“Illegal Closure of the Gaza Strip: Collective Punishment of the Civilian Population”.

8/8/2019 “Illegal Closure of the Gaza Strip: Collective Punishment of the Civilian Population”.

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/illegal-closure-of-the-gaza-strip-collective-punishment-of-the-civilian 1/104

1T h e I l l e g a l C l o s u r e o f t h e G a z a S t r i p : C o

l l e c t i v e P u n i s h m e n t o f t h e C i v i l i a n

P o p u l a t i o n

10 December 2010

C c t i P i s t

t Ciii

P p t i

Gz Stip:Ig Cs T h e

o f t h e

C c t i P ist

t Ciii

P p t i





P o p u l a t i o n



Gz Stip:Ig Cs T

h e

o f t h

e

C c t i

P ist

t CiiiP p t i

10 December 2010



Palestinian Centre for Human Rights

Gaza City 29 Omar El Mukhtar Street, Near Amal Hotel, P.O.Box 1328

Tel/Fax: +972 8 2824 776 / +972 8 2825 893

Khan Yunis Branch El Amal Street, Branch of Jamal Abdul-Nasser Street,near the College of Education

Tel/Fax: +972 8 2061 025 / +972 8 2061 035

Jabalya Branch Jabalya Refugee Camp, Opposite to Timraz Fuel StationTel/Fax: +972 8 2454 150 / +972 8 2454 160

West Bank Oce - Ramallah Al Beira, Nablus RoadTel/Fax: +972 2 2406697, +972 2 2406698

E-mail: [email protected] Webpage: www.pchrgaza.org



The PaleSTInIan CenTre for human rIGhTS

Te Palesinian Cenre or Human ighs is an independen non-pro legal agency based in Gaza ciy. Te Cenre was esablished in April 1995 by a group o Palesinian lawyers and human righs aciviss in order o proec humanrighs and promoe he rule o law in accordance wih inernaional sandards, creae and develop democraicinsiuions and an acive civil sociey in Palesine in accordance wih inernaionally acceped sandards andpracices and suppor all eors aimed a enabling he Palesinian people o exercise heir inalienable righs accordingo inernaional law.

• Te Cenre enjoys Consulaive Saus wih he ECOSOC o he Unied Naions. I was graned hreeinernaional prominen awards or is eors in he eld o human righs:

• Te 1996 French epublic Award on Human ighs; and• Te 2002 Bruno Kreisky Award or Ousanding Achievemens in he Area o Human ighs; and• Te 2003 Inernaional Service Human ighs Award (UNAIS).

Te Cenre has wide relaionships wih human righs and civil sociey organizaions hroughou he world. I is analiae o ve inernaional and Arab human righs organizaions, which are acive in he inernaional arena:

(1) International Commission of JuristsTe Inernaional Commission o Juriss (ICJ), headquarered in Geneva, is a non-governmenal organisaion inconsulaive saus wih he Unied Naions Economic and Social Council, UNESCO, and he Council o Europe

and he OAU. Founded in 1952, is ask is o deend he rule o law hroughou he world and o work owards heull observance o he provisions in he Universal Declaraion o Human ighs. is membership is composed o sixy eminen juriss who are represenaives o he dieren legal sysems o he world.

(2) Federation Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l’HommeTe Federaion Inernaionale des Ligues des Drois de l’Homme (FIDH) is an inernaional non-governmenalorganisaion dedicaed o he world-wide deence o human righs as dened by he Universal Declaraion o Human ighs o 1948. Founded in 1922, FIDH has eighy-nine naional aliaes in all regions.

(3) Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network

Te Euro-Medierranean Human ighs Nework (Euro-Med Nework) is a nework o human righs organisaions andindividuals rom he Middle Eas, Norh Arica and he European Union, esablished in 1997. Te overall objecive o heNework is o conribue o he proecion o he human righs principles embodied in he Barcelona Declaraion o 1995.

(4) International Legal Assistance Consortium (ILAC)Te Inernaional Legal Assisance Consorium (ILAC) is one o he mos imporan inernaional legal bodies. Iis specialized in legal and judicial raining. I includes more han 30 members o disinguished legal organizaionshroughou he world, including American Bar Associaion; Arab Lawyers Union; and Bar Council o England and

Wales.

(5) Te Arab Organization for Human RightsI is an NGO ounded in 1983. I calls or respec and promoion o human and people righs and undamenalreedoms in he Arab World or all individuals on is land in accordance wih inernaional human righsinsrumens. Te Organizaion signed an agreemen wih Egyp in May 2000, according o which is headquarer

was moved rom Limassol in Cyprus o Cairo.

(6) World Coalition against the Death Penalty Te World Coaliion agains he Deah Penaly is an alliance o abou 48 NGOs, bar associaions, local bodies andunions, including he Palesinian Cenre or Human ighs. I was creaed in ome in May 2002. Since 2003, heCoaliion has made 10 Ocober he World Day agains he Deah Penaly.



admInISTraTIve Board

aji Sourani

Jaber WishahIyad AlamiHamdi Shaqqura

Director General: Raji Sourani

Te Palesinian Cenre or Human ighs is an independen legal body dedicaed o he proeciono human righs, he promoion o he rule o law, and he upholding o democraic principles in heOccupied erriories. Mos o he Cenre’s aciviies and ineress concenrae on he Gaza Sripdue o he resricion on movemen beween he Wes Bank and Gaza Srip imposed by he Israeligovernmen and is miliary apparaus.

fundInG of The CenTre

Te Cenre is unded by he generous conribuions o a number o inernaional non-governmenalorganizaions in he elds o human righs, democracy, and social jusice and a number o

Governmens which has riendly relaionships wih he Palesinian people. PCH highly appreciaeshe conribuions o unding organizaions, especially:

Oxam NOVIB – Holland

Royal Danish Representative Ofce – Rammallah

Swiss Agency or Development and Cooperation – SDC

Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency – SIDA

Representative Ofce o the Kingdom o the Netherland to the Palestinian Authority

European Union

Open Society Institute – U.S.A

Christian Aid – U.K

Dan Church Aid – Denmark

Grassroots International – U.S.A

Representative Ofce o Norway

Irish Aid

Kvinna Till Kvinna – Sweden

Al Quds Association Malaga – Spain

Trocaire – Ireland

Denis O›Brien – Ireland

CARE International –West Bank and Gaza

ACSUR

Welare Association



TaBle of ConTenTS

Executive Summary

Introduction

Structure o the Report

I. Te Reality o the Closure

1. Te longstanding closure policy as imposed by

Israel on the oPt2. Te absolute closure o the Gaza Strip

2.1 Gaza Border Crossings: Overview

2.2 Israel’s oal conrol o he Gaza borders2.3 More han hree years o absolue closure

Box 1: Te Closure o he aah Crossing and he Agreemenon Movemen and Access o 2005

2.3.1 esricions on he movemen o persons2.3.2 A dicul journey: raveling abroad rom Gaza

Box 2: When Gaza had an Airpor

2.3.3 esricions on he movemen o goods

2.4 Gaza’s border crossings remain virually sealednowihsanding he alleged June 2010 easing o he

closure

3. Te devastating combined efect o the closureand Israel’s military ofensive on the Gaza Strip

o 27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009

II. Te Illegality o the Closure

4. Recognition o the illegality o the current

absolute closure

4.1 Legal Saus o he Gaza Srip as occupied erriory and

applicabiliy o occupaion law Box 3: Israel’s conrol o he Palesinian Populaion egisry

4.2 Israel’s obligaion as an Occupying Power and he illegaliy

o he closure under IHL4.3 Israel’s violaion o undamenal human righs o he

civil ian populaion

4.3.1 Te denial o he reedom o movemen o personsand goods

5. No security-rationale behind the closure

5.1 Te ‘economic warare’ raionale disclosed

9

15

15

19

192222

23

23

26

2829

30

32

34

36

39

39

40

43

46

48

5152

54



5.2 A orm o collecive punishmen

5.3 Te ulimae poliical aims o he illegal policy o closures

imposed by Israel

III. Te Efects o the Closure and the Violation o

Fundamental Human Rights

6. Socio-economic efects o the closure

Box 4: Te Buer Zone in he Gaza Srip

6.1 Fuel and elecriciy crisis6.2 Deerioraion o he healhcare secor and he violaion o

he righ o healh

Box 5: Applicaion Procedure o cross Erez or medicalreamen

6.3 No an adequae sandard o living6.4 Food insecuriy and he increased cos o living

6.5 Waer polluion6.6 Urgen Housing Concerns and he violaion o he righ oadequae housing

6.7 Educaion denied

6.8 Palesinian amilies orcibly dividedBox 6: Family Visis denied or Gazan prisoners in Israeli jails

6.9 Economic Srangulaion and he violaion o he righ o

work 6.9.1 Agriculural secor cu o rom expor markes

abroad

6.9.2 Fishing indusry conroned wih shrinking sea6.9.3 Indusry/consrucion secors wihou raw

maerials6.10 Human digniy deprived

Conclusions

7. Te criminal responsibility o the Israeli

authorities or implementing the illegal closure

57

58

61

61

6263

65

7074

75

78

81

8589

91

92

94

95

97

98

101

101





P o p u l a t i o n

exeCuTIve Summary

In June 2007, ollowing he Hamas akeover, Israel imposed an absolueclosure on he Gaza Srip. For more han hree years, his mos exreme ormo closure has been coninuously applied o he so-called “hosile eniy” hais he Gaza Srip, cuting o 1.7 million individuals rom he ouside world.

Palesinian civilians are illegally denied access o heir basic needs, including

ood, medicine, uel, elecriciy and oher necessary commodiies.

As a rule Palesinians are no allowed o ravel in and ou o Gaza, wih ew excepions mainly or humaniarian reasons (mosly paiens needing liesaving medical reamens). Sudens are no allowed o atend universiy programs abroad, or in he Wes Bank; amilies are divided and unable o visieach oher even wihin he Palesinian erriory; raders and businessmen are

prevened rom doing heir business. Only a small, ighly regulaed, numbero inernaionals are allowed ino Gaza under a sric sysem o permis.

For he pas hree and hal years he impor o goods ino Gaza has beenprohibied by he Israeli auhoriies, wih only limied quaniies o basicgoods, mainly ood, al lowed enry or ‘humaniarian’ reasons. Israel has alsoimposed a oal ban on he expors o he Gaza Srip’s producs, desroying

he economic secor and generaing dependency. Only limied quaniieso wo goods, owers and srawberries, were allowed o be sporadically expored hanks o specic inernaional mediaion.

Te eecs o he curren absolue closure o Gaza have been exacerbaed by Israel’s 27 December 2008-18 January 2009 miliary operaion(codenamed “operaion Cas Lead” by he Israeli miliary). Te oensivecaused he deah o 1,419 Palesinians, 1,167 o whom (82%) were civiliansno aking par in hosiliies and he injury o a urher 5,300 and resuledin he exensive desrucion o houses and civilian inrasrucure, includingschools, hospials, and indusry.

Since he oensive, in violaion o UN Securiy Council esoluion 1860

(2009), Israel has ailed o open he borders o Gaza, hus impeding hepassage o goods necessary or recovery and reconsrucion. By imposing hisdraconian closure policy – and no lifing i in he afermah o he miliary operaion - Israel has manuacured a chronic and proound humaniariancrisis.





P o p u l a t i o n

By denying a people heir abiliy o work and heir righ o move; by deprivingamilies o he abiliy o rebuild heir homes which have been reducedo rubble; and by orcing individuals o give up generaions-old amily radiions, an enire populaion is being reduced o a ‘humaniarian problem’.o his end, he mos proound impac o he closure canno be described

by gures or saisics. Te sysemaic humiliaion, inimidaion and generaldegradaion ha are he resul o Israel’s measures and resricions erode he

very abric o lie or he people o Gaza and deprive hem o heir very humandigniy.

95% o he 3,900 indusrial esablishmens in he Gaza Srip have closedor suspended heir work due o he resricions placed on he impor o raw maerials and as a resul o he inabiliy o expor heir producs. Teremaining 5% work a 20-50% o heir capaciy.

Te decimaion o Gaza’s indusry has resuled in he loss o beween 100,000-120,000 jobs. Afer he miliary oensive o December 2008-January 2009,only 1,878 individuals, o 65,000 employed prior o he curren closure,coninue o be employed in he indusrial secor in Gaza.

Israel’s unilaeral imposiion o a growing “buer zone” all along he Gaza borders, as a “no-go area” implemened wih open re, currenly renders 17%

o Gaza erriory or 35% o is agriculural land no accessible or accessibleonly under high risk o being sho by Israeli miliary orces. A sea, Israelallows shing only ou o 3 nauical miles, despie he limi o 20 nauicalmiles esablished under he Oslo Accords. Tis has urher drasically negaively impaced upon he agriculural and shing secor on whichhousands o amilies depend economically.

Tis repor ocuses on he Gaza Srip and on he excepionally sriccondiions o closure imposed by Israel over he pas hree and hal years.However he siuaion in Gaza canno be isolaed rom he overall conexo he occupaion o he Palesinian erriory. Equally, he closure policy isno a new phenomenon or one ha is limied o he Gaza Srip. Israel hassubjeced he occupied Palesinian erriory (oP) o an illegal policy o harsh resricions or almos wo decades.

For many years, Palesinians have no been allowed o ravel wihin he oP.esidens o Gaza have no been allowed o ravel o he Wes Bank andresidens o he Wes Bank are no allowed o ravel o Gaza. Even members





P o p u l a t i o n

o he Palesinian Legislaive Council have been resriced rom raveling inand ou o Gaza. Te vas majoriy o Palesinians living in he Wes Bank have never visied he Gaza Srip, as hey are prevened rom doing so. Anenire generaion o Gazans has never visied he res o he Palesinianerriory, le alone he world beyond he Palesinian erriory.

PCH believes ha Israel has pursued numerous aims hrough heimposiion o hese closures on he occupied Palesinian erriory, whichare one o he ools used by he occupying power o implemen a policy o separaion, ragmenaion and isolaion o he occupied erriory and o isinhabians.

An eviden direc implicaion o Israel’s closure policy is he growingseparaion inside he Palesinian erriory and among he Palesinianpeople. Te inernal poliical implicaions o his separaion, orced closure

and isolaion are eviden oday. Ulimaely, PCH nds ha he closureperpeuaes he long-sanding denial o sel-deerminaion o he Palesinianpeople.

Mos o all Israeli policy o closure exhibis a srongly puniive and reprisory characer: he closure is imposed collecively as a means o ‘economic

warare’, violaing inernaional law which unequivocally prohibis collecive

punishmen and reprisals agains civilians (Ar. 33 I V Geneva Convenion).Te Inernaional Commitee o he ed Cross clearly saed ha:

“Te whole o Gaza’s civilian populaion is being punished oracs or which hey bear no responsibiliy. Te closure hereoreconsiues a collecive punishmen imposed in clear violaion o Israel’s obligaions under inernaional humaniarian law.”

Tis repor deails he Israeli auhoriies’ responsibiliies or heimplemenaion o his illegal closure policy, which violaes undamenalprinciples o inernaional humaniarian law and he mos basic humanrighs o he Palesinian populaion o Gaza. In he words o he UN FacFinding Mission on he Gaza Conic, led by Jusice ichard Goldsone:

“Te condiions o lie in Gaza, resuling rom deliberae acions o he Israeli armed orces and he declared policies o he Governmeno Israel – as hey were presened by is auhorized and legiimaerepresenaives – wih regard o he Gaza Srip beore, during and





P o p u l a t i o n

afer he miliary operaion, cumulaively indicae he inenion

o inic collecive punishmen on he people o he Gaza Srip in violaion o inernaional humaniarian law”.

Te closure is prohibied as a orm o collecive punishmen and resuls inhe inicion o grea suering on he civilian populaion, which is a grave

breach o he Geneva Convenions. I is a crime ha enails individualcriminal responsibiliy or hose involved in his policy a various levels,

especially a he level o planning, organizaion, and acive implemenaiono he closure. Ulimaely, he closure may amoun o persecuion, which is acrime agains humaniy.

PCH reieraes ha nohing has subsanially changed afer he alleged“easing” o he closure, announced by Israel in June 2010 (afer he deadly Flotilla atack). As a very recen independen repor co-signed by a number

o inernaional NGOs has horoughly deailed, he measures aken by Israelio allegedly ease he closure are no eecive and Israel ailed o address heroo causes o he socio-economic crisis o Gaza.

Moreover PCH highlighs ha he parial easing o he resricionsimplemened by Israel does no deal wih he mos imporan aspec, whichis he reedom o movemen – also as a precondiion or he enjoymen o

many oher undamenal righs - o he imprisoned populaion o Gaza andhe resoraion o heir human digniy. Te Inernaional Fac Finding Mission mandaed by he UN o invesigaehe 31 May 2010 Israeli atack on he oilla carrying humaniarianassisance o Gaza, concluded ha he siuaion in he Gaza Srip is“deplorable”, “unsusainable” and “oally inolerable and unaccepable in he21s Cenury”. Te closure is “unlawul and canno be susained in law. Tisis so regardless o he grounds on which i is sough o jusiy he legaliy o he blockade”.

Te Inernaional communiy has he duy o ake measures o pu an endo he illegal closure o Gaza, which is inherenly illegal and criminal in isnaure. Te High Conracing Paries o he Geneva Convenions havehe duy o respec and ensure respec or he Convenions. Tis enails aduy o invesigae and prosecue hose responsible or grave breaches o he Convenions and o bring he perperaors o jusice beore heir ownnaional cours (Ar. 147 IV GC).





P o p u l a t i o n

By failing to do so the international community bears responsibility for theintentionally manufactured socio-economical crisis that is progressively destroying Gaza, and depriving its people of their most fundamentalhuman rights and dignity .





P o p u l a t i o n





P o p u l a t i o n

InTroduCTIon

Structure o the Report

Te presen repor is divided ino hree secions:

(i) Te rs secion, on he ‘ealiy o he Closure’, provides anoverview o he siuaion in he Gaza Srip, which is sill under

Israeli miliary occupaion and compleely dependen uponIsrael. I describes he closure pracices implemened by Israelagains he local populaion.

(ii) Te second secion, on he ‘Illegaliy o he Closure’, analyseshe resricions imposed by Israel in he ligh o inernaionalhumaniarian law and human righs law.

(iii) Finally, he hird secion, on he ‘Socio-economic impac o he Closure’ deails he worsening o he socio-economicsiuaion as a resul o he closure, and is disasrous impacon he undamenal human righs o he enire populaiono Gaza. Indeed, he mos proound impac o he Israeli-imposed resricions is on he human digniy o he Palesinian

populaion. Tis impac, alhough dicul o calculae, isapparen and aecs every aspec o lie in Gaza.

Israel has subjeced he occupied Palesinian erriory (oP), including heGaza Srip, o an illegal policy o closure or almos wo decades.

In June 2007, ollowing he Hamas akeover o he Gaza Srip, Israel imposedhe curren oal closure on he Srip. For more han hree years, his mosexreme orm o closure has been coninuously applied o he so-declared“hosile eniy”1 ha is he Gaza Srip, cuting o is inhabians rom heouside world. Palesinian civilians are illegally denied access o heir

basic needs, including ood, medicine, uel, elecriciy and oher necessary commodiies.

