SherriMunnerlyn
VIP Member
- Jun 11, 2012
- 12,201
- 265
- 83
- Thread starter
- #541
pg 30
"Conclusions
110. As we have explained, we have been given two radically different accounts of Israeli 1 practice. It is not our role to adjudicate between them. But within them are certain undisputed facts which compel us to conclude that Israel is in breach of articles 2 (discrimination), 3 (child’s best interests), 37(b) (premature resort to detention), (c) (non-separation from adults) and (d) (prompt access to lawyers) and 40 (use of shackles)111 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. If the manner of arrest and detention is to a significant extent that which is described in paragraphs 36 and 37, Israel will also be in breach of the prohibition on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in article 37(a) of the Convention. Transportation of child prisoners into Israel is in breach of article 76 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Failure to translate Military Order 1676 from Hebrew is a violation of article 65 of the Fourth Geneva Convention." 111. With regard to what is set out in paragraph 101, we record our view that to hold children routinely and for substantial periods in solitary confinement would, if it occurred, be capable of amounting to torture in breach not only of article 37(a) of the UNCRC but of other well-known international instruments. 112. The changes brought about by Military Order 1676 are positive. However, as this report indicates, there is still a long way to go before Israel can be confident that it satisfies its international and humanitarian obligations. We hope that the changes already made to improve the system will be the start of a process of continuing improvement so as to deliver parity between the treatment of Israeli and Palestinian children.
113. We are concerned at early reports of a divide between this new law and ongoing practice. For instance, the military order was published only in Hebrew. We are told that this is common with military orders, but it is a fundamental obligation of a State to let those subject to its jurisdiction know what laws it is promulgating.
114. When the Ministry of Justice discussed the proposed changes with us, it described them as conditional on there being no significant unrest or ‘third intifada’. We record our concern about this conditionality. A major cause of future unrest may well be the resentment of continuing injustice. We hope that the Israeli Government will recognise this, and will recognise too that justice is not a negotiable commodity but a fundamental human right which can itself do much to defuse anger. 115. It may be that much of the reluctance to treat Palestinian children in conformity with international norms stems from a belief, which was advanced to us by a military prosecutor, that every Palestinian child is a “potential terrorist”. Such a stance seems to us to be the starting point of a spiral of injustice, and one which only Israel, as the Occupying Power in the West Bank, can reverse."...
http://www.childreninmilitarycustod.../Children_in_Military_Custody_Full_Report.pdf
"Conclusions
110. As we have explained, we have been given two radically different accounts of Israeli 1 practice. It is not our role to adjudicate between them. But within them are certain undisputed facts which compel us to conclude that Israel is in breach of articles 2 (discrimination), 3 (child’s best interests), 37(b) (premature resort to detention), (c) (non-separation from adults) and (d) (prompt access to lawyers) and 40 (use of shackles)111 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. If the manner of arrest and detention is to a significant extent that which is described in paragraphs 36 and 37, Israel will also be in breach of the prohibition on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in article 37(a) of the Convention. Transportation of child prisoners into Israel is in breach of article 76 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Failure to translate Military Order 1676 from Hebrew is a violation of article 65 of the Fourth Geneva Convention." 111. With regard to what is set out in paragraph 101, we record our view that to hold children routinely and for substantial periods in solitary confinement would, if it occurred, be capable of amounting to torture in breach not only of article 37(a) of the UNCRC but of other well-known international instruments. 112. The changes brought about by Military Order 1676 are positive. However, as this report indicates, there is still a long way to go before Israel can be confident that it satisfies its international and humanitarian obligations. We hope that the changes already made to improve the system will be the start of a process of continuing improvement so as to deliver parity between the treatment of Israeli and Palestinian children.
113. We are concerned at early reports of a divide between this new law and ongoing practice. For instance, the military order was published only in Hebrew. We are told that this is common with military orders, but it is a fundamental obligation of a State to let those subject to its jurisdiction know what laws it is promulgating.
114. When the Ministry of Justice discussed the proposed changes with us, it described them as conditional on there being no significant unrest or ‘third intifada’. We record our concern about this conditionality. A major cause of future unrest may well be the resentment of continuing injustice. We hope that the Israeli Government will recognise this, and will recognise too that justice is not a negotiable commodity but a fundamental human right which can itself do much to defuse anger. 115. It may be that much of the reluctance to treat Palestinian children in conformity with international norms stems from a belief, which was advanced to us by a military prosecutor, that every Palestinian child is a “potential terrorist”. Such a stance seems to us to be the starting point of a spiral of injustice, and one which only Israel, as the Occupying Power in the West Bank, can reverse."...
http://www.childreninmilitarycustod.../Children_in_Military_Custody_Full_Report.pdf
