Israeli Settlers Destroy Palestinian Trees, Property

By Meredith Lee-Clark

Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

 

NABLUS, West Bank – Israeli settlers set fire to Palestinian automobiles, farm equipment, and buildings, and uprooted over fifty trees in the early morning on December 6. The settlers were allegedly protesting the Israeli government’s decision of a ten-month suspension in settlement construction in West Bank. The decision was a response to the Palestinian demand to freeze construction as a precondition for restarting peace talks.

 

Settlers reportedly set fire to property belonging to two Palestinian farmers in the town of Einabus, near Nablus, as well as a car and barn in the same area. Firefighters from the Palestinian Civil Defense Department were able to contain the fires, and reported that the property losses amounted to $40,000 (US).

 

The Israeli Defense Forces told the Ma’an News Agency that they could not confirm that the arsons were revenge attacks for the temporary construction suspension, but that a large military contingent was in the area, operating under the assumption that it was indeed “a revenge act.”

 

Settlers from the Yizhar settlement were likely involved, according to sources. The day before the arsons, a rabbi from the Yizhar settlement published an article that promoted confrontation to protest the settlement suspension.

 

“If there is no quiet for the Jews, there will be no quiet for the Arabs,” the article said. “A Civil Administration base can serve as a target for a quick, precise infiltration that could damage and destroy one of their offices. You destroy ours, we destroy yours!”

 

Many settlers have expressed outrage at what they deem to be a betrayal by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who they say was elected to preserve Israeli rule over the West Bank. Other Israelis believe Netanyahu is merely responding to pressure from the United States.

 

Prime Minister Netanyahu held a two-hour meeting with settlers in Tel Aviv on December 2, in which Netanyahu promised building could resume after the ten-month period. The settlers at the meeting widely dismissed any promises made by the Prime Minister.

 

Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal under international law.

 

For more information, please see:

 

Ha’aretz – Youth Protesting Settlement Freeze Block Jerusalem Entrance – 7 December 2009

 

Ma’an News Agency – Settlers Torch Palestinian Property, Uproot Trees – 7 December 2009

 

Palestinian News Network – West Bank Settlers Reject Netanyahu’s Plea for Support – 7 December 2009

 

BBC News – West Bank Settlers Reject Netanyahu Plea for Support – 3 December 2009

 

Christian Science Monitor – In Israeli Settlements, Residents and Builders Push Back on 10-Month Freeze – 1 December 2009

Canada to Review U.S. Soldier Asylum Claim

07 December 2009

Canada to Review U.S. Soldier Asylum Claim

By William Miller

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

TORONTO, Canada – A Canadian federal court has ordered Canada to review the rejected application for asylum filed by a soldier in the United States military who fled the U.S. after being persecuted for being a lesbian. The court said the Immigration and Refugee Board erred in rejecting her refugee claim.

Private Bethany Smith fled Fort Campbell, Kentucky after months of harassment, which included hundreds of threatening notes and a death threat. Smith reported that the letter was pinned to her barrack’s door and that it said “they were going to break into the supply room and get the keys to my room and beat me to death in my bed.” The harassment started after another soldier saw her holding hands with a woman and told other soldiers on the base.

Fort Campbell has been the site of anti-gay violence in the past. In 1999, a gay soldier was beaten to death at Fort Campbell with a baseball bat.

Smith had applied for a discharge after receiving the threat, but was denied. Although the U.S. Military has a policy of discharging openly gay solders, Smith was told her application would not be processed until after her next rotation to Afghanistan. After her discharge was denied she drove two days to the Canadian border and settled down in Ontario under the name Skyler James.

Smith took her case to the Canadian federal courts after her application was rejected by the Immigration and Refugee Board in 2007. The court overturned the decision on November 20, 2009, finding that the board unfairly dismissed evidence that gays face brutality and harassment in the U.S. military and that it had an obligation to assess the likelihood that U.S. military law would discriminate against Smith. According to the judgment, “[i]t is true that the board member summarized at some length the evidence offered by the applicant, but he has by no means considered it, let alone analyzed it and provided reasons for dismissing it.”