1 Securiy Cabine Declares Gaza Hosile erriory, Israeli Minisry o Foreign Aairs, o 19Sepember, 2007, available a:htp://www.ma.gov.il/MFA/Governmen/Communiques/2007/Securiy+Cabine+declares+Gaza+hosile+erriory+19-Sep-2007.hm.





P o p u l a t i o n

Te eecs o he closure have been exacerbaed by Israel’s 27 December2008-18 January 2009 miliary operaion (codenamed “operaion Cas Lead”

by he Israeli miliary). Te oensive caused he deah o 1,419 Palesinians,1,167 o whom were civilians no aking par in hosiliies2 (including 111

women, 318 children) and he injury o a urher 5,300 (1,600 childrenand 830 women) and resuled in he exensive desrucion o houses andcivilian inrasrucure, including schools, hospials, and indusry. Since heoensive, and in violaion o UN Securiy Council esoluion 1860 (2009)3 ,Israel has ailed o open he borders o Gaza, hus impeding he passage o goods necessary or reconsrucion.

Palesinian residens in Gaza are no allowed o leave he erriory, goods areno allowed o be expored and impors have been reduced o an excessively limied caegory o iems in quaniies dramaically insucien o ulllhe needs o he approximaely 1.7 million populaion o he Srip.4 In

imposing his draconian closure policy Israel has manuacured a chronichumaniarian crisis, or which Israeli auhoriies mus be held accounable.

As saed by he Inernaional Fac Finding Mission mandaed by he UN oinvesigae he 31 May 2010 Israeli atack on he oilla carrying humaniarianassisance o Gaza5 , he siuaion in he Srip is “deplorable”, “unsusainable”and “oally inolerable and unaccepable in he 21s Cenury”.6 Te closure is

“unlawul and canno be susained in law. Tis is so regardless o he groundson which i is sough o jusi y he legaliy o he blockade”.7

Indeed Israeli auhoriies are responsible or he implemenaion o he

2 Tese gures include he 251 non-combaan police ocers who were killed during heoensive.

3 S/ES/1860 (2009) o 8 January 2009, available a:

htp://daccess-ods.un.org/MP/2524654.hml.4 Figures abou he populaion o he Gaza Srip are no available: saisics indicaed 1.5

million almos hree years ago, wih a grow-rae o 3.4%.5 See he “epor o he Inernaional ac-nding mission o invesigae violaions o

inernaional law, including inernaional humaniarian and human righs law, resulingrom he Israeli atacks on he oilla o ships carrying humaniarian assisance”(hereinafer: he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Floilla inciden), A/HC/15/21o 27 Sepember 2010. Te Mission was decided on 2 June 2010 by he UN Humanighs Council (es. 14/1) and is members appoined on 23 July 2010. Te ull repor

is available a:htp://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/15session/A.HC.15.21_en.pd.

6 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Floilla inciden, A/HC/15/21, par.275.

7 Ibid, par. 261.





P o p u l a t i o n

illegal closure policy which violaes undamenal principles o inernaionalhumaniarian law and he mos basic human righs o he Palesinianpopulaion o Gaza. Te UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic,led by Jusice ichard Goldsone,8 concluded ha:

“Te condiions o lie in Gaza, resuling rom deliberae acions o he Israeli armed orces and he declared policies o he Governmeno Israel – as hey were presened by is auhorized and legiimaerepresenaives – wih regard o he Gaza Srip beore, during andafer he miliary operaion, cumulaively indicae he ineniono inic collecive punishmen on he people o he Gaza Srip in

violaion o inernaional humaniarian law”.9

Similarly, he UN ac-nding mission on he Floilla inciden poined ouha:

“…Te blockade amouns o collecive punishmen in violaion o Israel’s legal obligaions under inernaional humaniarian law”.10

Tis repor ocuses on he Gaza Srip and on he excepionally sriccondiions o closure imposed by Israel on his erriory over he pas hree

years. However he siuaion in Gaza canno be isolaed rom he overall

conex o he occupaion o he Palesinian erriory and he policy o closures can by no means be considered a new phenomenon or one ha islimied o he Gaza Srip.

8 Te Mission (hereinafer: he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic), was appoined by he UN Human Righs Council wih he mandae “o invesigae all violaions o inernaionalhuman righs law and humaniarian law” commited in he conex o he miliary operaions inGaza during he period rom 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009 “wheher beore, during orafer”,A/HRC/12/48 o 25 Sepember 2009.

9 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 74.10 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Floilla inciden, A/HC/15/21, par. 54.





P o p u l a t i o n





P o p u l a t i o n

I. The realITy of The CloSure

1.1 Te longstanding closure policy as imposed by Israel onthe oPt

Te ongoing closure imposed on he Gaza Srip since June 2007 atracssignican inernaional atenion as a resul o is exreme severiy. However,closures are no a new eaure o Israel’s policy owards he oP. Closures

have been imposed o varying degrees since he beginning o he miliary occupaion in 1967.11 Following a series o sric closures imposed by Israel on he Gaza Srip in 1996, he Palesinian Cenre or Human ighs(PCH) esablished a Closure Monioring eam which has moniored andrepored on he eecs o hese closures in regular Closure Updaes.12

Closure reers o Israel’s imposiion o border resricions around he oP as

a whole, or resriced areas, such as he curren closure o he Gaza Srip;his policy is enorced by Israel’s armed orces. Closures encompass varyingdegrees o conrol on he movemen o all goods, people and vehicles,paricularly – bu no limied o - across he Green Line, i.e. he armisice lineo 1949. Israel’s closure policy is applied a hree levels wih varying degreeso severiy:

i. General closure: is he leas resricive, imposed a he ouse o heoccupaion i has been in place ever since on he occupied Palesinianerriory. I allows Israel o conrol he movemen o Palesinians livingin he occupied erriory;

ii. Strict closure: a resricive ighening o he closure which allows very litle movemen, usually only ha o a humaniarian naure. I has

been applied more requenly since 1989, and in paricular since he re-deploymen o Israeli roops in he Gaza Srip in May 1994;

iii. Absolute closure: he mos resricive orm o closure which was rsimposed in 1996 or limied periods o ime.13 An absolue closure has

been imposed coninuously on he Gaza Srip since June 2007.

11 See PCH Sudy, Te Israeli Policy o Closure. Legal, Poliical and Humaniarian Evaluaion,1996, available a: www.pchrgaza.org

12 Te repors are available a: www.pchrgaza.org.13 See PCH Sudy, Te Israeli Policy o Closure. Legal, Poliical and Humaniarian Evaluaion, p. 5,

available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Israel osensibly jusies is closure policy on he basis o miliary consideraions and naional securiy. However, i is apparen ha in many cases – and specically wih regard o he ongoing closure imposed onGaza - his argumen is used as a preex and, as will be shown in his repor,resricions on he movemen o persons and goods do no eecively respond o securiy requiremens bu raher consiue a orm o collecivepunishmen (see infa section 5).

In he pas closures were imposed as acs o reribuion or realiaionin response o specic incidens or atacks carried ou by Palesinianmiliary and resisance groups and lased or a limied period o ime. 14 Teresricions on he reedom o movemen became more sringen wihhe oubreak o he second Iniada in Sepember 2000. Israel drasically resriced he access o Palesinians rom Gaza o Israel and he Wes Bank

by canceling exising permis and haling he issuance o new ones. Te

number o workers enering Israel daily hrough Erez crossing dropped rommore han 20,000 in Sepember 1999, o less han 900 in December 2000,and virually 0 in 2006.15

Te siuaion deerioraed urher afer he Israeli miliary disengagemenrom he Gaza Srip in Sepember 2005. As noed by he UN Oce orhe Coordinaion o Humaniarian Aairs (OCHA) “Coinciding wih

he Israeli disengagemen rom he Gaza Srip, movemen hrough Erezcrossing was severely resriced since 13 Augus [2005] wih only a very limied number o Palesinian workers and raders allowed access ino Israeland only a small number o acory owners allowed access ino he ErezIndusrial Zone (EIZ)”.16 Moreover, ollowing an atack on 24 Sepember2005, when Palesinian milians red homemade rockes rom he GazaSrip ino Israel, injuring six Israelis, anoher absolue closure was imposed

on all Palesinians in Gaza.Te resricions on Palesinians’ reedom o movemen will be addressed inmore deail in he secion o his repor addressing he illegaliy o he closure

14 Israel imposed he rs absolue closure on he Gaza Srip on 25 February 1996 in response o wosuicide bomb atacks in Ashkelon and Jerusalem carried ou by resisance aciviss. Oher absolueclosures were imposed laer he same year ollowing oher bomb atacks in el Aviv and Wes Jerusalem and he bloody clashes o Sepember-Ocober 1996, Ibid., p. 5.

15

Tese gures are aken rom he UN Oce or he Coordinaion o Humaniarian Aairs (OCHA)repors, which are available a: www.ochaop.org. See also he diagram included in he epor by GISHA, “Te aah Crossing: Who holds he keys?”, March 2009, p. 32, available a: www.gisha.org/UserFiles/File/publicaions/aah_epor_Eng.pd.

16 See OCHA, “Te Gaza Srip, Access epor”, Sepember 2005, available a: htp://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/73D80B9E47740D79852570A400651CC1.





P o p u l a t i o n

and he violaion o undamenal human righs (see inra secion 6). Suceo noe ha or many years Israel’s prohibiion on he movemen o peopleacross he borders o he Gaza Srip has been consisenly applied, wihlimied excepions, (predominanly relaing o hose paiens suering romlie hreaening diseases who require medical reamen abroad (see infa

BOX 5). However, even in hese cases, delays in he issuance o he necessary permis are ofen repored and have resuled in he deah o several paiens,he las being a wo-year-old child suering rom leukemia who died while

waiing or an urgen reerral o an Israeli hospial. In his regard, he WorldHealh Organizaion (WHO) repored ha since January 2009 a oal o 33paiens have died while waiing o access hospials ouside Gaza17.

For many years Palesinians rom Gaza have no been allowed o ravel ohe Wes Bank and Palesinians rom he Wes Bank are no allowed oravel o Gaza. Paradoxically, i is easier (despie being excepional and very

complicaed) or a Palesinian rom Gaza o ravel o Europe or he USA han o Jerusalem, amallah or he res o he occupied Palesinian erriory.Even members o he Palesinian Legislaive Council have been resricedrom raveling in and ou o Gaza. Te vas majoriy o Palesinians living inhe Wes Bank have never visied he Gaza Srip, since hey are no allowedaccess. Even members o he Palesinian Legislaive Council have beenresriced rom raveling in and ou o Gaza. An enire generaion o Gazans

has never visied he res o he Palesinian erriory, le alone he res o he world.

Israel has pursued dieren aims hrough he imposiion o hese closureson he Palesinian erriory: in paricular, he closures have been one o heools used by he occupying power o implemen a policy o separaion,ragmenaion and isolaion o he occupied erriory and o is inhabians.

Indeed i is clear ha one o he direc implicaions o he closure policy imposed by Israel is a growing separaion inside he oP isel and among hePalesinian people (see inra secion 5.3). Te inernal poliical implicaionso his separaion, orced closure and isolaion are eviden oday. Ulimaely,he closure perpeuaes he long-sanding denial o sel-deerminaion o hePalesinian populaion.

Te Israeli policy o imposing closures on he occupied Palesinian erriory exhibis a srongly puniive and reprisory characer; he closures are imposed

17 WHO, “eerral o Paiens rom he Gaza Srip”, Monhly epor, Ocober 2010, available a:htp://www.issuu.com/who-op/docs/updae_rad_ocober_2010.





P o p u l a t i o n

collecively, violaing inernaional law which unequivocally prohibiscollecive punishmen and reprisal agains civilians (see infa sections 5.2 and 6).

2. Te absolute closure o the Gaza Strip

2.1 Gaza Border Crossings: Overview 18

18 Map by OCHA, available a www.ochaop.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

2.2 Israel’s total control o the Gaza borders

Israel direcly conrols he 5 border crossings beween is erriory and heGaza Srip:

» Erez (Beit Hanoun) crossing: Pedesrian rac. » Nahal Oz (El Shij’ia) crossing: Indusrial uel/gas. » Karni (Al-Mentar) crossing: Conveyor bel or grains. » Sufa (Sofa) crossing: Humaniarian goods/consrucion maerials. » Karem Shalom (Karm Abu Salem) crossing: All auhorized goods.

Israel also indirecly conrols he Egypian-Palesinian border in he Souho he Gaza Srip:

» Rafah International crossing point: Pedesrian rac.

Under he erms o he Agreemen on Movemen and Access,19 Israel exersulimae conrol over he opening o aah crossing ( see infa, Box 1 “Te

closure o the Raah crossing and the Agreement on Movement and

Access o 2005”).

Finally, Israel reains exclusive conrol on he aerial and he naval space o

he Gaza Srip. As saed in he Israeli disengagemen plan, “Israel will holdsole conrol o Gaza airspace and wil l coninue o carry ou miliary aciviy in he waers o he Gaza Srip.” 20

2.3 More than three years o absolute closure

For he pas hree years, ollowing Hamas’ akeover o he Srip in June

2007, Israel has imposed very severe resricions on all o he Gaza Srip’scrossings. As a rule Palesinians are no allowed o ravel in and ou o Gaza, wih ew excepions mainly or humaniarian reasons (mosly paiensneeding lie saving medical reamens), and only a small, ighly regulaed,number o inernaionals are allowed ino Gaza o work as employees o humaniarian organizaions regisered in Israel, inernaional NGOs, or heUN. Diplomas and limied numbers o oreign journaliss are also allowed

o ravel o Gaza under a sric sysem o permis.19 Agreemen on Movemen and Access and Agreed Principles or aah Crossing, Israel-

PA, November 15, 2005, available a: htp://www.ma.gov.il20 Israel’s evised Disengagemen Plan o 2004, Aricle 3(1). See also he Agreemen on he

Gaza Srip and he Jerico Area, Cairo, May 1994, Annex I, Aricle 12





P o p u l a t i o n

For he pas hree years he impor o goods ino Gaza has been prohibied by he Israeli auhoriies, wih only limied quaniies o basic goods, mainly ood, allowed or ‘humaniarian’ reasons (see infa section 2.3.3). Israel has alsoimposed a oal ban on he expors o Gaza Srip’s producs or manuacures.Only sporadically limied quaniies o wo goods, owers and srawberries,

were allowed o be expored hanks o an agreemen brokered by he Duchgovernmen; however, even on hose occasions when permission wasgraned, he acual expors did no exceed 20% and 4% respecively o hequaniies prepared or ranspor.

Te ollowing is a brie overview o Gaza’s border crossings in he pas years21:

» Erez crossing, which is he only pedesrian crossing poin beween Israeland he Gaza Srip, has been compleely and coninuously closed oGazan civilians wishing o ravel o he Wes Bank, Israel or abroad, since

15 June 2007, immediaely ollowing Hamas’ akeover o he Gaza Srip.Since hen, Israeli auhoriies have permited only specic caegories o people o ravel ou o Gaza via Erez crossing, under very complicaedprocedures which ofen involve degrading reamen. Tese caegoriesinclude medical paiens suering rom lie hreaening illnesses.22 Teaccess o Gaza via Israel has been resriced essenially o a selecednumber o employees o inernaional humaniarian organizaions

regisered in Israel, UN ocials, diplomas and oreign journaliss, whohave o go hrough a sric sysem o permis » Nahal Oz and Karni crossings are gradually being closed, making Karem

Shalom he main crossing or goods ino Gaza, alhough is capaciy isno sucien o suppor even he passage o he limied goods currenly allowed or impor.

» Sua crossing which had been used or he delivery o consrucion

maerials was closed afer 15 June 2007. Some humaniarian aidconsignmens were allowed ino he Gaza Srip hrough he Soa crossingunil November 2008, when he crossing was compleely closed.

» aah Inernaional Crossing Poin, connecing he Gaza Srip wihEgyp, has been almos coninuously closed since June 2007, openingonly sporadically or humaniarian reasons. For insance, in May 2010

21 For more deailed ino see OCHA and PCH weekly repors.22 No every paien in need or medical reamen is allowed o exi he Gaza Srip and even

hose who are graned a permi are ofen allowed o ravel hrough Erez ollowing exensivelie hreaening delays and very complicaed procedures, which include inerviews orobaining a medical reerral o ravel abroad and ofen urher inerrogaions a he Erezcrossing: see PCH, “Te Healh Secor in he Gaza Srip”, Fac Shee, 2 June 2010,available a: www.pchrgaza.org





P o p u l a t i o n

he crossing opened or 6 days afer a coninuous closure o 78 days which impeded even he paiens reerred or medical reamen abroadrom reaching hospials in Egyp.23 From 12 June 2007 o May 2010 hecrossing was closed or a oal o 1018 days.24 Since June 201025 he aahcrossing is osensibly open; however, ravel is limied o hose sameresriced caegories o people ha were allowed beore. As a resul o heongoing closure o he crossing poin, housands o Palesinians wishingo ravel o and rom he Gaza Srip are prevened rom doing so. Whenaah crossing was parially open, i winessed congesion due o hehigh number o ravelers, especially medical paiens, who endure longhours’ wai a he crossing gaes.26 Te Palesinian Crossing and Borderauhoriies in Gaza have recenly inormed ha he opening days o hecrossing will be reduced rom 7 o 5 days a week. 27

23 Ibid.24 See PCH’s periodic repor, “Sae o he Border Crossings”, available a www.pchrgaza.

org.25 Te decision o open he aah crossing was aken ollowing he May 2010 Israel’s deadly

atack on he humaniarian oilla en roue o Gaza.26 See PCH, “Te Healh Secor in he Gaza Srip”,Fac Shee, o 2 June 2010 and o 7February 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org. See also Gisha, “aah Crossing: Whoholds he keys?”, p. 110-111.

27 epored by OCHA-oP, “Proecion o Civilians”, 10-23 November 2010, p. 3, availablea: www.ochaop.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Box 1

Te closure o the Raah crossing and the Agreement

on Movement and Access o 2005

From 19491 unil 1967 he Gaza Srip was under Egypian rule.During hose years i was possible o ravel by rain or by car rom

Cairo o Gaza hrough he Sinai Peninsula; raveling o and romGaza was subjec o a permi issued by he Egypian securiy auhoriies. Te Gaza Srip was declared a closed miliary area in1967, ollowing he Israeli miliary occupaion, and ravel ou o he Srip became dependen on he approval o he Israeli miliary commander. In 1982, when Israeli roops wihdrew rom he Sinaipeninsula, he Raah crossing was opened under Israeli conrol.2

Over ime i became increasingly dicul o obain a permi ocross Erez, and since 2000 i has been virually impossible or heoverwhelming majoriy o Palesinians o obain a permi o crosshe Israeli border.3 Tus he Raah border wih Egyp has long beenhe only pracicable – i remoe – possibiliy o ravel ou o Gaza.

Following he Sepember 2005 disengagemen o Israeli orces rom

he Gaza Srip – which also removed he Israeli miliary presencerom he Egypian-Palesinian border – on 15 November 2005Israel and he Palesinian Auhoriy (PA) signed he Agreemenon Movemen and Access (AMA). Te agreemen was mediaed

by he US and he EU. Egyp is no a pary o agreemen nor wasi an ocial pary o he negoiaions (alhough i paricipaed inhe works). According o he AMA: “aah will be operaed by he

Palesinian Auhoriy on is side and Egyp on is side, accordingo inernaional sandards”. Te PA’s work, on he Palesinian sideo he border, is placed under he supervision o he EU.

