes security forces. The authorities claimed that they intervened
when fighting broke out during the protest. Journalists who witnessed the scene stated that
security officials tried to prevent them from covering the event, assaulted them and
destroyed equipment.
3. Death penalty
79. No executions were carried out within the Gaza Strip during the reporting period.
However, local courts issued two death sentences related to murder charges while the
Permanent Military Court sentenced four individuals to death (one in absentia) for
collaboration with Israel.
IV. Accession by the State of Palestine to international human rights treaties
80. During the period under review, the Government of the State of Palestine advanced
in the preparation of the first round of reports under the seven human rights treaties to
which it acceded in 2014. OHCHR was informed that the first drafts of reports under the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Convention on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women are under internal review and
will be submitted for national consultations. OHCHR worked with the Government to
ensure that line ministries use the reporting process to establish baselines from which to
monitor implementation of human rights in the context of national development
programming. OHCHR has also been supporting the Independent Commission for Human
Rights in assuming its important role as the bridge between the Government and civil
society with regard to treaty implementation and monitoring.
V. Recommendations
A. Government of Israel
81. The High Commissioner recommends that the Government of Israel:
(a) Carry out an independent review of the Israeli security forces rules of
engagement and ensure that they are consistent with international human rights law
and standards, along with the actual use of force and firearms in the context of law
enforcement (including in the access restricted areas);
44 See www.madacenter.org/index.php?lang=1.
(b) Ensure that all torture and ill-treatment is outlawed and swiftly ended,
and remove exemptions for interrogations of Palestinian “security suspects” from the
requirement to record interrogations;
(c) Conduct prompt, thorough, effective, independent and impartial
investigations into all incidents of the use of force leading to death or injury, ensuring
they are subject to public scrutiny;
(d) Hold to account all individuals responsible for human rights violations
and provide victims with an effective remedy;
(e) End all forms of collective punishment, including the blockade on Gaza
and punitive demolitions;
(f) Ensure that the Israeli Prisons Act is consistent with international
human rights law; in particular, repeal provisions allowing force-feeding of detainees
on hunger strike;
(g) End the system of administrative detention and ensure that all detainees
are promptly charged or released;
(h) Respect international humanitarian law, particularly the principles of
distinction, proportionality and precaution, and ensure accountability for all
violations.
B. Government of the State of Palestine
82. The High Commissioner recommends that the Government of the State of
Palestine:
(a) Ensure that arbitrary arrests and detentions are not carried out — due
process guarantees should be respected and no person should be held without legal
basis or in a manner inconsistent with international human rights law;
(b) End the widespread practice of administrative detention through
governors’ orders in the West Bank — detainees should be promptly charged or
released;
(c) Ensure that torture and ill-treatment are promptly ended and that rules
of engagement and actual use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials are
consistent with international human rights law and standards;
(d) Conduct and ensure prompt, thorough, effective, independent and
impartial investigations into all incidents of use of force leading to death or injury,
ensuring that they are subject to public scrutiny, bring perpetrators to justice and
provide victims with an effective remedy;
(e) Respect the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly,
including for journalists and those with perceived links to opposition groups, and
ensure thorough and transparent investigations into allegations of attacks by third
parties against journalists and activists;
(f) Announce a moratorium on the death penalty including the award of
such sentences, as a step towards abolition.
C. Authorities in Gaza and Palestinian armed groups
83. The High Commissioner calls upon the authorities in Gaza:
(a) To take all measures necessary to ensure that the rights of persons
deprived of liberty are respected, including by ensuring effective, independent,
impartial, thorough and transparent investigations into allegations of torture and ill-
treatment, and ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice and that victims have
access to an effective remedy;
(b) End unlawful restrictions on freedoms of expression and peaceful
assembly.
84. In Gaza, the authorities and Palestinian armed groups should respect
international humanitarian law, particularly the principles of distinction,
proportionality and precaution, and ensure accountability for all violations.