The Turkel Report: A Preliminary Analysis

New Article Submission

Thank you for your interest in Jadaliyya. We welcome all submissions. The most significant requirement is for Jadaliyya submissions to be analytically compelling and offer a perspective or argument that has not been covered at length either on Jadaliyya or elsewhere. Because of the volume of submissions, well-written pieces are prioritized. Length is flexible, 1000 to 2500 words is the average range. However, we will accept longer pieces. Once submitted, several members of the editorial committee will review your piece and one of them will inform you of the decision.
Author Details
Article Details
Select Countries
Select Keywords
Select Topics
Only RTF, Word, and Pages documents accepted.

Recommended image size: 762x800 px

Location of each image should be indicated in the text of the article via a square bracket caption that includes: (1) a description of the image; (2) the photographer/designer and source of the image. Please note we only use images you as the author have the right to use, which usually means those of your own creation or those published under Creative Commons. Alternatively, you need specific permission from the copyright holder.
Please read the Release Form and provide an electronic signature [your full name] below to confirm that you accept its terms
Required
Hyperlink words in your article if they refer to links on the internet. We encourage more, rather than less, links (try to avoid footnotes—embed them as hyperlinks if possible)

Article added successfully.

Pages Menu BETA
Mar 6, 2013 Palestine-Israel
[A child carring a sign that reads `massacre on high-seas` stands on the beach-front in Ashdod. Photo by Edo Medicks used under a Creative Commons license.] [A child carring a sign that reads `massacre on high-seas` stands on the beach-front in Ashdod. Photo by Edo Medicks used under a Creative Commons license.]

The Turkel Report: A Preliminary Analysis

By : Adalah

The Turkel Report, which includes important evidence and recommendations, may become a dead letter if the international community does not act to ensure that it contributes the pursuance of accountability vis-a-vis Israeli violations of international law and to justice for victims.

On 6 February 2013, the Israeli government-appointed Turkel Committee published the second part of its report. The report examines whether Israeli investigations of claims of war crimes and breaches of international law conform to international law standards. The Committee affirms that it does. However, it also details no less than eighteen recommendations to improve Israel’s investigation systems.

Adalah, the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) and Physicians for Human Right-Israel (PHR-I) call on the Israeli government to adopt and implement these recommendations. We similarly call on the international community to demand Israel’s strict compliance with international norms regarding the investigation of alleged violations of human rights and international humanitarian law (IHL).

The Turkel Committee, appointed in June 2010, was charged with investigating the legality of the Israeli closure and maritime blockade of Gaza, and the legality of the Israeli navy’s raid on a flotilla carrying aid to Gaza in May 2010. The Israeli raid ended in the deaths of nine Turkish activists, multiple injuries, and the arrests and detention of other flotilla participants. The second, broader part of the Committee’s mandate was to determine whether Israeli investigations of claims of war crimes and breaches of international law conform to international law standards. 

The latter subject was assigned to the Committee against the backdrop of growing initiatives by civil society organizations, individuals, and UN-appointed bodies to criticize the manner in which Israel investigates human rights and IHL violations alleged to have been committed by its forces. The second part of the Turkel Committee’s report (over 400 pages long), is a detailed examination of how the Israeli military, police, and the Israel Security Agency (ISA or Shin Bet), which is charged, among other things, with interrogating individuals considered to be security suspects by Israel, conduct investigations of complaints lodged by or behalf of civilians. 

While the Committee found that Israel’s investigatory systems conformed to international standards, the actual, specific findings and recommendations paint a very different picture. The Committee’s findings regarding Israeli failings in objectively and sufficiently investigating complaints of Israeli violations – including targeting civilians, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks on civilians, the use of human shields, massive destruction of homes and infrastructure, torture, ill-treatment of detainees, illegal arrests of Palestinians, abusive and excessive use of administrative detention, and settler violence – serve as both an indictment and as an unbiased (from the official viewpoint of Israel) call to action. The fact that the Committee made these eighteen recommendations essentially confirms the criticisms voiced by human rights organizations over the years regarding the bias and inadequacy of Israel’s investigatory mechanisms and we therefore call on Israel to implement them. 