On paper, he AMA was inended o “give he Palesinian peoplereedom o move, rade, live normal lives” and o gran he PA conrol over enry and exi rom is erriory.4 However, conrary o

he declaraions, he agreemen was never properly implemened,and he PA was no allowed conrol over exi and enry rom andino he Gaza Srip. Israel coninued o exer is conrol over heoperaion o he aah crossing in a number o ways:

* Please noe ha he oonoes o he Box are a page 102





P o p u l a t i o n

i. Te crossing was requenly closed by Israel due o incidens

unrelaed o he crossing isel; ollowing he capure o heIsraeli soldier Shali, on 25 June 2006 Israel closed he aah

border. In ha year, unil June 2007 when he agreemen wasindeniely suspended, aah was closed or 265 days.

ii. Crossing hrough aah is only permited or holders o Palesinian IDs, i.e. individuals regisered in he Palesinianpopulaion regisry.

iii. Trough is conrol o he Palesinian populaion regisry,Israel coninues o indirecly deermine who is allowed ocross aah (many residens o Gaza have been unable oobain IDs and so canno ravel);

iv. Israel reained he power o preven he passage o Palesinianson he basis o “securiy grounds” and o veo he passage o oreigners.5 In principle oreigners (i.e. no carrying Palesinian

ID or passpor) are no allowed o ener Gaza hrough Egyp bu need o obain an Israeli enrance visa and Israeli permio cross Erez. Te agreemen liss excepional caegories o oreign naionals allowed o ener he Gaza Srip hroughRaah: diplomas, oreign invesors, employees o inernaionalorganizaions, humaniarian workers and oreign journaliss. Wih regard o such ravelers, according o he erms o he

AMA, he PA mus inorm Israel in advance: i is Israel ha deaco makes he nal decision on he enry o Gaza hrough heRaah crossing o hese caegories o persons.

In June 2007 Israel announced he reezing o he crossing agreemen.Since June 2007 he people o Gaza have been eecively denied accesso he ouside world boh rom Erez and Raah crossings. Alhough

since June 2010 he Egypian auhoriy has declared he opening o heRaah crossing, raveling o and rom Egyp remains an excepionalcase or he local populaion. In ac he coordinaion wih he Egypianauhoriies, which was already dicul in he pas, became de acoimpossible afer 2007 and i coninues o be almos impossible o ravel

wihou some sor o “special coordinaion” (i.e. personal connecion).Cars are no allowed o cross he Raah border. Tis aecs paiensraveling or medical reasons, who are ofen in very serious healhcondiions, as all ravelers have o cross as pedesrians organised in acomplex and inconvenien sysem o collecive buses.





P o p u l a t i o n

2.3.1 Restrictions on the movement o persons

As noed, he curren regime o absolue closure is only he laes measurein he longsanding policy o closures and ragmenaion o he oP. Despiehe ac ha he Oslo agreemens expressly considered he Wes Bank andhe Gaza Srip o be a single erriorial eniy which Israel was bound orespec28 , (a posiion conrmed, iner alia, by he UN Securiy Council) hepolicy o closures imposed by he Israeli miliary governmen has resuled inhe de aco complee separaion o he oP.

Following he cancellaion in 1991 o he general exi permi rom he oP which had been in use since 1972, an individual exi permi, o be issued by he Israeli Securiy Agency, was required or Palesinians o exi he GazaSrip, o move beween he occupied erriory (Gaza - Wes Bank, includingoccupied Eas Jerusalem) or o ener Israel. Following he oubreak o he

second Iniada in 2000, his permi became even more dicul o obain.29

As a consequence, raveling rom Gaza o he Wes Bank (and vice-versa)has been rendered virually impossible or Palesinians and enire amiliesare now separaed. Te orced separaion o amilies is in violaion, iner alia,o Aricle 16 o he 1948 Universal Declaraion o Human ighs (UDH)and Aricle 23 o he 1966 Inernaional Covenan on Civil and Poliicalighs (ICCP) which obliges Saes o proec he righ o marry and

ound a amily (see infa section 6.8).

Moreover, he righ o “sae passage” or Palesinians wishing o move wihinhe oP, provided or by he 1995 Israeli-Palesinian Inerim Agreemens onhe Wes Bank and Gaza Srip30 , was de aco never implemened oher hanor a year, beween Ocober 1999 and Sepember 2000. According o Israeligures, almos 12,000 permis per monh were issued o Gaza residens

each monh during ha year31

. Even during he only year o operaions o he passage, Israel ailed o comply wih he erms o he agreemen. Te saepassage urned ou o be an “unsae road”32 , due o he resricions imposedha ulimaely negleced he very conen o he righ o sae passage or hePalesinians wihin heir erriory. Wih he oubreak o he second Iniada

28 Ar. IV o he Declaraion o Principles on Inerim Sel-Governmen Arrangemens .29 B’selem, “Freedom o Movemen and Closure”, available a:www.bselem.org /English/

Freedom_o_Movemen/Closure.asp.30 Te so-called Oslo Agreemens, See Inerim Agreemen o 1995, appendix I, Secion 10.31 Gisha, “aah Crossing: Who holds he keys?”, p. 33, a: www.gisha.org.32 See PCH, An Unsae oad, Special epor on he Sae Passage, available a: www.

pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Israel closed he passage indeniely. From he end o 2000 unil 2006only in excepional cases were Palesinians allowed o ravel rom Gaza ohe Wes Bank. In he end he sae passage was never a realiy, in spie o is inclusion in he 2005 Israeli-Palesinian Agreemen o Movemen and

Access (AM A) which was never properly implemened (see supra Box 1).

2.3.2 A dicult journey: traveling abroad rom Gaza

Since a leas 1995, raveling abroad or Gazans has been virually impossible.33

Moreover, even in hose excepional cases where a ravel permi is issued(mosly or he aah crossing), he crossing o he border and he journey o Cairo airpor in Egyp, is ineviably an exremely dicul and humiliaingexperience. On he oher hand, crossing he Erez border o ener Israel ofenresuls in long inerrogaions and even deenion by he Israeli Securiy

Agency. Many cases have been repored o Palesinian paiens, reerred ormedical reamen abroad, who have been summoned by he Israeli miliary orces in order o ‘ge inormaion’ (see inra secion 6.2). Tis pracice has

been repored as ar back as 2008 by he UN Special apporeur on he oP. 34

33 See PCH, Te Israeli Policy o Closure. Legal, Poliical and Humaniarian Evaluaion, ,1996, p. 22-23, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.

34 A/63/326, par. 46, available a www.ohchr.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Box 2

When Gaza had an Airport

While giving ull conrol over Gaza’s airspace o Israel, he Oslo Accords allowed or he consrucion o a Palesinian airpor.Inauguraed in 1998, he Araa Inernaional airpor provided a

limied number o weekly ighs o Arab counries. ranspored by bus o he aah Crossing, passengers were checked alongsidehose leaving or Egyp by land (i.e. under he supervision andconrol o he Israeli auhoriies). On 8 Ocober 2000 Israelclosed down he airpor afer he oubreak o he Second Iniadaand i has no reopened since. Israel has repeaedly bombed heairpor since December 2001 and used i as a miliary base unil

he compleion o he disengagemen plan in 2005, when Israelisoldiers reporedly vandalized he building. Alhough no in useanymore Israeli orces sill requenly bomb he airpor premises,

which are compleely abandoned.

Gaza Inernaional A irpor, 1998





P o p u l a t i o n

Gaza Inernaional Airpor©, 2010

Apar rom he shor lie-span o Araa inernaional airpor, he land

crossings have been he only means hrough which o ener or leave heGaza Srip. A projec exised or he consrucion o an inernaional por,

which was also included in he Agreemen on Movemen and Access o 2005, however Israel never genuinely suppored is consrucion. In he endhe worsening o he poliical siuaion and Israeli atacks on he exisingpor inrasrucure blocked he projec.

Te only possibiliy or exernal ravel is hereore across he land borders,eiher via Erez crossing o Israel (and hen o Jordan), or via he aahcrossing o Egyp.

» Via Erez: Gazans wishing o ravel abroad, need o obain a permirom he Israeli auhoriies, allowing hem o cross hrough Erez andhen direcly o Jordan. Anoher possibiliy would be o reach he Ben-Gurion airpor in Israel (approximaely 40 km rom Gaza) bu hishas become only a heoreical opion, since Palesinians are generally denied enry ino Israel.

» Via Rafah: Te process o obaining a permi o leave Gaza via aah,is complicaed, and only in excepional cases is a permi issued. In heeven ha a Gazan is successul in crossing via aah, hey are ofen

escored direcly o Cairo Airpor, where hey are orced o wai inholding cells unil heir igh depars.

As a resul o his he number o Palesinians rom Gaza which have beenable o ravel abroad in he pas 15 years is miniscule. Even smaller is he





P o p u l a t i o n

number o persons, including people holding inernaional passpors, whohave been allowed o visi Gaza, or any reason. Te Gaza Srip has beeneecively sealed o rom he ouside world.

2.3.3 Restrictions on the movement o goods

As one o he main eaures o he illegal closure policy imposed since June2007, he impor o goods ino Gaza has been prohibied. Unil June 2010only excepionally limied quaniies o impors were allowed, specically hose deemed by he Israeli auhoriies as ‘humaniarian’ goods. Indeed i isunclear how he Israeli auhoriies deermined he lis o limied iems whichare allowed ino Gaza; he exisence isel o such a lis has been acually puin serious doub (see infa secion 5).

On 17 June 2010, consequen o inernaional pressure ollowing Israel’s deadly atack on he “Gaza Freedom Floilla”, he Israeli Securiy Cabine35 claimedo have begun easing he closure, by enlarging he lis o goods allowed o geino Gaza and by creaing a lis o prohibied iems o replace he previous liso permited iems. A he ime o wriing, however, no signican seps have been aken by Israel in order o ease he closure and i is sill unclear whaconcree measures will be aken by Israel (see infa section 2.4)

Te original lis o permited iems apparenly consised o an exremely resriced caegory o goods, approximaely 40, mosly oodsus and oher basic iems. As documened by he Israeli organizaion Gisha, he lis wasgradually expanded over ime and, prior o June 2010, i seemed o includeapproximaely 100 goods which were allowed ino Gaza (see infa section 5.1).

Wha is clear is ha he ype and amoun o goods allowed ino Gaza over

he pas years has been wholly insucien wih respec o he needs o hepopulaion o he Gaza Srip. As shown by he graphics below, over 2009 inaverage only 2,180 ruckloads o goods have been allowed ino Gaza eachmonh, compared o an average o 10,400 ruckloads which enered Gaza

beore he imposiion o he absolue closure36.

35 Securiy Cabine Decision, Prime Minisers Oce, o 17 June 2010, available a:

htp://www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Communicaion/Spokesman/2010/06/spokemediniyu170610.hm.

36 However, i is noed ha hese gures, which dae back o 2006 are oudaed, and haeven beore he imposiion o he absolue closure in 2007, he limied capaciy o heGaza crossings creaed a shorage o goods (and in paricular o uel) vis-à-vis he acualneeds o he populaion.





P o p u l a t i o n

In 2010 he monhly average o ruckloads was 3,034, ar below he needs o he local populaion.37

Following a decision o he Israeli governmen in Sepember 2007, hesupply o elecriciy and uel ino Gaza has been dramaically reduced, in

blaan violaion o Israel’s obligaions as an Occupying Power responsibleor he well-being o he populaion in occupied erriory. Tis illegaldecision, which has been challenged by a group o Israeli and Palesinianorganisaions, including PCH, has been endorsed by he Israeli HighCour o Jusice (see inra secions 5.1 and 6.1). On average, only 8,000housand lires o uel (o 18,000 needed) are impored each monh, well

below boh he acual quaniy required and he “humaniarian minimum”

o 10,000 indicaed by he Israeli High Cour o Jusice in January 200838

.

37 htp://www.gazagaeway.org/goods-enering-gaza/38 HCJ 9132/07, issued January 30, 2008.





P o p u l a t i o n

As deailed in his repor, such resricions on he enry o goods and o uel,

in paricular, orm par o an illegal policy o ‘economic warare’ ha heSae o Israel is inenionally implemening agains he Palesinian civilianpopulaion (see inra secion 5.1).

Tis policy is conrary o Israel’s obligaion as an occupying power underinernaional humaniarian law, and also violaes he undamenal humanrighs o he people o Gaza39.

2.4 Gaza’s border crossings remain virtually sealednotwithstanding the alleged June 2010 easing o theclosure

Te 31 May 2010 Israeli atack on he “Gaza Freedom Floilla” ininernaional waers, which resuled in he killing o nine civilians (8 urkish

and 1 American) and he wounding o many more,40

emporarily ocusedhe world’s atenion on he suering o he Palesinian populaion in Gazaand he violaion o heir righs.

As an immediae reacion o his ragic even he Egypian auhoriiesannounced he indenie opening o he aah crossing. A he ime o

39 Economic, social and culural righs o he people o Gaza as claimed rom 2007 onwards by several repors o he UN Special apporeur on he OP. See or insance A/HC/7/17, A/HC/10/20, A/HC/13/53/ev.1, available a: www.ohchr.org.

40 See PCH Press release, “PCH Condemns Israeli Atack on Gaza Freedom Floilla”o 31 May 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org. See he repor o he UN Fac FindingMission on he Floilla Inciden (A/HC/15/21) o 27 Sepember 2010.





P o p u l a t i o n

wriing (December 2010) he crossing is osensibly open. However, i mus be emphasized ha he crossing canno be considered acually open: peopleand goods are sill no ree o ge in and ou o Gaza. On he conrary, hecrossing remains almos compleely closed – wih only a limied caegory o individuals allowed o use he pedesrian crossing – and is compleely closedor goods and vehicles. I remains exremely complicaed o ge he necessary coordinaion o be allowed ino and ou o Gaza hrough he aah crossingand he realiy is ha or he overwhelming majoriy o Gazans nohing haschanged.

Equally, new inernaional pressure has been exered on Israel in order opu an end o he closure. In l ine wih a proposal pu orward by he Quareepresenaive o he Middle Eas, ony Blair, Israel has announced anosensible easing o Gaza’s closure or humaniarian reasons. However, hediplomaic iniiaives sponsored by he Quare, which merely ocus on

he increase o he volume o goods’ exchanges, ail o address he inherenillegaliy o he closure and he derimenal eecs i has on he localpopulaions’ human righs. Te alleged easing is in ac purely cosmeic anddoes no represen any subsanial change o he inrinsic illegaliy o heclosure. I merely consiss in moving rom a lis o permited iems ino Gazao one o prohibied iems. Gaza now receives more oodsu and secondary goods a cheap prices rom Israel, which paradoxically – given he ban on

expors rom he Srip - has worsened he weak local economy.41

In addiion,he quaniy o permited goods remains wholly incapable o meeing heneeds o he Gaza populaion.42

Te High epresenaive o he European Union or Foreign Aairs, Ms.Caherine Ashon, has recenly poined ou ha “a he presen ime, wehink ha wha’s happened wih Gaza is unsaisacory, he volume o

goods is no increasing as signicanly as i needs o.” Similar declaraionshave been made by every high oreign diploma ha visied Gaza in he pasmonhs43. As saed in November 2010 by Mr. John Ging, in his capaciy ashe UNWA Direcor in Gaza, “Tere is no angible change or he peopleon he ground here wih regard o heir condiion, dependence on aid, he

41 BBC, Gaza Business Boxed in by Israel’s Expors Ban, 2 November 2010, available a: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-eas-11668080.

42 For a deailed picure o he acual siuaion see he epor, “Dashed Hopes. Coninuaiono he Gaza Blockade”, November 2010, by Amnesy Inernaional UK and 14 oherinernaional organizaions, also available a: www.pchrgaza.org.

43 See or insance he German Foreign Miniser Guido Weserwelle’s declaraions onoccasion o his November 2010 visi o Israel and Palesine repored on November 17,2010 a www.haarez.com.





P o p u l a t i o n

“Te closure o or he resricions imposed on border crossings

by Israel in he immediae period beore he miliary operaionssubjeced he local populaion o exreme hardship and deprivaionsha are inconsisen wih heir proeced saus. Te resricions onhe enry o oodsu, medical supplies, agriculural and indusrialinpu, including indusrial uel, ogeher wih he resricions on heuse o land near he border and on shing in he sea have resuledin widespread povery, increased dependence on ood and oher

assisance, increased unemploymen and economic paralysis. TeMission can conclude only ha Israel has and coninues o violaeis obligaions as an occupying Power under he Fourh GenevaConvenion”.48

Signicanly, despie heavy ghing, he closure o he Gaza Srip remainedrmly in place during Operaion Cas Lead. As noed by ichard Falk,

he UN Special apporeur on he oP, his was one o he only conicsin he world where civilians were unable o ee, or o seek reugee saus.49 Tis denial o movemen had signican implicaions or hose injured andrequiring advanced medical care.50 Almos wo years afer he end o hemiliary operaion or mos o he seriously injured vicims, heir siuaion,raher han being resolved, has been aggravaed.

Moreover, consrucion maerials have no been allowed ino he Gaza Srip,compleely prevening necessary recovery and reconsrucion. As armed

by Mr Filippo Grandi, in his capaciy as he UNWA CommissionerGeneral: “ehabiliaion and consrucion requiremens are enormous.In spie o his, crucial maerials remain subjec o severe resricions,cumbersome impor procedures and requen delays”51. Tereore “we muscall or he blockade o be lifed in ull o enable Gaza o begin he process o recovery ha is long-suering people so urgenly need”.52

For example, according o PCH gures, 7,878 housing unis werecompleely or parially desroyed (rendered uninhabiable), aecing 51,842

48 Ibid., par. 1305.

49 See he 2010 repor o he Special Rapporeur on he oP, A/HRCH/13/53/rev.1 par. 13.50 See inra secion 6.2.51 Saemen o he Special Poliical and Decolonisaion Commitee o he UN General

Assembly, 1 November 2010, available a htp://www.unrwa.org/eemplae.php?id=835.52 Ibid.





P o p u l a t i o n

individuals. 20,000 individuals remained homeless afer he war,53 many o hem, almos wo years on, sill live in emporary shelers or even in ens54.

In March 2009, Saes gahered a a donor conerence in Sharm el-Sheikhpledged USD 4.5 billion in unds or he reconsrucion o Gaza. However

because o he oal closure imposed by Israel, which includes virually all building maerials, any possibiliy o rebuild and reciy he exensivedamage brough by he las devasaing miliary operaion on Gaza hasailed, and he money has no been used or is purpose.55

53 See PCH epor, “23 Days o War, 928 Days o Closure, Lie one year afer Israel’s Laes

Oensive on he Gaza Srip, 27 December 2008 – 18 January 2009”, available a www.pchrgaza.org.54 See inra secion 6.6.55 See he repor “Failing Gaza: no rebuilding, no recovery, no more excuses. A repor one

year afer Operaion Cas Lead”, December 2009, published by Amnesy InernaionalUK and oher inernaional organizaions, available also a: www.oxam.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

II. The IlleGalITy of The CloSure

4. Recognition o the illegality o the current absoluteclosure

As acknowledged, iner alia, by he Inernaional Commitee o he ed Cross(ICC), he closure imposed by Israel on he Gaza Srip is sraighorwardly illegal.56 Such a conclusion has also been clearly armed by he Inernaional

Fac Finding Mission mandaed by he UN o invesigae on he Floillainciden o 31 May 2010: he closure is “unlawul and canno be susainedin law. Tis is so regardless o he grounds on which i is sough o jusiy helegaliy o he blockade”.57

Israel is he occupying power in he oP, including he Gaza Srip, and as suchi is subjec o a number o pressing legal obligaions, as codied primarily

in he Hague egulaions o 1907 and he Fourh Geneva Convenion o 1949 (see inra secion 4.1). As conrmed by he Inernaional Cour o

Jusice, Israel is also obliged o respec, and proec he righs o he occupiedpopulaion in accordance wih he requiremens o inernaional humanrighs law.