Smith claims she would face court martial for abandoning her post and other charges for being in a same-sex relationship. She further claims that a jury of her peers would most likely share the same views as those who harassed her before she fled.

Although the Canadian Parliament has urged government agencies to accept the more than 200 American military servicemen and women who fled to Canada to avoid transfer to Iraq and Afghanistan, the courts and immigration officials have failed to comply. At least two soldiers have been deported and several more are at risk of meeting the same fate. None have been given refugee status so far. This stands in stark contrast to policy implementation during the Vietnam War, when thousands of U.S. citizens received permanent residency after fleeing to Canada to avoid the draft.

For more information, please see:

Women’s Enews – Lesbian Who Fled Army Opens Legal Grounds in Canada – 7 December 2009

AFP – Canada to Review U.S. Lesbian Soldier’s Asylum Claim – 20 November 2009

Associated Press – Lesbian U.S. War Deserter Wins Stay of Deportation – 20 November 2009

Nauru Plans to Ratify CEDAW

By Cindy Trinh
Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

YAREN, Nauru – Nauru announced its support for the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

Nauru is one of the remaining three Pacific countries yet to ratify the convention. Tonga and Palau have not signed.

Tonga refuses to sign, saying that CEDAW would “cut across the cultural and social heritage that makes up the unique Tongan way of life.”

Nauru’s President, Marcus Stephen, stated that the Convention would allow for the “full and complete development of a country through the maximum participation of women on equal terms with men in all fields.”

In a two-day dialogue, Stephen confirmed Nauru’s commitment to ratify CEDAW.

The parliamentarians of Nauru assessed the advantages and challenges for Nauru of ratifying CEDAW. The staff from the Pacific Regional Rights Resource Team of the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (RRRT) assisted the parliamentarians during the meeting in Nauru.

During the dialogue, the parliamentarians considered how the CEDAW process could assist them in identifying and addressing current gaps in national laws and policy relating to violence against women, women’s reproductive heath rights and political participation by women.

However, ratifying CEDAW does pose challenges for Nauru, especially with the lack of resources and technical capacity to meed the associated implementation and reporting requirements of the Convention.

Mathew Batsiua, the Minister for Justice, Health and Sports, stated that it would be costly for Nauru to send a delegation to Geneva to report on Nauru’s progress in implementing CEDAW.

He suggested that to lessen the costs there could be special sittings of the CEDAW committee in the Pacific area, so that the Pacific Islands can report in a timely manner.

Nauru acknowledged RRRT’s technical support and looks forward to a “continuous partnership with key regional organizations and donor agencies in advancing gender equality through ratification of CEDAW in Nauru.”

For more information, please see:
Islands Business – Nauru MPs commit to ratifying CEDAW – 07 December 2009

Pacific.Scoop – Nauru MPs commit to ratifying CEDAW – 07 December 2009

Pacific Islands News Association – Nauru MPs commit to ratifying CEDAW – 07 December 2009

Radio New Zealand International – Nauru MPs back CEDAW – 07 December 2009

Cambodian War Tribunal Proves Turbulent

By M.E. Dodge
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

PHNOM PEHN, Cambodia — Amidst the trial of Khmer Rouge prison commander, Comrade Duch,the difficulty of such an undertaking in a country with a reputation for corruption and a compromised judiciary is apparent.  

Kang Kek Ieu, referred to as Kaing Guek Eav in tribunal filings, but better known by countrymen as, Comrade Duch, was responsible for running ehe infamous prison. At the site, Duch oversaw 15,000 supposed enemies of the revolution. It was at the camp where the inmates were tortured before being executed in the nearby “killing fields.”

At trial, Duch expressed  enthusiasm for the job at the notorious S-21 prison, and argued that he and his family would have been killed had he not carried out his superiors’ orders.