The recommendations made by the Committee include:

  • Initiating legislation for all international law offenses that do not have a corresponding domestic offense in Israeli criminal law, for example, the absolute prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment
  • Enacting legislation to impose direct criminal liability on military commanders and civilian superiors where they did not take all reasonable measures to prevent offenses committed by their subordinates
  • Transferring the role of the ISA Interrogatee Complaints Comptroller from the ISA to the Police Investigation Division at the Ministry of Justice
  • The full videotaping of all ISA interrogations, in accordance with rules that will be determined by the AG in coordination with the head of the ISA
  • Strengthening the status and independence of the Chief Military Prosecutor (CMP) because of the dual hat of the Military Advocate General (MAG)
  • Implementing reporting procedures, including the documentation of the scene of an incident, and the seizure and storing of  all exhibits and documents that may assist the examination and investigation
  • Implementing a strict documentation procedure for all examination and investigation actions carried out in a file and for all the decisions made, especially in cases involving investigations of alleged violations of IHL
  • Establishing a fact-finding assessment mechanism with special team which should form the basis for the MAG’s decision as to whether an investigation is necessary
  • Establishing a timeframe of a few weeks for the decision whether to open an investigation and set a maximum period of time between the decision to begin an investigation and the decision to adopt legal or disciplinary measures or to close the case
  • An obligation on the MAG to reason his decision not to open an investigation and applying the arrangements provided in the Rights of Victims of Crime Law – 2001, relating to the receipt of information on criminal proceedings to persons injured by law enforcement operations of the security forces.

However, the three signing organizations, while endorsing the recommendations of the meticulously researched report, consider its impartiality to be marred by its apparent purpose, namely to shield Israeli suspects of war crimes and the laws of war from prosecution abroad. While the report describes the shortcomings of the system in detail, its authors nevertheless conclude that current Israeli investigations mechanisms are compatible with international law, in an apparent attempt to provide immunity for Israel for its past actions.

A further cause for concern is that the Committee’s recommendations are not legally binding and there is no legal obligation on the part of the Israeli government to adopt them. Like many other government-appointed committees and Commissions of Inquiry in Israel, its recommendations may remain ink on paper for years to come. The obstacles preventing Israel from conducting effective investigations and criminal procedures regarding violations of the human rights of Palestinians have always been more to do with a lack of political will rather than professional competency, capacity or knowledge.

If Israel adopts the recommendations made in the report, they would form the basis for the introduction of serious improvements in the local investigative process and in domestic justice mechanisms for dealing with alleged war crimes and gross human rights violations in situations of conflict and Occupation. However, if the report is to support the ultimate aim of accountability, justice, and protection from impunity, the international community must establish clear mechanisms to ensure that Israel now carries out the effective local investigations that have been denied to Palestinian victims for years, failing which international justice mechanisms will likely continue to be pursued.

This coalition:

  • Supports the adoption of the Turkel Report’s recommendations by Israel;
  • Reminds the EU and the wider international community that Israel’s past record of heeding recommendations made by commissions of inquiry is poor; and
  • Appeals to the international community to apply a strict level of scrutiny, not relinquishing its demand for Israeli compliance with international human rights and humanitarian law, and to demand the implementation of the Turkel Report’s recommendations.

Adalah - The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel
Tags
Feb 16, 2011 Lebanon
Jadaliyya Reports By :
Jadaliyya Reports

Past is Present: Settler Colonialism Matters!

On 5-6 March 2011, the Palestine Society at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London will hold its seventh annual conference, "Past is Present: Settler Colonialism in Palestine." This year`s conference aims to understand Zionism as a settler colonial project which has, for more than a century, subjected Palestine and Palestinians to a structural and violent form of destruction, dispossession, land appropriation and erasure in the pursuit of a new Jewish Israeli society. By organizing this conference, we hope to reclaim and revive the settler colonial paradigm and to outline its potential to inform and guide political strategy and mobilization.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is often described as unique and exceptional with little resemblance to other historical or ongoing colonial conflicts. Yet, for Zionism, like other settler colonial projects such as the British colonization of Ireland or European settlement of North America, South Africa or Australia, the imperative is to control the land and its resources -- and to displace the original inhabitants. Indeed, as conference keynote speaker Patrick Wolfe, one of the foremost scholars on settler colonialism and professor at La Trobe University in Victoria, Australia, argues, "the logic of this project, a sustained institutional tendency to eliminate the Indigenous population, informs a range of historical practices that might otherwise appear distinct--invasion is a structure not an event."[i]