As he ICC saed in 2000: “As an occupying power, Israel may resric he

reedom o movemen o he residen populaion, bu only when and in soar as miliary necessiy so dicaes. esricions on movemen by meanso curews or he sealing o o areas may in no circumsances amoun ocollecive penalies, nor should hey severely hamper he daily lie o hecivilian populaion or have dire economic consequences. Moreover heoccupying power has he duy o ensure an adequae level o healh care,including access o hospials and medical services, and may no obsruc

he circulaion o ood supplies. All insiuions devoed o he care andeducaion o children mus be allowed o uncion normally. eligiouscusoms mus be respeced, which implies access o places o worship o heulles exen possible”.58

Te curren closure regime violaes a number o principles o inernaional

56 ICC, “Gaza Closure: no anoher year,” News elease, 14 June 2010, available a: www.icrc.org.

57 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Floilla inciden, A/HC/15/21, par.261.

58 ICC, News release o 21 November 2000, available a: www.icrc.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

humaniarian law, iner alia, Aricle 43 o he Hague egulaions, and Aricles 33, 55 and 56 o he Fourh Geneva Convenions (see inrasecion 4.1). Moreover he closure violaes inernaional human righs law,inringing upon several undamenal human righs, including he righ olie, he righ o he highes atainable sandard o healh, he righ o reedomo movemen o persons and goods, he righ o adequae sheler, and herigh o live in human digniy (see infa section 6 et seq.). Te closure regimeulimaely inringes upon he righ o sel-deerminaion o he Palesinianpeople as a maniesaion o he occupaion, and hrough he resulanprocess o severe de-developmen.

Te members o he inernaional communiy, including he HighConracing Paries o he 1949 Fourh Geneva Convenion “elaive o he Proecion o Civilian Persons in ime o War”, have shameully ailedo ake he acion necessary o ensure Israel’s respec or he Convenion in

he oP, he ulllmen o which would include lifing he illegal closure andending policies which violae he economic, social, civil and poliical righso he Palesinian civilian populaion.

4.1 Legal Status o the Gaza Strip as occupied territory andapplicability o occupation law

Since he beginning o he occupaion in 1967, he inernaional communiy – consising o boh governmens and inernaional organisaions, includinghe Unied Naions Securiy Council and he ICC59 – has recognisedIsrael as he belligeren occupan, and he Palesinian erriory, comprisinghe Gaza Srip and he Wes Bank (including Eas Jerusalem), as subjecedo occupaion by he miliary o a belligeren oreign counry.60

Te Cairo Agreemen o 1994 beween he Governmen o Israel and hePLO “Inerim Agreemen on he Gaza Srip and Wes Bank” esablishedhe Palesinian Naional Auhoriy (PNA, or PA) and ranserred o ilimied auhoriy in Jericho and mos o he Gaza Srip.61 Te responsibiliy

59 ICC, “Fac and Figures: Te ICC in Israel and he occupied erriories”, available ahtp://www.icrc.org/eng/where-we-work/middle-eas-norh-arica/israel-occupied-erriories/index.jsp.

60 See or insance he ollowing UN Securiy Council esoluions: SC/ES 446 o 22o March, 1979, SC/ES 605 o 22 December, 1987; SC/ES 904 o 18 March, 1994;SC/ES 1322 o 7 Ocober, 2000. Tis view was urher embraced by he UN Specialapporeur on he oP in is 2010 repor o he HC: see A/HC/13/53/ev.1, par 1.,available a: www.ohchr.org.

61 See Gisha, “aah Crossing: Who Hold he Keys?”, p. 18, available a: www.gisha.org





P o p u l a t i o n

ranserred o he PNA is essenially resriced o he sphere o inernal civilaairs, and excludes responsibiliy in respec o overall securiy and oreignrelaions. Israel remains he occupying power, subjeced o he provisions o he law o occupaion, and he Palesinian civilian populaion is eniled ohe proecions aorded by occupaion law.

In ac, nowihsanding he relocaion o Israeli orces as a resul o heInerim Agreemen, Israel’s occupaion o hese areas remained boh a legaland a physical realiy, as conrmed by he Inernaional Cour o Jusice inis Advisory Opinion on he “Legal Consequences o he Consrucion o a

Wall in he Occupied Palesinian erriory”62 (see inra secions 4.1 and 4.2).

Under Aricle 42 o he Hague egulaions o 1907 a “erriory is consideredoccupied when i is acually placed under he auhoriy o hosile army. Teoccupaion exends only o he erriory where such auhoriy has been

esablished and can be exercised”.

Occupaion is a acual sae under inernaional law, and is exisence issubordinaed o a es o “eecive conrol” which depends on he abiliy o miliary adverse power o exercise is power on a oreign erriory or counry.

Wha is required is ha he occupying power has he capaciy o exercise ispower, which does no require ha he power is exercised de aco. Moreover,

i is recognized in he jurisprudence ha miliary orces need no be placedhroughou he enire erriory.63

In his regard nohing changed afer he redeploymen o he Israeli miliary orces rom he Gaza Srip in 2005, and he Gaza Srip remains occupiederriory. As horoughly elaboraed by Proessor John Dugard, he ormerSpecial apporeur on siuaion o Human ighs in he oP, Israel coninues

o be he Occupying Power given he eecive conrol i exers on he GazaSrip, which subsaniaes isel hough a number o elemens. 64

Te concep o eecive conrol indeed encompasses boh miliary andadminisraive conrol over he occupied erriory. Following disengagemenIsrael coninues o reain complee and eecive conrol over he Gaza Srip:

62 Inernaional Cour o Jusice (ICJ), Advisory Opinion Concerning he LegalConsequences o he Consrucion o a Wall in he Occupied Palesinian erriory, 9 July 2004 (hereinafer: ICJ Advisory Opinion), available a: www.icj-cij.org.

63 Prosecuor v. Naleilic and Marinovic, Case No.I-98-34-, Judgmen (31/3/2003), 217.64 epor o he Special apporeur on he oP, A/63/326, o 25 Augus 2008, par. 5.





P o p u l a t i o n

i reains exclusive conrol over Gaza’s airspace,65 erriorial waers and land borders. In addiion Israel has ulimae conrol over he adminisraiveaspecs o he civilian populaion in he Gaza Srip: i is he Israeli auhoriiesha reain he conrol o he Palesinian populaion regisry hus having hepower o gran ciizenship and issue Ideniy Cards o Palesinians in heoP66.

65 Israel’s exclusive conrol over he Gaza Srip’s airspace was already sipulaed in he Gaza- Jericho agreemen, Annex I, Aricle 12, and rearmed in he evised Disengagemenplan o 2004, Aricle 3(1).

66 See Gisha, “aah Crossing: Who Hold he Keys”, p. 57, available a: www.gisha.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Box 3

Israel’s control o the Palestinian Population Registry

Following the Declaration o Principles on Interim Sel-Government Arrangements (the Oslo Accords), the authority to issue identity cards was transerred to the Palestinian Authority (PA). However,

Israel retained control over the Palestinian Population Registry, andthus ultimate control over the rights and status o all Palestiniansliving in the oPt. Te registry lists the ocial address o each person.Under the Oslo Accords the PA must inorm Israel o all changes tothe registry: however since 2000 Israel has not updated its copy o theoPt’s population registry.

As pointed out by the Israeli legal aid organisation Hamoked, thismeans that Palestinians living in the West Bank whose registeredaddress is in the Gaza Strip or vice versa have been detained as “illegalaliens”, regardless o their actual residence.6 Moreover Palestinians whose identity card is rom Gaza, but who are actually living in the West Bank may be deported to the Gaza Strip as Israel reuses tochange their place o residence on the registry records. Te situation

was urther worsened by two military orders, no. 1649 and 1650issued in April 2010, which have dened as “inltrators” any personin the oPt, who is not in possession o an Israeli issued permit, thussubjecting them to possible deportation, ne and imprisonment.7 Because o the Israeli authorities reusal to update the Populationregistry regarding the change o address and the high number o rejections o applications or amily reunication, these new military

orders orce many Palestinians to live with the constant threat o being arrested and possibly deported. Gazan students studying at West Bank universities have been prohibited rom returning to study afer making brie visits home in the Gaza Strip. Israeli authorities alsoprevent Gazan students accepted or study at West Bank universitiesrom even enrolling.8

In he end Israel no only decides who has he righ o live wihin he GazaSrip’s erriory and who doesn’, bu also – hrough a complex sysem o permis – deprives he Palesinians o heir righ o choose heir residency

wihin he Palesinian erriory.






P o p u l a t i o n

Tis legal realiy has been recognized by he inernaional communiy,including he UN Securiy Council67 , he UN General Assembly 68 , heUN Human ighs Council69 and he ICC70. Te redeploymen o Israelimiliary orces rom he Gaza Srip represened a change in he orm o occupaion bu no o subsance71.

In sum, despite the implementation o the unilateral Disengagement Planin September 2005, Israel indeed remains the ultimate authority able toexercise eective control on the Gaza Strip, and thus is the occupyingpower.72 Te physical presence in act has been replaced by other meanso eective control which are as pervasive and oppressive as the military presence on the ground, and that ensure that Israel retain authority overthe Gaza Strip and its population. Moreover, as legally acknowledged by

Article 43 o the Hague Regulations and Article 64 o the Fourth GenevaConvention, the existence o a local government is not incompatible

with the persistence o the military occupation. Te reality is that,notwithstanding the existence o a Palestinian Authority, nothing ispossible both in the West Bank and in Gaza in the absence o a decision by the Israeli occupation orces.

Te exen o which Israel remains in overall conrol o he Gaza Srip (as well as o he Wes Bank including Eas Jerusalem), is illusraed o some

exen hrough is abiliy o impose closures as i has coninued o do pos re-deploymen. Te Palesinian civilian populaion remains dependen uponhe cooperaion o Israel or basic necessiies such as ood, medical supplies,elecriciy, waer, and in order o exercise basic reedoms and righs such

67 UN Securiy Council, Resoluion 1860 (2009) o 8 January 2009, S/RES/1860 (2009).68 UN General Assembly, esoluion 63/96 (2008) o 18 December 2008, A/ES/63/93

(2008).69 UN Human Righs Council, Resoluion S-9/1 o 12 January 2009, A/HRC/S-9/L.1 (2009).70 ICC, “Gaza Closure: no anoher year,” News elease, 14 June 2010, and “Israel, he

occupied Palesinian erriories,” ICC Annual epor 2009, 19 May 2010, p. 365-369, boh available a: www.icrc.org.

71 Full argumens in his sense are developed by S. Darcy and J. eynold, “OherwiseOccupied”: Te Saus o he Gaza Srip rom he Perspecive o Inernaional

Humaniarian Law, Journal o Conic & Securiy Law, Oxord Universiy Press, 2010, p.211-243.

72 See in his sense he auhoriaive posiion o Proessor Yoram Dinsein, “Te InernaionalLaw o Belligeren Occupaion”, Cambridge 2009, p. 279. See also he sudy o Diakonia,“Does Inernaional Humaniarian Law Apply o he Gaza Srip afer he wihdrawal?”, 14 January 2009, available a: www.diakonia.se/sa/node.asp?node=842.





P o p u l a t i o n

as reedom o movemen, healh, educaion, and access o work.73 Underinernaional law Israel is obliged o ulll is obligaions as an occupyingpower and o cooperae in order o ensure he undamenal righs andneeds o he civilian populaion o Gaza. However, in conradicion wih hendings o inernaional bodies and judicial organs he Israeli High Couro Jusice (HCJ) in 2008 held ha Israel is no in “eecive conrol” overhe Gaza Srip.74 Tus he Israeli HCJ acceped he Sae’s argumens haIsrael’s duies owards he populaion o Gaza are limied o he preveniono a humaniarian crisis.

Te Israeli posiion ries o ransorm he Sae’s precise legal obligaionsowards he civilian Palesinian populaion o a mater o “goodwill” on heIsraeli side.75 Tis posiion, which aims a sripping he civilian populaiono he proecion o which hey are eniled under humaniarian and humanrighs law, is blaanly conrary o inernaional law.

Te applicabiliy de jure o he Convenion was ulimaely conrmed by heInernaional Cour o Jusice (ICJ), he highes judicial body wihin he UNsysem. In he 9 July 2004 advisory opinion on he “Legal Consequences o he Consrucion o a Wall in he Occupied Palesinian erriory” he Courclearly saed ha he Fourh Geneva Convenion is legally applicable (i.e. de

jure no only de acto) in he oP, regardless o heir precise prior saus.76

In paricular, he insrumens ha conain relevan humaniarian provisionson he law o occupaion are he Hague egulaions annexed o he FourhHague Convenion o 1907,77 and he Fourh Geneva Convenion o 194978.Israel raied he Fourh Geneva Convenion in January 1953, while heHague regulaions orm par o cusomary law.79

Ta Israel is legally obliged o apply he Fourh Geneva Convenion o he73 See, he epor, “Beween he ence and a hard place. Te humaniarian impac o Israeli-

imposed resricions on access o land and sea in he Gaza Srip,” Augus 2010, availablea: www.ochaop.org, p. 31-33.

74 Israeli High Supreme Cour 9132/07, Jaber Al Basyouni v. he Prime Miniser, 30 January 2008.75 See Gisha Repor, “Disengaged occupiers”, a htp://www.gisha.org/index.php?inLanguag

e=2&inSieSN=119&OldMenu=119. See also, Darryl Lee, “Te Gaza Srip as a Laboraory.Noes in he Wake o Disengagemen,” Journal o Palesine Sudies, vol. 35, 2006.

76 See ICJ Advisory Opinion, par. 89-101.77 In paricular, Secions III “miliary auhoriy over he erriory o he hosile Sae.”78 See PCH Sudy, “IVh Geneva Convenion and Israeli Occupaion o Palesinian

erriories, November 1998”, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.79 See ICJ Advisory Opinion, par. 89-101





P o p u l a t i o n

whole occupied Palesinian erriory was conrmed, iner alia, by he UNSecuriy Council esoluion 681 o 20h December 1990, which demandedha Israel, as he occupying power, apply he Convenion de jure in respeco he erriories which i de aco occupies.80 UNSC esoluion 681 alsorequesed he High Conracing Paries o he Fourh Geneva Convenion oulll heir obligaions under Aricle 1 herein wih regard o he Palesinianerriory. Te High Conracing Paries mus ake all measures “o respecand o ensure respec or he presen Convenion in all circumsances”.

4.2 Israel’s obligation as an Occupying Power and theillegality o the closure under IHL

Inernaional humaniarian law places a number o precise duies on Israelas he occupying power vis-à-vis he Palesinian populaion. However, as

was ound, iner alia, by he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic,“Israel has no ullled is duies as an occupying power in relaion o heGaza srip”.81 When ocusing in paricular on he closure regime imposedon Gaza over he las hree and a hal years, i is apparen ha he resricionsimposed on he civilian populaion o he occupied erriory, “he proecedpersons” o inernaional humaniarian law, are in blaan violaion o heSae’s specic obligaion under he same body o law.

egulaion 43 o he Hague egulaions, which has cusomary law saus,imposes upon Israel, as he occupying power, he obligaion o mainainpublic order and civil lie, i.e. o guaranee normal condiions o lie or hecivilian populaion under occupaion. Tis encompasses, iner alia, hemainenance and provision o inrasrucure, healh, educaion, qualiy o lie, sheler, and public works (including sewage reamen, power and waer);in oher words, he maerial condiions under which he populaion o he

occupied erriory live. Israel is hereore obliged o ensure he condiionsnecessary or residens o Gaza o enjoy, as ar as possible, ‘a normal lie’. Iis apparen ha Israel’s absolue closure regime, by denying he reedom o movemen in and ou he Gaza Srip or persons and goods, undamenally denies he possibiliy or Gazans o have a normal lie, and is in violaion o he basic principles o inernaional humaniarian law.

Israel’s obligaions as an occupying power are urher dened in he FourhGeneva Convenion. In paricular Aricle 50 imposes on he occupying80 See also Special apporeurs epor on he OP, A/HC/7/17 p. 2 (2008) and Special

apporeurs epor on he oP, A/HC/13/53/ev.1, par 1 (2010).81 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 1311.





P o p u l a t i o n

power he duy o aciliae he working o care and educaion insiuions; Aricle 55 requires he occupying power o ensure “o he ulles exen o he means available o i (…) he ood an medical supplies o he populaion;i should in paricular bring in he necessary oodsu, medical sores andoher aricles i he resources o he occupied erriory are inadequae”.

Aricle 56 requires he occupying power o ensure “in cooperaion wih henaional and local auhoriies, he medical and hospial esablishmens andservices, public healh and hygiene in he occupied erriory (…) Medicalpersonnel o all caegories shall be allowed o carry ou heir duies”. Whilei is recognised ha he occupying power is no solely responsible or headminisraion o healh services and hospials, i mus o he ulles exen o he means available o i, ensure ha hospials and medical services can work properly and coninue o do so.82

In 2001 he ICC expressly noed ha Israel’s policy o closures is in violaion o is obligaions under inernaional humaniarian law:

“Te ICRC views the policy o isolating whole villages or anextended period o time as contrary to international humanitarianlaw (IHL), particularly with respect to those aspects o IHL,

which protect civilians in time o occupation. Indeed, stringent

closures requently lead to breaches o Article 55 (ree passageo medical assistance and ood stus), article 33 (prohibitionon collective punishment), article 50 (children and education),article 56 (movement o medical transportation and publichealth acilities) and article 72 (access to lawyers or personscharged) o the Fourth Geneva Convention. While acceptingthat the State o Israel has legitimate security concerns, the ICRC

stresses that measures taken to address these concerns must be inaccordance with international humanitarian law. Furthermore,these security measures must allow or a quick return to normalcivilian lie. Tis, in essence, is the meaning o the Fourth GenevaConvention which is applicable to the Occupied erritories”83.

Ulimaely, as concluded by he Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic

wih respec o he closure:

82 J. Pice, ICC Commenary o he IV Geneva Convenion, p. 314.83 ICC epor o 26 February 2001, available a: www.icrc.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

“Te resricions on he enry o oodsus, medical supplies,

agriculural and indusrial inpu, including indusrial uel, ogeher wih he resricions on he use o land near he border and on shingin he sea have resuled in widespread povery, increased dependenceon ood and oher assisance, increased unemploymen and economicparalysis. Te Mission can conclude only ha Israel has and coninueso violae is obligaions as an occupying Power under he FourhGeneva Convenion.”84

4.3 Israel’s violation o undamental human rights o thecivilian population

Under inernaional human righs law, Saes are obliged o (i) respec and(ii) proec he undamenal human righs o he populaion and in doing sohey mus, inter alia , rerain rom inerering direcly or indirecly wih he

enjoymen o such righs.