For nine months, French lawyer Francois Roux crafted a defense strategy of admission and apology that implied the team would seek a lenient sentence. But in the trial’s final moments, Duch and his Cambodian lawyer, Kar Savuth, broke with this posture, disputing the legitimacy of the court and calling for Duch’s immediate release. Even though the tribunal promised a more inclusive approach than its counterparts at the International Criminal Court at The Hague, instead, the trial ended with strike among Cambodian and foreign defense counsels. The disagreement signifies the difficulty and challenges of carrying out international standards of justice, especially in a country with a reputation for corruption and a deeply compromised legal system.

Over the last two years, claims of governmental interference and kickbacks have underscored the disadvantages of holding the tribunal in Cambodia. The turbulent negotiations in bringing about former Khmer Rouge leaders to justice began in 1997. By 2003, former-U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the extreme politicization of Cambodia’s judiciary required that the tribunal be held outside the Cambodian system. After much deliberation, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia was developed as a local tribunal, namely running under local laws, with the United Nations playing the role of a minor partner. After implementing this model, it is said that, “No one in the U.N. or elsewhere will ever copy the Cambodian model,” said Brad Adams, Asia head of Human Rights Watch. “It’s the lowest standard the United Nations has been willing to go.”  
  
 

For more information, please see:

The Boston Globe – Cambodia and its War Tribunal – December 6, 2009 

Los Angeles Times – Cambodia’s first war crimes trial marred by flaws – December 6, 2009

KI Media – KR Tribunal to instigate civil war in Cambodia?”: CWCI – December 6, 2009

Martial Law in Philippines Challenged

By Michael E. Sanchez
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia 

SHARIFF AGUAK, Philippines- Civil rights groups in the Philippines have filed a legal challenge against the government’s imposing of martial law in the southern province of Maguindanao.  Late Friday Gloria Arroyo, the Philippines’ president declared military rule, citing a breakdown of order in the province. 

The Philippine armed forces and police say they are pursuing at least 3,000 men loyal to the Ampatuan clan.  The government has accused the clan of killing 57 people last week and inciting rebellion.

There has been criticism from pro-democracy groups, saying that imposing military rule is an overreaction by the government, setting a dangerous precedent which goes against the constitution.  This is the first time in 30 years that martial law has been imposed anywhere in the Philippines since late dictator Ferdinand Marcos declared it nationwide in the late 1970’s.

Harry Roque, a human rights lawyer said the legal challenge “questioned the constitutionality of the presidents declaration”.  Roque said the constitution, which was drafted after the Marcos dictatorship, allows for a declaration of martial law only “when there is a foreign invasion or when there is an actual taking up of arms for the purpose of overthrowing the Philippine government”.  However the situation in Maguindanao, according to Roque, was one of lawlessness, and did not fit into the constitutional requirements for imposing martial law.  He said “The task at hand now is to effectively investigate and prosecute those behind this dastardly act, rather than declare martial law”.

President Arroyo’s critics have also criticized the declaration of rebellion because it politicizes the crimes and allows suspects to be granted bail and presidential amnesty.  The security forces however, say that martial law has allowed them the freedom to move against the Ampatuan clan.  Officials have claimed that a series of raids have uncovered a vast cache of weapons and ammunition stored by Ampatuan supporters.  Commanders have also stated that the Ampatuan followers, numbering up to 4,000, are believed to be heavily armed and capable of carrying out bombing, arson attacks and abductions.

But many Filipinos are wary about the methods being used to do what should have been done long ago, according to Rachel Harvey, BBC’s South East Asia correspondent.

Some critics of the President say she may move to place the entire country under martial law in a bid to hold on to power after her term ends next year.

For information, please see:

BBC News- Philippine Forces Target 3,000 Clan Rebels – 7 December 2009

Aljazeera.net- Philippines Martial Law Challenged– 7 December 2009

Associated Press- Philippine Massacre Suspects Face Rebellion Raps-7 December 2009