Therefore, the classification of the Zionist movement as a settler colonial project, and the Israeli state as its manifestation, is not merely intended as a statement on the historical origins of Israel, nor as a rhetorical or polemical device. Rather, the aim is to highlight Zionism`s structural continuities and the ideology which informs Israeli policies and practices in Palestine and toward Palestinians everywhere. Thus, the Nakba -- whether viewed as a spontaneous, violent episode in war, or the implementation of a preconceived master plan -- should be understood as both the precondition for the creation of Israel and the logical outcome of Zionist settlement in Palestine.

Moreover, it is this same logic that sustains the continuation of the Nakba today. As remarked by Benny Morris, “had he [David Ben Gurion] carried out full expulsion--rather than partial--he would have stabilised the State of Israel for generations.”[ii] Yet, plagued by an “instability”--defined by the very existence of the Palestinian nation--Israel continues its daily state practices in its quest to fulfill Zionism’s logic to maximize the amount of land under its control with the minimum number of Palestinians on it. These practices take a painful array of manifestations: aerial and maritime bombardment, massacre and invasion, house demolitions, land theft, identity card confiscation, racist laws and loyalty tests, the wall, the siege on Gaza, cultural appropriation, and the dependence on willing (or unwilling) native collaboration and security arrangements, all with the continued support and backing of imperial power. 

Despite these enduring practices however, the settler colonial paradigm has largely fallen into disuse. As a paradigm, it once served as a primary ideological and political framework for all Palestinian political factions and trends, and informed the intellectual work of committed academics and revolutionary scholars, both Palestinians and Jews.

The conference thus asks where and why the settler colonial paradigm was lost, both in scholarship on Palestine and in politics; how do current analyses and theoretical trends that have arisen in its place address present and historical realities? While acknowledging the creativity of these new interpretations, we must nonetheless ask: when exactly did Palestinian natives find themselves in a "post-colonial" condition? When did the ongoing struggle over land become a "post-conflict" situation? When did Israel become a "post-Zionist" society? And when did the fortification of Palestinian ghettos and reservations become "state-building"?

In outlining settler colonialism as a central paradigm from which to understand Palestine, this conference re-invigorates it as a tool by which to analyze the present situation. In doing so, it contests solutions which accommodate Zionism, and more significantly, builds settler colonialism as a political analysis that can embolden and inform a strategy of active, mutual, and principled Palestinian alignment with the Arab struggle for self-determination, and indigenous struggles in the US, Latin America, Oceania, and elsewhere.

Such an alignment would expand the tools available to Palestinians and their solidarity movement, and reconnect the struggle to its own history of anti-colonial internationalism. At its core, this internationalism asserts that the Palestinian struggle against Zionist settler colonialism can only be won when it is embedded within, and empowered by, the broader Arab movement for emancipation and the indigenous, anti-racist and anti-colonial movement--from Arizona to Auckland.

SOAS Palestine Society invites everyone to join us at what promises to be a significant intervention in Palestine activism and scholarship.

For over 30 years, SOAS Palestine Society has heightened awareness and understanding of the Palestinian people, their rights, culture, and struggle for self-determination, amongst students, faculty, staff, and the broader public. SOAS Palestine society aims to continuously push the frontiers of discourse in an effort to make provocative arguments and to stimulate debate and organizing for justice in Palestine through relevant conferences, and events ranging from the intellectual and political impact of Edward Said`s life and work (2004), international law and the Palestine question (2005), the economy of Palestine and its occupation (2006), the one state (2007), 60 Years of Nakba, 60 Years of Resistance (2009), and most recently, the Left in Palestine (2010).

For more information on the SOAS Palestine Society 7th annual conference, Past is Present: Settler Colonialism in Palestine: www.soaspalsoc.org

SOAS Palestine Society Organizing Collective is a group of committed students that has undertaken to organize annual academic conferences on Palestine since 2003.

 

[i] Patrick Wolfe, Settler Colonialism and the Transformation of Anthropology: The Politics and Poetics of an Ethnographic Event, Cassell, London, p. 163

[ii] Interview with Benny Morris, Survival of the Fittest, Haaretz, 9. January 2004, http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/art.php?aid=5412