By prevening he enry o necessary goods and by impeding he enire civilianpopulaion rom leaving he erriory, he closure regime imposed by Israelon Gaza blaanly violaes no only he mos basic principles o inernaionalhumaniarian law, bu also he undamenal human righs o he Palesiniancivilian populaion ( see infa section 4.3). As noed by he UN Fac Finding

Mission on he Gaza Conic wih specic regard o he closure policy, inconras wih “Israel’s obligaion o respec, proec, aciliae or provide, ohe exen possible, or he enjoymen o he whole range o economic, socialand culural righs in he Gaza Srip (...) Israel’s acions have led o a severedeerioraion and regression in he levels o realizaion o hose righs.”85

Indeed, in addiion o he guaranees already provided or by inernaional

humaniarian law, he Palesinian people are inherenly eniled o heguaranee o heir undamenal righs, in accordance wih inernaionally-acceped norms o human righs law. Israel is bound, iner alia, o he1966 Inernaional Covenan on Civil and Poliical ighs and he1966 Inernaional Covenan o Economic, Social and Culural ighs(hereinafer ICCP and ICESC).86

84 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 1305.85 Ibid., par. 1312.86 Israel has raied boh Covenans and also he 1989 UN Convenion on he ighs o he

Child.





P o p u l a t i o n

Tus, as long as Israel has conrol over he Palesinian erriory, includingGaza, i has o respec and proec he undamenal human righs o hePalesinian populaion living under occupaion. Te Human ighsCommitee, or insance, has consisenly assered ha Israel’s obligaionspursuan o he ICCP do apply o he Palesinian populaion boh in he

Wes Bank and in he Gaza Srip.87

Te applicabiliy o human righs insrumens o he oP, despie Israel’sclaims o he conrary, was auhoriaively conrmed by he InernaionalCour o Jusice.88 As he Cour esablished: 1) he proecion oered

by human righs convenions does no cease in imes o war; 2) hoseinsrumens are applicable in respec o acs done by a Sae in he exercise o is jurisdicion ouside is own erriory.

Wih regard o he rs poin, i mus be noed ha he proclamaion o a

“sae o emergency”89

under Aricle 4 ICCP, does no relieve he Saerom is obligaions under he Covenan. Aricle 4 clearly sipulaes haderogaions mus be sricly required (“o he exen sricly required by heexigencies o he siuaion”), and measures aken under sae o emergency shall no involve discriminaion and shall no be inconsisen wih oherobligaions under inernaional law. Moreover, several undamenal righsare absolue in heir naure, and hereore canno be derogaed even during a

proclaimed “sae o emergency”.90

Wih regard o he second poin, he principle o exraerriorial scope o human righs has been clearly armed by he ICJ in he Case Concerning

Armed Aciviies on he erriory o he Congo91. Te exraerriorialiy o he proecion oered by human righs insrumens has been reieraed on87 See Human ighs Commitee, “Consideraion o repors submited by Saes paries

under Aricle 40 o he Covenan, Concluding Observaions”, Israel, 18 Augus 1998, par.10 (CCP/C/79/Add.93) and Israel, 21 Augus 2003, par. 11 (CCP/CO/78/ISL),available a: www.ohchr.org.

88 See ICJ Advisory Opinion, par. 102-113.89 Israel has proclaimed Sae o emergency in 1948 and renewed i every year since.

Concerns have been raised abou he prolonged, mainained sae o emergency by Israel,see Human ighs Commitee, Consideraion o repors submited by Saes pariesunder Aricle 40 o he Covenan, Concluding observaions, Israel, 21 Augus 2003, par.12 (CCP/CO/78/IS), available a: www.ohchr.org.

90 On he absolue characer o he Human ighs norms in he ICCP see Human ighsCommitee, Lopez Burgos vs. Uruguay, ibid. e. Communicaion no. 052/1979, U.N.Doc. CCP/C/OP/1 a 88 (1984), available a: www.ohchr.org.

91 ICJ, Case Concerning Armed Aciviies on he erriory o he Congo (Democraicepublic o he Congo v. Uganda), 2005 I.C.J. ep. (December 19), available a: www.icj-cij.org





P o p u l a t i o n

several occasions by he UN Human ighs Commitee, esablished by heICCP o monior he implemenaion o is provisions. As poined ou by he Commitee: “a Sae pary mus respec and ensure he righs laid downin he Covenan wihin he power or eecive conrol o ha Sae pary,even i is no siuaed wihin he erriory o he Sae pary”.92 Furhermore,in Lopez Burgos vs. Uruguay93 , he Commitee argued ha under Aricle 2.1 o he ICCP a Sae pary can be held accounable or violaions o he righsunder he Covenan which is agens commi in he erriory o anoher sae.

Tis view is consisen wih he objec and purpose o human righsobligaions: hey aim o proec individuals agains Sae arbirariness, abuse,

violence, regardless o he locaion where he conduc occurs. Any exerciseo power by he Sae abroad, jus as wihin is own erriory, however limiedin ime, mus be respecul o human righs obligaions.

As he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic recalled, “a he very leas […] Israel is under an obligaion no o raise any obsacle o he exerciseo such righs in hose elds where compeence has been ranserred o hePalesinian Auhoriy”94. A posiion explicily esablished by he ICJ wihregard o he ICESC.

However, in violaion o is obligaions arising direcly rom inernaional

law, Israel coninues o deprive he Palesinian populaion o is legiimaeand undamenal righs. Tis is well documened, inter alia , by he reporso he UN Special apporeur on he occupied Palesinian erriory.95 Tereore, on op o he responsibiliies o Israel as an occupying powerunder he IHL regime, he widespread and well documened violaionso IH law commited by Israeli agens in he Gaza Srip imply he legalresponsibiliy o he Sae vis-à-vis he human righs violaions commited

agains he Palesinian populaion.

Tis repor aims a deailing how he Israeli imposed policy o closures - and

92 Human ighs Commitee, General Commen n. 31 (2004), CCP/C/21/ev.1/ Add.13, par.10, available a: www.ohchr.org

93 Communicaion no. 052/1979, U.N. Doc. CCP/C/OP/1 a 88 (1984), available a: www.un.org.

94 See ICJ Advisory Opinion, par. 112.95 epor o he Special apporeur on he siuaion o human righs in he Palesinian

erriories occupied since 1967, UN Doc, A/HC/7/17 (2008) and epor o heSpecial apporeur on he siuaion o human righs in he Palesinian errioriesoccupied since 1967, A/HC/13/53/ev. 1 (2010), available a: htp://www.ohchr.org/en/counries/menaregion/pages/psindex.aspx, (accessed 8 December 2010).





P o p u l a t i o n

especially he coninuous absolue closure o Gaza since 2007 - severely impacs on a number o undamenal human righs and reedoms o hecivilian populaion. Te closure regime o he Gaza Srip consiues in hissense only one o he several ools in he hand o he occupying power opreven he Palesinians rom he ull enjoymen o heir righs, saring

wih he denial o heir reedom o movemen and ending wih he compleedenial o heir righ o sel deerminaion.

4.3.1 Te denial of the freedom of movement of persons and goods

Te violaion o he righ o reedom o movemen can be considered he‘umbrella violaion’ resuling rom he illegal closure o he Gaza Srip: asreedom o movemen o persons and goods is a necessary precondiion orhe exercise o a number o oher undamenal righs, is violaion also resulsin he violaion o many oher undamenal reedoms and righs, such as he

righ o healh, o an adequae sheler, o educaion, o work, or o accesseconomic opporuniies.96

Aricle 12 o ICCP ensures he righ o reedom o movemen: “Everyonelawully wihin he erriory o a Sae shall, wihin ha erriory, have herigh o libery o movemen and reedom o choose his residence andeveryone shall be ree o leave any counry, including his own.”97 Limiaions

o such righ are permited only o he exen ha hey do no nulliy heprinciple o libery o movemen and are governed by he requiremen o necessiy and consisency wih he oher righs laid down in he Covenan.98

Te enjoymen o he righ o reedom o movemen, including ows o goodsand ood supplies, is o paramoun imporance since i is inexricably iedo he economic developmen o a given erriory and he social condiions

o is inhabians: he well-being o he communiy as a whole is aeced when he reedom o movemen is resriced. Moving in and ou a erriory is necessary, or insance, o atend educaion courses, or working reasonsand medical needs. Arbirary and prolonged resricions o movemens o persons and goods jeopardize he enjoymen o all undamenal humanrighs. esricions o such kind are hus o be regarded as unjusied hosileacions violaing he ICESC, aricle 1 o which saes: “In no case may a

96 See Human ighs Commitee, CCP/C/21/ev.1/Add.9, General Commen 27, o 2November 1999, available a: www.ohchr.org.

97 See also Aricle 13 o he Universal Declaraions o Human ighs (UDH).98 See he Human ighs Commitee, CCP/C/21/ev.1/Add.9, General Commen 27,

o 2 November 1999, par. 2, available a: www.ohchr.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

people be deprived o is own means o subsisence,” while aricle 5 providesha: “Nohing in he presen Covenan may be inerpreed as implying orany Sae, group or person any righ o engage in any aciviy or o perormany ac aimed a he desrucion o any o he righs or reedoms recognizedherein.”

5. No security-rationale behind the closure

As he presen repor will deail urher, he closure o he Gaza Srip isimposed by Israel as a realiaory and puniive ac ( see infa section 5.2).PCH believe ha he exreme resricions on movemen o goods andpersons o and rom he Gaza Srip are deniely no imposed or securiy reasons. Israel’s argumens in his respec are ambiguous and conradicory.

Israel has sough o presen he imposiion o closures as a securiy

measure, claiming ha heir primary objecive was o ensure is naionalsecuriy, and as a resul his is ofen how he closures have been perceived by he inernaional communiy and he general public. However, his isa misrepresenaion o he realiy. For many years PCH has noed hespurious naure o he ‘securiy argumen’.99

I is apparen ha closures have been always imposed in an arbirary ashion

and o arge he generaliy o he Palesinian populaion raher han hosespecically posing a securiy hrea.100 Moreover, i mus be recalled haalhough Saes’ sovereign righ o ake all appropriae seps o proec heirciizens is no dispued, securiy measures mus be aken in accordance wihinernaionally recognised legal norms and principles and mus respec heundamenal human righs o he civilian populaion. Tis is absoluely nohe case wih regard o he closures, which have been imposed or decades

on he Palesinian erriory in general, and on he Gaza Srip in paricular.

Following he 2007 Hamas-akeover o he Srip, Israel declared is ineniono block he passage ino Gaza o goods which could poenially have amiliary usage. Trough he Deense Expor Conrol Law 5766/2007, heIsraeli governmen incorporaed a lis o goods considered o be o dual use

99 See PCH Sudy, “Te Israeli Policy o Closure: Legal, Poliical, and HumaniarianEvaluaion”, 1996, p. 6-7, available a www.pchrgaza.org.

100 Ibid.





P o p u l a t i o n

(civilian and miliary)101 ino is legislaion and subsequenly prohibied by direcive heir impor ino he Palesinian erriory.102 Such goods, however,consiue only a small par o he iems ha have been banned or resricedrom enry in he Gaza Srip, which include, as already noed, oodsus,medicines, and basic maerials such as paper.

As noed by he Israeli organizaion Gisha – Legal Cenre or Freedom o Movemen (Gisha), “Israel openly saed ha i would resric he movemeno goods ino and ou o Gaza no in order o proec agains securiy hreassemming rom he ranser, bu raher as par o a policy o apply ‘pressure’or ‘sancions’ on he Hamas regime”.103

On 19 Sepember 2007, Israel’s Securiy Cabine declared Gaza a ‘hosileerriory’ and decided ha: “[...] urher resricions will be placed on heHamas regime such as he passage o goods o he Gaza Srip will be limied,

he supply o uel and elecriciy will be reduced, and a limiaion will beimposed on he movemen o people rom he Srip and o i. Te resricions will be implemened afer a legal review, while aking ino consideraionhe humaniarian aspecs o he siuaion in he Gaza Srip and ou o heinenion o avoid a humaniarian crisis.”104

A he ime, several saemens were made in he media by Israeli ocials

and cabine members, according o which heir inenion was o causesuering o he Gazan residens, so o exer “civil ian leverage” on he Hamasregime in response o he ring o Kassam rockes rom he Srip105. In heopinion o he Israeli depuy Prime Miniser, Haim amon, “Israel shouldake puniive seps such as disconnecion o elecriciy and waer”106

101 Te Wassenar Arrangemen on Expor Conrols or Convenional Arms or Dual-UseGoods and echnologies, WA Secrearia, Vienna, 2004. Israel is no a pary o heagreemen.

102 See Gisha, “esricions on he ranser o goods o Gaza: Obsrucion and obuscaion”, January 2010, available a: www.gisha.org.

103 Ibid, p. 1. According o Gisha Direcor, Sari Bashi: “Insead o considering securiy concerns, on he one hand, and he righs and needs o civilians living in Gaza, onhe oher, Israel banned glucose or biscuis and he uel needed or regular supply o elecriciy – paralyzing normal lie in Gaza and impairing he moral characer o he Saeo Israel. I am sorry o say ha major elemens o his policy are sill in place”, 21 Ocober2010.

104 English unocial ranslaion by Gisha, available a www.gisha .org.105 See he English ranslaion o he Peiion in he Al-Basyouni case, HCJ 9132/07, par. 79,

available a www.gisha.org106 Ibid.





P o p u l a t i o n

Commening on he above menioned cabine decision, Deence MiniserEhud Barak also said, “our aim righ now is he weakening o Hamas and hesrenghening o [Palesinian Auhoriy Prime Miniser] Salam Fayyad”.107

In addiion, he Israeli governmen has someimes linked he closure (andis lifing) o he release o he Israeli soldier Gilad Shali, who was capuredin June 2006 by Palesinian armed groups in Gaza.108 Such a circumsanceclearly undermines he securiy preex behind he closure, which can only bedened as a orm o collecive punishmen o he civilian populaion o Gaza.

As urher shown below, ollowing a peiion led by Gisha under heFreedom o Inormaion Ac, Israel was in he end orced o disclose ispolicy o “economic warare” behind he closure, which aims a deliberaely reducing he basic goods in he Gaza Srip, inicing grea suering on hecivilian populaion ( see infa sections 5.1 and 7).

5.1 Te ‘economic warare’ rationale disclosed

I is dicul no only o ideniy a securiy raionale, bu also logic, wihrespec o he prohibiion o he enry o goods in Gaza. Te resricions arearbirary and reveal he inenion o Israel o inic suering on he civilianpopulaion, inter alia , by resricing he goods allowed ino he Gaza Srip

o a so-called “humaniarian minimum”, i.e. o wha Israel deems is sricly essenial or he survival o he civilian populaion.109

Since 2007 Israel reused o provide deails o wha is allowed and whais prohibied ino Gaza - and on which basis - claiming ha reveling hem

would harm “sae securiy and possibly even Israel’s oreign relaions.”110 Neverheless, a lis o permited/prohibied iems was compiled, on he

basis o inormaion received rom Palesinian raders and business persons,inernaional organizaions and he Palesinian Coordinaion Commitee.

107 Y Ne, 19 Sepember 2008, htp://www.yne.co.il/aricles/17340, L-3451070,00 hm.108 Former Prime Miniser Ehud Olmer, or example, declared ‘We will no allow he

opening o he crossings o Gaza and ouside o Gaza o he exen ha i will helphem bring back lie ino a compleely normal pace. Cerainly no beore Gilad Shaliis back home’, Address by PM E. Olmer, Conerence o Presidens o Major American

Jewish Organizaions, 15 February 2009, htp://www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Archive/Speeches/2009/02/speechpre150209.hm.109 See he Israeli Securiy Cabine Decision o 19 Sepember 2007.110 An English ranslaion o “Excerps rom he April 25, 2010 Sae o Israel’s response

o Gisha’s peiion pursuan o he reedom o Inormaion Law”, along wih he ulldocumenaion o he case (mosly in Hebrew) is available a: www.gisha.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Tanks o he documenaion assembled by Gisha, i is possible o ‘deduce’ha an original lis o approximaely 40 permited iems exised, which lis

was progressively expanded, according o unknown crieria. Te prohibiediems comprised everyhing ha was no expressly permited, and included

wood or consrucion, cemen, iron, plasic/glass/meal conainers.111

Some o he prohibiions appeared o be lifed, ollowing he alleged easingo he closure announced by Israel in June 2010 ( see supra section 2.4): sage,cardamom, cumin, coriander, ginger, jam, kechup, biscuis and poao chipsappeared o be allowed again ino Gaza during he 2010 summer. However,oher seemingly innocuous goods, such as dried rui, resh mea, noebooks,oys, musical insrumens, shing nes, irrigaion pipe sysems, donkeys andgoas coninued o remain prohibied, along wih poenial ‘dual use goods’,

which include virually all consrucion maerials.

In Ocober 2010, due o he peiion led by Gisha beore he el Aviv Disric Cour under he Freedom o Inormaion Ac, he Sae o Israel hado release some documens oulining is policy regarding he resricionso good ino Gaza unil June 2010. Israel sill reuses o release he new documens regarding he curren closure policy as allegedly amended aferhe Floilla inciden o 31 May 2010.112 However, he disclosed documensreveal ha Israel decided o implemen a “policy o deliberae reducion”

o basic goods, including he supply o uel, and hereore elecriciy and waer, oodsu and goods o “rehabiliaive characer”, which required aspecial permission or approval, irrespecive o any securiy consideraion.

According o his policy, even humaniarian iems could be blockedand inernaional organizaions or oreign governmens did no receivepermission o ranser building maerials ino Gaza or he (re)consruciono schools or homes113.

In applying he closure, Israel has declared is inenion o wage ‘economic warare’ i.e. o arge and weaken Hamas by exering pressure on he civilianpopulaion o Gaza. Te deails o such an illegal policy o economic wararehad already emerged during he ‘Al-Basyouni case’, which was brough

111 See Gisha, “esricions on he ranser o goods o Gaza: Obsrucion and obuscaion”

and “Parial Lis o Iems prohibied/permited ino he Gaza Srip, May 2010, availablea: www.gisha.org.112 All he documenaion is available, parly ranslaed ino English, available a: www.gisha.

org.113 See Gisha, “Due o Gisha’s Peiion: Israel eveals Documens relaed o he Gaza

Closure Policy”, 21 Ocober 2010, available a: www.gisha.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

beore he Israeli High Cour o Jusice in 2007 by a number o Israeliand Palesinian organisaions, including PCH, ollowing he decision oresric he supply o energy o Gaza aken by he Securiy Cabine o heGovernmen o Israel on 19 Sepember 2007 ( see supra section 2.3.3)114. TeIsraeli governmen, argued beore he Supreme Cour ha: “argeing heeconomy isel is a legiimae means o warare and a relevan consideraion,even when deciding on he ranser o aid consignmen”. 115

Israeli Miliary Advocae General, Brig. Gen. Avichai Mendelbli, hasrecenly explicily conrmed ha he closure o Gaza is par o he economic

warare ha Israel is inicing on he civilian populaion in realiaion oHamas’ acions:

“Every sep aken, be i par o classical warare or economic warare,aims o bring he oher side o do wha we wan i o do. We wan

Hamas o sop launching rockes a our ciizens. We have no desireo punish he civilian populaion [in Gaza],” he said. “As an indirecresul, he civilian populaion does suer, and ha is why we havechecked he legaliy [o he blockade]. We’ve consuled wih heatorney general and wih he Supreme Cour, and ound ha i islegal and permited.” 116

PCH srongly rearms ha inicing suering upon he civilianpopulaion o obain poliical goals is conrary o basic law principles, andin ac consiues a orm o collecive punishmen. Te UN Fac ndingMission on he Gaza Conic rejeced he argumen pu orward by Israelha he closure consiues a legiimae sancion noing ha blankesancions are no permited under inernaional law, inter alia: “i is essenialo disinguish beween he basic objecive o applying poliical and economic

pressure upon he governing elie o he counry o persuade hem oconorm o inernaional law, and he collaeral inicion o suering uponhe mos vulnerable groups wihin he argeed counry.117 PCH urhersress he illegiimacy o ‘economic warare’. Te principle o disincion

114 See he Peiion o he Israeli High Cour o Jusice: HCJ 9132/07, Al-Basyouni v. PrimeMiniser, which was led joinly by a number o Israeli and Palesinian human righsorganisaions, including PCH, available a: www.gisha.org.

115

See he Sae response o November 1, 2007 o HCJ peiion 9132/07 Al-Bassyouni vsPrime Miniser, secions 44 and 25, available a: www.gisha.org.116 htp://www.haarez.com/news/diplomacy-deense/miliary-advocae-general-gaza-

blockade-enirely-legal-1.310346117 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 74,

78, 91, 1309, 1320, 1331, 1344, 1457, 1878, 1934 and 1943.





P o p u l a t i o n

is a core componen o boh reay-based and cusomary inernaionalhumaniarian law, i explicily holds ha atacks may no be direced againsnon-combaans and he civilian populaion.

5.2 A orm o collective punishment

egardless o Israel’s claims o he conrary, he curren resricions onmovemen o goods and persons ino and ou o he Gaza Srip are clearly no imposed or securiy reasons or miliary necessiy. Te inheren naureo he closure imposed by Israel on he Gaza Srip is puniive, realiaory andcollecive, and i dramaically impacs on he undamenal human righs o he proeced civilian populaion living under occupaion in Gaza.

PCH, along wih oher Palesinian, Israeli and Inernaional Humanighs organisaions, have repeaedly denounced he illegal policy o

closure imposed on he oP, and on Gaza in paricular, as a orm o collecivepunishmen o he Palesinian civilian populaion118.

Tis conclusion was recenly acknowledged also by he InernaionalCommitee o he ed Cross, in is repor o 14 June 2010.119 Teauhoriaive posiion o he ICC clearly saes ha he closure is illegal, isa orm o collecive punishmen and here is no oher susainable soluion

han is complee cessaion. Te Inernaional communiy, and especially he High Conracing Paries o he Geneva Convenions, mus cooperaeo pu an end o he illegal closure o he Gaza Srip and ake every possiblemeasure o his end.

Te closure consiues a orm o collecive punishmen o he civilianpopulaion which is absoluely prohibied under Aricle 33 o he Fourh

Geneva Convenion:

“No proeced person may be punished or an oense he or she hasno personally commited. Collecive penalies and likewise allmeasures o inimidaion or o errorism are prohibied”.

Tis provision is absolue and mandaory in characer and canno

be derogaed even in case o miliary necessiy, as noed in he ICC118 See he Peiion o he Israeli High Cour o Jusice HCJ 9132/07 in he Al-Basyouni

case, which was led joinly by a number o Israeli and Palesinian organisaions, includingPCH.

119 ICC, “Gaza Closure: no anoher year”, June 2010, available a: www.icrc.org





P o p u l a t i o n

commenary on he Convenion120.

Te prohibiion o collecive punishmen under inernaional humaniarianlaw was already armed by Aricle 50 o Te Hague egulaions o 1907

which saes ha “No general penaly, pecuniary or oherwise, shall beiniced upon he populaion on accoun o he acs o individuals or whichhey canno be regarded as joinly and severally responsible”. Te principle isalso enshrined in he Firs Addiional Proocol o he Geneva Convenionso 1977121 , which is considered o have acquired cusomary saus.122

Moreover, i is a general principle o criminal law ha no one shall bepunished or a (criminal) oence commited by ohers, hus conrminghe illegaliy o collecive punishmens under inernaional cusomary law (more exensively inra secion 5.3).

5.3 Te ultimate political aims o the illegal policy o closures imposed by Israel

As noed rom he ouse o his repor, PCH emphasizes ha i is necessary o analyse he closure imposed on he Gaza Srip since 2007 as par o heoverall closure policy and no as an isolaed case. Te absolue closure o Gaza is jus he laes and he mos exreme o a series o closures which

have been progressively imposed by Israel on he occupied Palesinianerriory since a leas 1991. For almos 20 years Israel has heavily resricedhe reedom o movemen o all Palesinians, and especially hose in Gaza.I is sel eviden ha he closure policy is persecuory in is naure: raherhan alleged ‘erroriss’, he closure arges insead he common people,hose who wish o have a normal lie in Gaza or o ravel abroad or dierenreasons, including sudens, workers seeking employmen abroad, amilies

wishing o be reunied, and even paiens in need o medical reamen.

Israel has pursued dieren aims hrough he imposiion o hese closureson he oP; in paricular, he closures have been one o he ools used by heOccupying Power o implemen a policy o separaion and ragmenaiono he occupied erriory and o is inhabians. Te driving impulse o heclosure policy imposed by Israel is he growing separaion beween he

Palesinian erriory isel and among he Palesinian people. Te inernal120 See J. Pice, Commenary IV Geneva Convenion (1958), p. 225-228.121 See Aricle 75(2)(d).122 See G. von Glahn, “Law Among Naions: an Inroducion o Public Inernaional Law”,

Boson, 1996, p. 622.





P o p u l a t i o n

Palesinian poliical implicaions resuling rom he separaion, orcedclosure and isolaion o he erriory and is inhabians are paricularly eviden oday.

For many years Palesinians rom Gaza have no been allowed o ravel o he Wes Bank and Palesinians rom he Wes Bank are no allowed o ravel oGaza. As a paradox, i is easier - alhough always exremely complicaed andexcepional - or a Palesinian rom Gaza o ravel or insance o Europehan o he res o he Palesinian erriory. Te vas majoriy (and virually no one among hose younger han 20 year old) o he Palesinians living inhe Wes Bank have never seen he Gaza Srip, since hey are no allowed apermi o ge in. Even he members o he Palesinian Legislaive Councilhave been subjec o access resricions.

Ulimaely he policy o closures imposed on he occupied Palesinian

erriory by Israel, and especially he absolue closure o he Gaza Srip,causes hardship no only a he economic-social-humaniarian level bu alsoa he poliical level. PCH believes ha he illegal closure policy imposed

by Israel, raher han aiming a proecing he naional securiy o he counry rom concree securiy hreas, has wo main objecives. By increasingragmenaion and isolaion, and generaing economic dependence hepolicy aims o:

1. Disrup he emergence o a Palesinian Sae, prevening Palesinians’rom achieving sel-deerminaion;

2. Deprive he Palesinian populaion o heir human digniy, also by manuacuring a humaniarian crisis.

In his regard i can be said ha he Israeli governmen’s illegal policy has

been successul.





P o p u l a t i o n





P o p u l a t i o n

III The effeCTS of The CloSure and The vIolaTIon of

fundamenTal human rIGhTS.

6.Socio-economic efects o the closure

Te economic impac o he prolonged, illegal closure o Gaza is pervasive:i has paralyzed all economic secors and resuled in he emergence o aman-made, compleely prevenable, humaniarian crisis. Te resricions on

he movemen o goods ino and ou o he Gaza Srip has mean ha heindusrial secor in Gaza is no longer able o obain raw maerials neededo make is producs, and producers can no longer expor heir goods omarkes in he res o he oP, or abroad. Te resricions on he movemeno people has mean ha he housands o Palesinians who once workedalongside Israelis in Israel can no longer access heir jobs and have since

become unemployed, wih eviden implicaions or povery and dependency

raes. Te shing indusry, or which Gaza is amous and which previously employed a large segmen o he populaion, is being wiped ou as i is orcedino an increasingly small shing area by Israeli gunships which requenly re a—and wound—Palesinian sherman, and conscae shing boasand equipmen.

Te unilaeral Israeli imposiion o a buer zone all around he borders

beween he Gaza Srip and Israel, which is a “no-go zone” area ha exendsa leas 300 and up o 2000 meers123 ono Palesinian land, is cuting o access o more han 35% o agriculural lands.124

123 See PCH, “Te Buer Zone in he Gaza Srip”, Fac Shee, Ocober 2010 Updae,available a: www.pchrgaza.org.

124 See OCHA/WF epor, “Te Humaniarian Impac o Israeli-imposed resricions on Access o Land and Sea in he Gaza Srip, Augus 2010, available a: www.ochaop.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Box 4

Te Bufer Zone in the Gaza Strip

Israel imposes a so-called “buer-zone” along he whole border beween he Gaza Srip and Israel. esidens are prevened romenering hese “no-go areas” which exend up o 2,000 meers romhe border. Esimaes indicae ha he buer-zone9 consiues abou17,000 dunums o land, which equals 17% o Gaza’s erriory and 35%o Gaza’s agriculural land.10 Tis renders 35% o agriculural landaccessible only under high risk o being sho by Israeli border parols.Beween 1 January and 30 Sepember 2010, PCH repored 47deahs and 114 injuries as oucome o atacks in he buer-zone.11 Teimposiion o such an illegally resriced area aggravaes ood securiy

issues and increases dependence on exernal aid. A sea, he buer-zone is enorced by Israel wih live re12 and allows shing only ouo 3 nauical miles, despie he limi o 20 nauical miles esablishedunder he Oslo Accords. Tis has negaively impaced upon he shingsecor on which approximaely 3,600 amilies depend economically.

Overall, an esimaed 178,000 people are direcly aeced by he

imposiion o he illegal buer-zone by Israel.13

Te socio-economic eecs o he las hree years o absolue closurecanno be undersaed: beween 45%-50% o Palesinians in Gaza are now unemployed, a leas 60% live below he povery line (US $594/monh), andmore han 66.7% live in deep povery.125 I is undeniable ha he siuaionsuggesed by hese worrying saisics is a direc consequence o he closure:

he World Bank has esimaed ha he rae o hose living below he povery line increased rom 35% a he end o 2006 o more han 67% a he endo Ocober 2007;126 his rae has coninued o climb in he inerim. Nearly 1.1 million Palesinians coninue o rely on ood assisance rom he UN in

125 PCH, “Price Increases in he Gaza Srip: A epor on he Impac o he Price Increaseson he Economic and Social ighs o he Civilian Populaion o he Gaza Srip”, June2008, Closure epor available a: www.pchrgaza.org. See also, According o he

Palesinian Cenral Bureau o Saisics, beween he rs and he second quarer o 2010,he unemploymen rae increased rom 39.7 o 44.3 percen, which is one o he highesraes in he world, c. OCHA, Humaniarian Monior, Sepember 2010, p.9, available a: www.ochaop.org.

126 htp://sieresources.worldbank.org/inwesbankgazainarabic/resources/arwbgupdaeoc07.pd.






P o p u l a t i o n

order o mee heir basic caloric needs.127

Meanwhile, he cos o living in Gaza has skyrockeed as he closure causesa severe shorage in essenial goods: he reduced quaniies o goods in localmarkes are available a inaed prices ha ofen reach 500% o he marke

value (see infa sections 6 and 6.9).

A populaion o proud and independen individuals is being reduced orelying on handous rom inernaional aid agencies. o his end he mosproound impac o he closure canno be described by gures or saisics:he closure has ransormed he enire erriory ino an open air prison,depriving a whole people o is human righs, including he mos undamenalrigh o live in digniy. Te youh o Gaza are deprived o heir presen and lef

wih litle or no hope or he uure. Te Israeli-imposed closure is desroyinggeneraions-old radiions and he way o lie or amilies in Gaza.

Tis secion o he repor will explore he impac o he closure-beginning wih he shorage o uel and elecriciy, which deeply aecs every economicsecor and aspec o daily lie in Gaza-and how he social and economiceecs have combined o erode he very abric o lie or Palesinians in Gaza.

6.1 Fuel and electricity crisis

Te Gaza Srip is heavily dependen on elecriciy rom Israel: approximaely 93% o he elecriciy comes direcly or indirecly – hrough he provisiono uel or he Gaza Power Plan – rom Israel. O he 240 MW required,120 MW are provided direcly by Israel, and 17 MW are provided by Egypo he aah area, in he souhern par o Gaza. Te remaining 107 MW are inended o be supplied locally by he Gaza Power Plan. 128 However,

because he Gaza Power Plan depends on indusrial uel provided by Israel- which has been sharply resriced as par o he absolue closure since 2007-he Plan was able o produce only 65 MW in 2009, a deci o 42MW.129 Te deci is exacerbaed by he poor conneciviy o he Plan’s power grid,

which is largely a consequence o he Israeli bombing o he plan in 2006

127 OCHA, Humaniarian Monior, Sepember 2010, p. 1, available a: www.ochaop.org.

128 PCH, “Sae o he Gaza Srip’s Border Crossing 16-30 June 2010”, available a: www.pchrgaza.org. According o OCHA sources, he oal provision o elecriciy hroughouhe Gaza Srip sands a abou 40 percen below he esimaed daily demand o 280 MW,see OCHA, “Proecion o Civilians Weekly epor, 10 - 23 November 2010”, availablea: www.ochaop.org.

129 Ibid.





P o p u l a t i o n

and he subsequen Israeli resricions on he enry o maerials needed orepair and rehabiliae he plan.

Following a decision in Sepember 2007, he Israeli Governmen has sharply resriced he amoun o uel permited ino he Gaza Srip, allowing heenry o only 2.2 million liers each week, less han hal o he minimum uelrequiremens o he civilian populaion in Gaza.

Te Gaza Power Plan has been resriced o 45% o is operaional capaciy asa direc resul o he lack o uel.130 During he rs week o November 2010,he Power Plan was orced o reduce is elecriciy producion by abou hal (30 MW vs. 60 M W), riggering daily power cus o 8 o 12 hours.131

Subsequenly, he Gaza Srip is experiencing a 30% elecriciy deci, wihscheduled power ouages now lasing beween eigh and welve hours a day;

his, oo, has had ar reaching eecs. PCH has highlighed he diculcondiions now conroning Gaza’s healhcare secor, as surgeons in hospialcardiac unis work in consan repidaion o power ouages, as do paiensreceiving care, paricularly hose seeking dialysis reamen.132

Te chronic lack o uel has aeced every aspec o lie in Gaza: 90% o privae cars are o he road and only 15% o public services are operaing.

PCH has documened a number o cases illusraing he wide range o impac o he uel crisis: or example, medical paiens seeking urgen careare orced o be ranspored o he hospial via donkey car due o he lack o operaional ambulances, and some schools have been orced o close

because hey canno provide ransporaion o heir sudens.133

Te decision o reduce he supply o uel and elecriciy o he Gaza Srip is

illegal as a blaan violaion o Israel’s obligaion under inernaional law asan occupying power.

Moreover, such a decision is also illegal because in violaion o he

130 PCH, “Sae o he Gaza Srip’s Border Crossing 16-30 June 2010 and 1-15 Sepember2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.

131

OCHA, “Proecion o Civilians Weekly epor, 3 - 9 November 2010”, available a: www.ochaop.org.132 PCH, “Dialysis in Paralysis,” Narraives Under Siege, 6 July 2010, available a: www.

pchrgaza.org.133 PCH, “Special Needs Children Denied Teir Educaion Because o Chronic Fuel

Shorage,” Narraives Under Siege, 20 May 2008, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

undamenal human righs o he local populaion. As i will be shown inhe nex par o he repor, indeed, no only he reedom o movemen bu allundamenal human righs o he 1.7 million inhabians o he Gaza Sripare violaed daily as a consequence o he pervasive negaive socio-economiceecs o he Israeli-imposed illegal closure, he lack o elecriciy - and isconsequences - being one o he mos blaan o hem.

6.2 Deterioration o the healthcare sector and the violation

o the right to health

As a direc resul o he prolonged illegal closure o he Gaza Srip he localhealhcare secor has sharply deerioraed, aeced by he lack o bohequipmen and medicines. As a consequence many paiens suering romserious injuries and illnesses canno receive adequae medical reamen inGaza and are orced o seek ransers o hospials ouside. However, hundreds

o paiens are prevened rom raveling due o he complee closure o bordercrossings or he movemen o Palesinian civilians. PCH documenedseveral cases o paiens ha died since 2007 because hey could no obainhe necessary reamen in Gaza and were denied a permi o seek medicalreamen abroad (see inra Box 5 Applicaion Procedure o cross Erez orMedical reamen).

In his regard he closure blaanly violaes Palesinians undamenal humanrigh o healh. Te righ o he highes atainable sandard o healh isguaraneed, iner alia, by Aricle 12 o he ICESC: “Saes Paries recognisehe righ o he enjoymen o he highes atainable sandard o physical andmenal healh”, he realizaion o which includes an obligaion on saes oprovide and aciliae he atainmen o such sandards.134

Similar o he righ o reedom o movemen, he righ o healh is undamenalo he enjoymen o oher human righs, as noed by he Human RighsCommitee in General Commen 14.135 Indeed, as noed by he HumanRighs Commitee in he same General Commen, his righ is no resricedo he righ o healh care. On he conrary, “i embraces a wide range o socio-economic acors ha promoe condiions in which people can lead a healhy lie, and exends o he underlying deerminans o healh, such as ood and

nuriion, housing, access o sae and poable waer and adequae saniaion,

134 See also ar.25 UDH. I is urher conained in oher Human ighs reaies, such as heICED under a. 5, he ICEDAW under a. 12, and he CC under ar.24.

135 E/C.12/2000/4 par 3, available a: www.ohchr.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

sae and healhy working condiions, and a healhy environmen”136.

Under H law, Saes are obliged o boh respec and ensure he righ ohealh and in doing so hey mus, iner alia, rerain rom inerering direcly or indirecly wih he enjoymen o he righ o healh.137 According o heexraerriorialiy o he human righs provisions enshrined in boh UNCovenans (see supra, secion 4.3). Saes are responsible or violaions hey commi ouside heir own erriory (on he basis o conrol). Clearly, Israel is

violaing Gazans righ o he highes atainable sandard o healh, primarily as a consequence o he sric resricions on he passage o goods and peoplein and ou o he Srip.

In 2008, hundreds o Gazan paiens were denied access o medical reamena hospials in Israel and he Wes Bank, including Eas Jerusalem. Accordingo PCHR’s documenaion, in 2008, 29 paiens died as hey were denied

access o advanced medical reamen ouside he Gaza Srip; pursuan oha repor, he number o paiens who died beween 10 June 2007 and heend o 2008 amouned o 50, including 17 women and 10 children138.

Moreover, he World Healh Organizaion (WHO) repored ha since January 2009 a oal o 33 paiens have died while waiing o access hospialsouside Gaza139.

On several occasions he UN Special Rapporeur on he oP has condemnedhe closure o he Gaza crossings and highlighed he ofen deadly consequences on he Palesinian people. For insance, rom mid-June o early Augus 2007 over 30 Palesinians reporedly died while waiing a he Raahcrossing, whose closure is – as noed above – indirecly conrolled by Israel.140

Gazans raveling hrough Erez or medical reasons are subjec o a prolongedand complicaed procedure which grealy aecs heir inheren righ ohealh. Te applicaion procedure is quie proraced and can ake monhs,ofen causing severe, lie-hreaening, delays. Te seps he paien mus ake

136 Ibid. , par. 4.

137 Ibid. par. 33.138 PCH, “2008 annual repor”, p. 49, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.139 WHO, eerral o Paiens rom he Gaza Srip, Monhly epor, Ocober 2010, available

a: htp://www.issuu.com/who-op/docs/updae_rad_ocober_2010.140 A/HC/7/17 par 15, available a: www.ohchr.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

o secure a permi o cross Erez are oulined in he Box below 141. Moreover Israel has prohibied he impor o medical equipmen, includingnew dialysis machines and spare pars needed o repair hose machines

which are no longer uncioning.

As a direc resul o he Israeli-imposed closure, he healh secor in he GazaSrip has deerioraed sharply and suers rom an acue shorage in medicineand medical equipmen. According o he Palesinian Minisry o Healh,110 ypes o medicine and 123 ypes o medical equipmen have run ou inhe Gaza Srip during he rs six monhs o 2010 and anoher 76 ypes o medicine are expeced o run ou in he coming monhs.142

According o Dr. Mohammad Shaa, he Depuy Direcor o he DialysisUni a Al-Shia hospial in Gaza Ciy, he healhcare secor in Gaza has

“winessed a shorage o almos fy percen in he medicine and machines we need o run his uni a is capaciy due o he Israeli occupaion andclosure.” Te consequences, he says, have been a visible decline in he healhand prospecs or recovery and survival o he paiens.

When medicines are no available in he hospials paiens mus ofenpurchase heir medicaions in pharmacies ouside, paying ou o heir own

pockes - and a aricially high prices - or medicines hey used o receiveree o charge. For example, he price o Solian, an anipsychoic, increased o213 NIS compared o 113 NIS prior o he siege, while in Israel is coss is 143NIS. For many paiens who already ace dicul economic circumsances,paying hese prices is no an opion. Te consequences o going wihou herequired reamen are obvious and deleerious:

Ahmed Zourob suers rom chronic kidney ailure and has beenreceiving reamen a Gaza Ciy’s Al-Shia hospial or he las wo

years: “Tree monhs ago he hospial old me ha my medicine was no longer available in he hospial pharmacy, bu wihou a jobI canno aord he medicaion on my own. I don’ know wha I cando. Now, because I haven’ aken he medicaion, he docors ell me

141 Much o his inormaion was obained wih he help o Physicians or Human ighs –Israel.

142 PCH, “Healh Secor in he Gaza Srip”, Fac Shees, 2 June 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

ha I have anemia as well.”143

For dialysis paiens like Ahmed Zourob, he elecriciy crisis creaes asiuaion in which reamen is boh lie-saving and lie-hreaening: i hepower goes ou during his reamen, he can lose up o 300cc o blood.

Exacerbaing he shorage in medicine, medical equipmen and humanexperise, he healhcare secor in Gaza suers also rom he shorage

o elecriciy resuling rom he Israeli-imposed closure (see supra section6.1). Sudden and requen ouages which come in addiion o he regularelecriciy cus place he paiens’ lives and he medical machines a grearisk.

Te uel crisis, also severely undermines he delivery o humaniarian aidand emergency medical services. Less han 15% o local public services are

operaing in Gaza, and basic emergency services such as ambulances aresreched ar beyond heir capaciy: Emiraes Hospial in aah receives1,800 paiens a monh and has one operaing ambulance, which runs only par ime as he uel supply allows. Emergency paiens regularly resor ousing donkey cars o access hospials, as PCH documened.144

As a consequence o he condiions described above, many paiens

suering rom serious injuries and illnesses canno be reaed in he Gaza143 PCH, “Dialysis in Paralysis”, Narraives Under Siege, o 6 July 2010, available a: www.

pchrgaza.org.144 PCH, “aah Ambulance Drivers Sruggle Amids “Miserable” Work Condiions”,

Narraives Under Siege, o 13 May 2008, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Srip’s hospials. Paiens are hus orced o seek ransers o hospials ousideo Gaza o receive adequae medical reamen; however, in mos cases, hesepaiens canno do so due o he ongoing and complee closure o bordercrossings or he movemen o Palesinian civilians. Hundreds o paiens-including women and children- are denied exi rom Gaza each monh

by Israel under he guise o “securiy concerns.” Since 2007, PCH hasdocumened 67 cases in which paiens have died because hey could noobain he necessary reamen in Gaza and were denied a permi o seek medical reamen abroad145.

145 Physicians or Human ighs – Israel, “Holding Healh o ansom”, Augus 2008, availablea: www.phr.org.il.





P o p u l a t i o n

Box 5

Application Procedure to Cross Erez or Medical reatment

1. Referral Report: Te paien mus obain a documen wih he words “eerral epor” rom a governmen hospial in Gaza.egular medical documens will no suce and he reerral repor

will only be considered valid i i is samped by he atendingphysician, he deparmen direcor, and he hospial direcor.

2. Securing Financial Undertaking: Te paien mus deliver heeerral epor o he eerral Abroad Deparmen (RD) a heMinisry o Healh (MoH) in Gaza. Te ocials o his deparmenare appoined by and accounable o he PA Minisry o Healh inamallah, which unds medical reerrals abroad. Te RD makes a

recommendaion as o where he paien should be reerred o andorwards his o he MoH in amallah or approval. I paiens areno approved or unding by he RD and he MoH in amallahand wish o sel-nance heir reamen ouside o Gaza, hey willno receive permis o leave Gaza.

3. Obtaining Hospital Appointment: Afer receiving he FinancialUnderaking, he paien conacs he RD again in order o obain

a hospial appoinmen, which depends on he nex available dae o he hospial and is willingness o receive he paien.4. Application to Leave Gaza for Medical reatment: Te

applicaion maerials are submited o he Palesinian CivilianCommitee, which orwards hem o he Israeli army’s DisricCoordinaion Oce (DCO). Te DCO sends he maerials ohe Israeli General Securiy Services (GSS), which makes he nal

decision on wheher o approve or rejec applicaions.5. Response: Te GSS may provide he paien wih a permi, reusea permi (on ‘securiy grounds’), or make he decision dependenon quesioning o he paien by he GSS. While no all summonedpaiens appear or quesioning, generally very ew applicaions areapproved afer quesioning by he GSS (In November 2009, noneo he 64 applicans who appeared or quesioning were approved

afer he inerview).6. In case o a rejeced permi applicaion, he paien may choose o

re-apply wih he help o a non-governmenal organizaion, usually Physicians or Human ighs – Israel. Te NGO aciliaes he





P o p u l a t i o n

process hrough direc conac wih he responsible Israeli ocials.

Overview o Applicaion Procedure or Permi o cross Erez or medicalreamen ouside Gaza.

Tere are a large number o poenial obsacles he paien may encounerduring in he permi applicaion process, each o which can abor or prolonghe applicaion process:

» Te eerral epor rom he governmen hospial in Gaza may have been issued or signed by someone whom he Israeli side does no accep,eiher because hey suspec him o documen orgery or because he isassociaed wih Hamas. In his case, a new eerral epor mus beobained and he applicaion procedure repeaed.

» I he paien does no receive unding rom he MoH in amallah, sel-unding o medical reamen is no permited.

» I medical documens are deemed o be ou-o-dae, he applicaionprocedure mus be repeaed.

» Delays because he designaed escor, who mus be a rs-degree relaive,is no approved by Israeli army and GSS and someone mus replace himor her. Te applicaion mus hen be re-submited o he PalesinianCivilian Commitee.

» Applicaions can be rejeced ourigh on “securiy” grounds, alhoughhis policy has been replaced by exended “review” periods146.

» Hamas police near he Erez crossing do no allow individuals who saehey are ravelling o Erez crossing or quesioning o proceed, andoccasionally hreaen hese paiens wih arres.

» Te governmen in Gaza has recenly required ha all Palesinians

wishing o leave he Gaza Srip obain permission rom he Minisry o he Inerior 3 days in advance. Tis pracice, which is illegal underPalesinian law, ofen means ha paiens are denied permission oravel by he governmen in Gaza. For example, he Israeli auhoriiesypically only inorm paiens hey can ravel he nigh beore, making iimpossible o noiy he Minisry o he Inerior.

» Prolonged GSS reviews ofen lead o delays weeks beyond he scheduled

hospial appoinmen. Around 25% o all permi applicaions are delayed146 According o he ICRC, pending reerral requess or paiens needing auhorizaion rom

Israel o ravel ouside Gaza make up abou 30 o 40 per cen o reerral requess. Tiscreaes havoc in hospials expecing he paiens, mos o which are in Eas Jerusalem andelsewhere in he Wes Bank. ICRC, “Gaza: ailing healh-care sysem pus lives a risk 01-07-2010 Inerview wih Eileen Daly, ICRC’s healh coordinaor, available a: www.icrc.org





P o p u l a t i o n

beyond he hospial appoinmen dae, orcing he paien o schedule anew appoinmen and apply or a new permi.

Moreover a number o Palesinian paiens are inerrogaed by he GSS aErez crossing each monh. Furher, inerrogaions can also ake place a Erezi hey are no announced in advance and he paien already holds a permi,leading o long delays and poenially also leading o a missed hospialappoinmen, in which case he applicaion process begins anew. Many o hese paiens are pressured o collaborae wih he Israeli inelligence. I hey reuse, hey are ofen reurned o Gaza.

Ahmed Abu Shawish, o Gaza Ciy, is one o hundreds o Palesinians inGaza whose lives are suspended because hey canno access he medicalreamen hey urgenly need. According o gures rom he PalesinianMinisry o Healh, approximaely 1,000 Palesinians rom Gaza apply o

Israel each monh or permis o exi he Gaza Srip via Erez Crossing in ordero access urgen medical reamen ouside o he Gaza Srip. Like many o hose who apply, his applicaion was denied many imes over, and he has

been conned o his home, where he lives and wais in pain, discomor anduncerainy:





P o p u l a t i o n

Abu Shawish is conned o his house in Gaza Ciy, waiing or a permi o

ener Israel in order o receive he medical reamen he desperaely needs.

“I have been sick or more han a year now. Five monhs ago I wasnally diagnosed wih cancer o my bladder. Te [Palesinian]Minisry o Healh reerred me o Echelo Hospial in el Aviv orspecialis reamen. Bu o course I need a permi o leave Gaza, andmy permi was denied. I am righened a he prospec o having

surgery or my cancer here. How do you hink I eel when even my own docors are elling me ha, or my own sake, I need o go andhave my surgery in hospial in Israel?”147

In he afermah o he Israeli miliary operaion on he Gaza Srip o December2008-January 2009, he Special Rapporeur clearly atribued responsibiliy o Israel or he worsening o he healh-condiions o he civilian populaion:

“one year afer he Operaion Cas Lead, he humaniarian siuaion in Gazano only remains deplorable bu has also worsened. Te oal blockade o heGaza Srip remains in ull eec, having lased now or nearly hree years,conribuing o deerioraing he physical and menal healh or 1.5 millionpersons”.148 Similarly, in his 2009 repor on he siuaion o human righsin he oP, he UN Special Rapporeur poined ou ha “96% o he Gazapopulaion suer rom depression and ha such menal deerioraion is isel an indicaion o a ailure by he occupying power o discharge is basic duy o

147 See PCH, “Gaza paiens coninue painul wai or urgen medical reamen, NarraivesUnder Siege, o 22 Augus 2008, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.

148 A/HC/13/53/ev.1 par. 30.





P o p u l a t i o n

saeguard he healh o civilians living under he occupaion”149.

By subjecing he enire populaion o Gaza, including paiens seekingmedical reamen and individuals wih emergency humaniarian needs,o wha is in pracice an unlawul regime o permis in order o cross he

borders o Gaza, Israel is inenionally inicing grea suering o he civilianpopulaion, which is a grave breach o he Fourh Geneva Convenion canamoun o a crime agains humaniy (see infa secion 7).

6.3 Not an adequate standard o living

Te righ o an adequae sandard o living in he Gaza Srip has been violaed by he illegal closure imposed by Israel.

Te righ o an adequae sandard o living is armed in Aricle 25(1) o he

UDHR. As specied by Aricle 11 o he ICESCR: “Te Saes Paries o hepresen Covenan recognize he righ o everyone o an adequae sandardo living or himsel and his amily, including adequae ood, clohing andhousing, and o he coninuous improvemen o living condiions. Te SaesParies will ake appropriae realisaion o his righ, recognising o his eeche essenial imporance o inernaional co-operaion based on ree consen”.

Te severe resricions on he ow o goods, including oodsu, resuled in heunprecedened deerioraion alimenary condiions, which also impacs on hehealh o he civilian populaion, whose poor siuaion was described above (see

supra secion 6.2). Severe resricions are imposed, iner alia, on supplies o mea,sh, whea, our, rice, oil, ruis and diary producs. Tose oodsus allowed oener are resriced o limied quaniies, resuling in increased prices (see infasecion 6).

Te ollowing paragraphs will show how he illegal closure policy imposed by Israel on he Gaza Srip is inenionally prevening he populaion oatain an adequae sandard o living in paricular by violaing heir accesso ood, and a aordable prices, o sae waer and o housing, which are allnecessary precondiions o he righ o an adequae sandard o living.

149 A/HC/10/20, par. 8, oonoe 2.





P o p u l a t i o n

6.4 Food insecurity and the increased cost o living

Te righ o ood, as par o he righ o an adequae sandard o living, is codiedin Aricle 11 o he ICESCR. Te long sanding occupaion o he Gaza Srip andis progressive closure over he years, which resuled in he absolue closure since June 2007, has made he populaion dependen on he impor o Israeli producs.

Israel’s curren absolue closure o he Gaza Srip has severely underminedhe civilian populaions’ righ o ood, which enails he righ o accesssae oodsu in sucien quaniies and a aordable prices. oday morehan 1,1 million people, approximaely 75% o Gaza’s populaion, lack oodsecuriy according o UN esimaions150.

Te Israeli-imposed closure has resuled in an acue shorage o essenialgoods and supplies, which has subsequenly caused a sharp increase in he

coss o he vasly reduced quaniies ha are available in Gaza, exacerbainghe poor economic circumsances conroning mos amilies in Gaza. Many ood iems have disappeared, or became oo expensive, aecing civilians’abiliy o access an appropriae nuriional balance: his grealy aecschildren as he rs vicims o malnuriion151. As noed bu he UN Specialapporeur o he oP, he severe Israel-imposed blockade, by resricing“he ows o ood o sub-subsisence levels” also has been “responsible or

a serious overall decline in he healh o he populaion and o he healhsysem”, in violaion o he Fourh Geneva Convenion.152

Indeed as a direc consequence o he closure and he shorages o goods,prices increased in an unconrolled manner reaching levels ou o reach ormos o he populaion. Te price o mea, or insance, increased by 76%afer June 2007, making he consumpion o mea a luxury ha only a small

minoriy o amilies can aord153

. Shorages have also aeced oher basicood iems such as sh, whea, our, rice, oil, ruis and oher dairy producs.150 OCHA, “Impeding Assisance: Challenges o mee he humaniarian needs o he

Palesinians”, Special Focus, May 2010, p.2, available a: www.ochaop.org.151 See OCHA/WFP epor, Te Humaniarian impac o Israeli-imposed resricions on

access o Land and sea in he Gaza Srip, Augus 2010, p. 27, available a: www.ochaop.org.

152 A/HC/10/20 par 9. As noed by he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Floilla inciden,

“Since he imposiion o he blockade […] here has been a shif in die (rom proein richo low cos and high carbohydrae oods), riggering concerns over mineral and viamindeciencies, A/HC/15/21, par. 41.

153 See PCH, “Price Increase in he Gaza Srip. A epor on he Impac o he Price Increaseson he Economic and Social ighs o he Civilian Populaion in he Gaza Srip”, June2008, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Te prices o some supplies, such as peroleum producs and cooking gas hasincreased since 2007 by 300%, and he price o local agriculural producshas risen by as much as 500%. In addiion, ransporaion coss and he priceo educaional supplies and medicine have increased by a leas 200%.154

Anwar Abu Alkass owns a popular mini-marke in cenral Gaza. “We used o havea lo o resh goods on sale, bu now he majoriy o our goods are dry producs”he explains. “Every business has been aeced by he closure – we used o selllos o resh milk and dieren kinds o cheese – bu now we are orced o dependon wo Israeli companies or our dairy impors. Teir producs are expensive orus, bu we have no choice. Tere have been rapid price increases because o heclosure. Beore he closure, or insance, a lier o corn oil cos 19 shekels. Now icoss 29 shekels. Te price o our has also doubled; hree monhs ago a kilo o our was 2 shekels. Now our cusomers have o pay 4 shekels.” 155

Anwar Abu Alkass displays one o he empy rerigeraors in his cenral Gazasore. Te producs which are available are so only a aricially high prices.

Te incredible increase in he cos o living has coincided wih hedeerioraing economic condiions which his repor has atemped oillusrae, and his combinaion has had a deep and negaive impac on heliving condiions or amilies in Gaza. As a consequence amilies have been

154 htp://sieresources.worldbank.org/inwesbankgazainarabic/resources/

arwbgupdaeoc07.pd.155 See PCH, “Abu Alkass Mini-Marke, Gaza ciy”, Narraives under Siege, April 2008,

available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

orced o compleely aler he way in which hey live:

H.B. 75, Beach Camp in Gaza Ciy. She is a widow and has a amily o weny-one members:

“I live wih my hree sons and heir children. One o my sons was working in plasering and his work was erminaed due o heclosure. wo monhs ago, we ran ou o cooking gas. We boughan elecric heaer and we suer a lo when he elecriciy goes ou.

We mainly rely on aid rom UNWA. We don’ buy ruis; we only buy basic needs due o he price increase. We don’ buy resh meas, bu i we have some money we buy rozen low-qualiy mea. One o my sons suers rom hepaiis and we can’ aord o buy him herequired reamen because he medicine prices are very high.”

F.A., 67, Gaza Ciy. She lives wih an eigh-member amily:

“My husband has a cardiac condiion and is unemployed. We rely on aid rom UNWA. We only buy a small amoun o rozen mea.Beore [he closure] we used o buy some rui, bu oday we never

buy rui because i is very expensive. My husband needs medicine, bu we can’ aord he high prices.”

According o he 2010 repor o he UN Special apporeur on he igho Food, ood insecuriy had already risen rom 34 % in 2006 o 38 % in2008 due o he shorages o basic essenial iems.156 Te severe impac onGazan people provoked by insucien ood supplies has been also reporedon several occasions by he UN Special apporeur on he OP157.

Te UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza conic ound ha “Israel violaed is duy o respec he righ o he Gaza populaion o an adequaesandard o living, including access o adequae ood, waer and housing”.158 Moreover, he Mission ound ha “he condiions o lie in Gaza, during andafer he miliary operaions, [...] indicae he inenion o inic collecive

156 epor o he Special apporeur on he righ o ood, Olivier De Schuter -Addendum

- Summary o communicaions sen and replies received rom Governmens and oheracors, UNDocs A/HC/13/33/Add.1 (2010), 26 February 2010, par 49.

157 Siuaion o human righs in he Palesinian erriories occupied since 1967 - Noe by he

Secreary-General, UNDocs A/63/326 (2008), 25 Augus 2008, par. 11.158 See supra noe 5, par. 73.





P o p u l a t i o n

punishmen on he people o Gaza Srip in violaion o inernaionalhumaniarian law”159 and ha his migh lead a compeen cour o concludeha “crimes agains humaniy have been commited”.160

6.5 Water pollution

One o mos dangerous consequences o he illegal closure imposed by Israel on he Gaza Srip is he deerioraion o he waer supply.161 Te aquieris pollued, poisoned by sewage and depleed by he rising populaion

which i can no longer suppor. Only 10% o he aquier’s waer now meesinernaional sandards or consumpion. Generally, waer in Gaza is now undrinkable, and nirae and chloride levels reach six and seven imes heinernaional saey sandards pu orward by he World Healh Organizaion(WHO). Te later has urher esimaed ha nowadays 26% o disease inGaza is waer-relaed and ha he chance o an oubreak o waer-borne and

ood-borne diseases, such as cholera, is high.

162

As noed by he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic “even beorehe miliary operaions, 80% o he waer supplied in Gaza did no mee he

World Healh Organizaion’s sandards or drinking waer.”163

Wasewaer reamen aciliies are inadequae and unable o deal wih he

needs o he growing populaion, and unreaed sewage is ofen dumpedino he sea or on land areas surrounding highly populaed ciies such asaah, Bei Lahia and Khan Younis. Ulimaely, his ends up conaminainghe qualiy o waer as 90% o he waer available in Gaza comes rom only one source, he coasal aquier.

Te righ o waer is considered par o he righ o an adequae sandard

o living. According o he Commitee on Economic Social and Culuralighs “he righ o waer clearly alls wihin he caegory o guaraneesessenial or securing an adequae sandard o living, paricularly since i is

159 Ibid., par. 74.160 Ibid., par. 75.161

See PCH “Tere’s Somehing in he Waer: Te Poisoning o Lie in he Gaza Srip”,Narraives Under Siege, o 5 Augus 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org162 epored by UNICEF oP, Monhly Updae, March 2010, available a: www.unice.org/

op163 See also he epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/

HC/12/48, par. 67





P o p u l a t i o n

one o he mos undamenal condiions or survival”164. Moreover, he righo waer is clearly linked o he righ o he highes atainable sandard o healh, wih availabiliy, aordabiliy, accessibiliy and qualiy o waer beingsome o he principal componens o he righ.

According o he same Commitee he righ o waer, like any oher humanrigh, imposes hree ypes o obligaions on Saes paries: obligaions orespec, obligaions o proec and obligaions o ulll165. Saes paries haveurher inernaional obligaions and have o respec he enjoymen o herigh in oher counries. Te Commitee underlined ha “Inernaionalcooperaion requires Saes paries o rerain rom acions ha inerere,direcly or indirecly, wih he enjoymen o he righ o waer in ohercounries. Any aciviies underaken wihin he Sae pary’s jurisdicionshould no deprive anoher counry o he abiliy o realize he righ o waeror persons in is jurisdicion”166. Saes paries should rerain a all imes rom

imposing embargoes or similar measures, ha preven he supply o waer, as well as goods and services essenial or securing he righ o waer. Waershould never be used as an insrumen o poliical and economic pressure.167

Te illegal Israel-imposed closure, by prevening he enry o basic building maerials and adequae levels o uel and elecriciy, impedes hereconsrucion o wasewaer reamen aciliies and heir abiliy o adap

o he needs o he rising Gazan populaion.168

Approximaely 80,000 cubicmeers o sewage are pumped ino he Medierranean Sea everyday due ohe lack o seady elecriciy supply in Gaza needed o adequaely processhe wase.169

“Tis sewage canno be reaed due o he lack o a seady elecriciy supply wihin he Gaza Srip” says an OCHA repor on Gaza

saniaion. Hamada Al-Bayari works or he Gaza OCHA oce.“We’re very concerned ha he sea is becoming dirier and more

164 See E/C.12/2002/11, General Commen 15 (2002), o 20 January 2003, par. 3, availablea: www.ohchr.org.

165 Ibid., par. 20.166 Ibid., par. 31.167

Ibid., par. 32.168 See also he 2010 repor o he UN Special apporeur on he OP, A/HC/13/53/ev.1, par. 30 and he epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 65.

169 See PCH, “Tere’s Somehing in he Waer: Te Poisoning o Lie in he Gaza Srip”,Narraives Under Siege, o 5 Augus 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

conaminaed because o he chronic shorages o uel and sparepars. “Gaza’s sewage reamen plans urgenly need oureen dayso uninerruped power in order o run a proper sewage reamencycle, or he sake o Gaza’s public healh.”

Million o liers o raw sewage leak ino he sea in Gaza due o, among oherhings, he lack o uel and elecriciy needed o rea i. Tis sewage pipeis adjacen o a Gaza Ciy searon resauran and less han 100m rom apopular beach. On some beaches, bahers are now, lierally, swimming insewage.

In his regard, he Israeli-imposed closure clearly violaes he universal righo healh and a healhy living environmen or he Palesinian populaion o Gaza. Under inernaional humaniarian law, Israel, as an occupying power,is obliged o aciliae access o all ameniies. Clean drinking waer and sea

waer are in his sense nohing more han basic human righs.

Moreover, he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic ound haIsrael clearly violaed inernaional law, iner alia, by deliberaely argeing

waer insallaions wihou any miliary advanage.170

170 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 52.Te oensive damaged more han 30 kilomeers o waer neworks, 11 groundwaer wells, 6,000 roo anks and 840 household connecions.





P o p u l a t i o n

According o PCH’s gures, 86,000 houses urgenly need o be consrucedo provide adequae sheler or hose lef homeless by Israel’s laes miliary oensive and o accoun or naural growh. 2,400 homes were compleely desroyed during he hree weeks long atack, in which 3,253 amiliesonce lived. Addiionally, 3,277 houses were parially desroyed (rendereduninhabiable), in which 5,483 amilies used o live; a leas 12,000 homes

were damaged in oal. Tousands o civilians were displaced as a resul o he desrucion, mos o whom moved in wih amily members, adding ohe already highly congesed living condiions in he Gaza Srip.

Te absolue closure aecs, iner alia, he impor o concree and oherconsrucion maerials, and providing sae and decen housing coninues o

be a serious concern (and a denied righ) or many amilies in Gaza. As saed by he UN Special apporeur on he oP “he blockade include virually all building maerials, hereby prevening eors o reciy he exensive

damage brough by he Operaion Cas Lead”.176

Te coninued closure o border crossings and he ban imposed on heimpor o basic consrucion maerials, especially cemen and iron, havehindered, and in mos cases compleely haled, all sages o he reconsrucionprocess o hese homes. Amnesy Inernaional repors ha only ory-oneruckloads o consrucion maerials were allowed o ener Gaza beween

he end o he Israeli oensive in mid-January 2009 and December 2009.177

I is esimaed ha o rebuild only he houses desroyed, over 670,000ruckloads o consrucion maerial would be required.178 Alhough henumber o ruckloads has increased marginally under he new closurearrangemen announced by Israel in July 2010, he impor o consrucionmaerials remains unchanged.179 Compared o 10,500 ruckloads allowedino he Gaza Srip by Israel monhly beore 2007, i is clear ha he curren

supply o building maerials is woeully inadequae o address even heminimum needs o Gaza’s civilian populaion.

Accordingly, he humaniarian crisis o he Palesinian civilian populaion

176 2010 epor, A/HC/13/53/ev.1, par 30.177 Amnesy Inernaional, “Gaza’s Civilians Sill Unable o ebuild One Year Afer

‘Operaion Cas Lead,’” 22 December 2009, available a: htp://www.amnesy.org.uk/news_deails.asp?NewsID=18552.178 See he epor, “Dashed Hopes: Coninuaion o he Gaza Blockade”, p. 7, also available

a: www.pchrgaza.org.179 “Since he “easing” o he blockade, only 715 ruckloads o consrucion maerials or all

uses have enered Gaza since June 2010, a mere 11% o pre-closure levels.” Ibid., p. 7.





P o p u l a t i o n

in he Gaza Srip has been grealy worsened as a resul o he lack o consrucion maerials needed o rebuild homes desroyed in he laesoensive, and many amilies coninue o live emporary shelers, or even inens, unable o reurn o heir normal lives.

Salah Jalal Abu Leila lives in a crowded en wih his amily o welve beside a dusy main sree in he Norhern Gaza own o BeiLahia: “Our home was compleely desroyed in he war. I workedor sixeen years in Israel o build my home, and in one atack hey desroyed i all. Since 2002 I have no been able o go o Israel o

work, and I have been unemployed. I have no money o buy a new home. I have welve children, and we have been living in a en orover a year. I asked he governmen o help me, bu hey said here isnohing hey can do because hey canno ge he maerial o buildnew houses. I am a Palesinian civilian. I am no poliical. Wha did

I do o deserve his?”180

Salah Jalal Abu Leila has been living in a en or over a year, since his home was desroyed in he laes Israeli miliary oensive. Unemployed sincehe was barred access rom his job in Israel, he canno aord o ren a new aparmen, and here is no maerial o rebuild his ormer home.

Salah is ar rom alone in his dicul siuaion. Jus across he sree in BeiLahia, in an empy oce above a semi-operaional gas saion, lives Sabah al-

Atar and her amily: “Our home was compleely desroyed on he rs day o

180 See PCH, “Lie Pu on Hold as Consrucion Maerials Coninue o be esriced”,Narraives Under Siege, o 27 July 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

he war [December 27, 2009].

For over a year Sabah al-Atar and her amily have been living in an empy oce on he second oor o his gas saion. Teir home was desroyedand he en provided o hem was conscaed. Because o he dangerousliving condiions, Sabah’s amily is being orced o leave, alhough hey havenowhere o go.

“Afer he atack, we had nowhere o go” Sabah explains, “we sayedin a en or feen days, bu hen he governmen ook he en romus o give i o securiy orces. Since hen we have been living inan empy oce above a perol saion nearby, bu he governmendiscovered us here and is orcing us o leave because i is very dangerous o live here due o he large gas ank direcly below us.Tey say i we don’ leave by he end o he monh, we will have o

pay a 10,000 NIS ne. We don’ have anywhere o go. We have nohome, no work, nohing.”

Te Israeli-imposed absolue closure violaes he basic human righ ohousing or sheler, iner alia, by denying Palesinian civilians heir righo reconsruc he housands o homes and buildings desroyed duringIsraeli miliary operaions in he Gaza Srip over he pas 10 years. Tis

clearly violaes Gazans’ undamenal righ o adequae sheler, renderingIsrael accounable in accordance wih is inernaional human righs law obligaions.





P o p u l a t i o n

nally able o cross ino Gaza and visi wih her amily afer hree years.Now, however, Nevin aces the sadly ironic dilemma o not beingable to leave. Unable to get permission to travel via the Raah border crossing, Nevin’s new school, St. Lawrence University inNew York, has inormed her that her scholarship is too expensive tomaintain in her absence and so it will be canceled. “My university doesn’t understand about lie in Gaza. My amily lives in a reugeecamp, and they can’t aord to send me to university in Gaza.”

Like hundreds o oher sudens in he Gaza Srip, Nevin Abu aima hashad her educaion and her uure hijacked by he closure.

In addition to denying Palestinians the opportunity to develophuman capital and technical expertise, Israel has denied the young

generation in Gaza an opportunity or cultural exchange andintellectual stimulation through its restriction on the movemento people. Students in Gaza are isolated rom the outside world andorced to pursue their studies with the vastly inadequate resourceslocally available to them: the result has been an increasingly narrow world-view among the students in Gaza.

Te Israeli-imposed closure has deepened the intellectual and culturaldivide within the Palestinian territory itsel. Beore 1994 more than3,000 Gazan students were studying in West Bank universities.In March 1996, Israeli military orces issued an order expelling all





P o p u l a t i o n

Palestinian students rom Gaza who were in the West Bank. Due tothese measures, more than 1,200 students rom Gaza were arbitrarily deprived o the right to continue their education at universities andinstitutions in the West Bank. Due to escalated restrictions onmovement between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank imposed by Israel afer 2000, the number o students rom Gaza registered inthe West Bank universities decreased even urther. Now, under thepolicy o complete closure imposed since June 2007, Palestinians romGaza -who once constituted approximately 35% o the student body at universities in the West Bank- are virtually absent rom West Bank education institutions.

According to the Israeli Supreme Court Palestinian students are a“dangerous category” and universities in the West Bank are “greenhousesor growing terrorists”.183 Instead o examining the individual cases and the

requests or travelling o Gazan students individually, the Israeli military authorities systematically deny any study-permit or the West Bank to young people rom Gaza, claiming generic and ill-ounded reasons.184

Along wih hose Palesinian sudens prevened rom raveling ousideGaza or educaional purposes, sudens in he local universiies are alsoseriously aeced by he unlawul Israel-imposed closure. During he

miliary operaion o December 2008-January 2009 several schools,including UNWA schools and he American school, were argeed183 On March 2005, a peiion was submited o he Israeli Supreme Cour, on behal o en

sudens rom he Gaza Srip or enabling hem o ravel o he Wes Bank o sudy a heBehlehem Universiy (Hamdan’s case and ohers, appeal no. 11120/50). Par. 8 o heIsraeli High Cour decision regarding appeal no. 11120/50 saes: “ravel rom Gaza o Judea and Samaria, he Wes Bank, is allowed or senior Palesinian Auhoriy employees, who are no aliae o Hamas, senior businessmen, senior employees who work orinernaional organizaions, residens o he Wes Bank who wan o reurn o heir places,

and humaniarian excepional case bu no or hose who are beween 16 and 35 yearsold including universiy sudens as hey are o high danger degree. In he “danger crieria”and upon Israeli inelligence inormaion, i is alleged ha erroris aciviies are aken by persons who are beween 16 and 35 years old and paricularly universiy sudens. I isalso alleged ha he Wes Bank universiies orm greenhouses or growing erroris andsudens who sudy here and have no inen o carry ou erroris acs will be aeced by he surrounding environmen.” available a: www.gisha.org.

184 In he recen Peiion no 10/4609, “Miss Fama Al Shari agains he Commander o he Souhern Command”, he Israeli HCJ reused o allow her o ravel o he Wes Bank

in order o atend o he Maser’s degree program in human righs and democracy aBirzei Universiy o amallah. During he hearing, he Israeli Miliary Atorney Generaladmited ha he Israeli miliary has no allowed any sudens rom he Gaza Srip oravel o he Wes Bank o sudy here. In is response o he peiion, he Cour supporedhe miliary’s decision and acceped ha here were no new policies concerning he easingo resricions imposed on he movemen o people as a resul o he governmen decisiono 20 June 2010. Te ull documenaion is available a: www.gisha.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

and many educaional insiuions were damaged or desroyed. Boh heUN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic185 and he UN Specialapporeur in he oP186 asked or eecive invesigaions ino his damageand desrucion.

Te absolue closure wih he ban on he impor o he needed consrucionmaerials has made exremely dicul and cosly – i no impossible – herebuilding or building o new schools and oher educaional insiuions. Asrepored by Filippo Grandi, he head o UNWA, he Gaza Srip urgenly needs an addiional 100 schools. So ar Israel has only given permiso UNWA or he consrucion o six. According o he same source,approximaely 40.000 children are already prevened rom enrolling inUNWA schools o Gaza, alhough possessing he ormal requisies o doso, due o he physical lack o places. Te classes are overcrowded, couningin he average 50 scholars each, and he schools are currenly run on riple

daily shifs.187

In his already compromised scenario an addiional negaive impac on heaccess o educaion o Gazan sudens is represened by he Israeli-unilaeralimposiion o he “buer zone” along he Srip’s borders (see supra Box 4), assome schools are locaed wihin 1500 meers rom he border and hereoreexposed o requen “Israeli re argeing people presen in he resriced

areas, armers or armed milians”.188

As noed by UN sources, boh hesaey o he approximaely 4.400 sudens and 250 eachers and employeesis aeced by his siuaion, and he qualiy o educaion provided in heseinsiuions has been seriously undermined due o classes inerrupions, oreven enire evacuaions, and damages o he school aciliies189.

As a resul o he Israeli-imposed closure sudens’ undamenal righ o

educaion in Gaza is negleced. Depriving Palesinian sudens o heir righ185 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par.

1268-1274.186 epor o he Special apporeur on he siuaion o human righs in he Palesinian

erriories occupied since 1967, UNDocs A/HC/10/20 (2009), 11 February 2009,par 33.

187 Inerview given by Mr. Grandi in he UNWA school o Bei Lahia on 24 November2010. For more deails on he impac o he closure on UNWA aciviies see he epor,

“Dashed Hopes. Coninuaion o he Gaza Blockade”, November 2010, by Amnesy Inernaional UK and 14 oher inernaional organizaions, also available a: www.pchrgaza.org.

188 OCHA-WFP epor, “Te Humaniarian Impac o Israeli-imposed resricions onaccess o land and sea in he Gaza Srip”, Augus 2010, p. 28.

189 Ibid.





P o p u l a t i o n

o educaion consiues a serious violaion o boh humaniarian and humanrighs law. As poined ou by he Commitee on Economic, Social andCulural ighs “As an empowermen righ, educaion is he primary vehicle

by which economically and socially marginalized aduls and children canlif hemselves ou o povery and obain he means o paricipae ully inheir communiies.”190

6.8 Palestinian amilies orcibly divided

Te righ o amily is armed by Aricle 16 o he 1948 Universal Declaraiono Human Righs and Aricle 23 o he 166 ICCPR, which obliges Saes oproec he righ o marry and ound a amily. Moreover Aricle 10 ICESCR saes ha “he wides possible proecion and assisance should be accordedo he amily, which is he naural and undamenal group uni o sociey (...)”.

Te righ o amily o he Palesinian populaion is violaed in many ways by Israel: by denying amily reunicaion, by conrolling residency righs o every Palesinian and ulimaely hrough he illegal policy o closure, whichresrics he reedom o movemen o every Palesinian residing in Gaza or

wishing o ravel in or ou o i191.

Nisreem Karam has no been able o visi her sick, 70 year-old aher

or more han en years. Nisreem was born in 1977 in Bir Sheiva andhad an Israeli ID. Afer she go married o a Palesinian man o Gazain 1994, and given he impossibiliy or he man o ge he permio reside in Israel, she decided o move o Gaza. In order o do soshe had o give up her Israeli ID and afer all kind o diculies,delays and obsacles she nally go a Palesinian ID in 2004 as aresiden o Gaza. Since now more ha en years she is prevened

rom visiing her amily and relaives, and in paricular her aher, who is living in Bir Sheiva, Israel. Te las applicaion, submitedon her behal by PCH las June, was rejeced one monh afer

by he Israeli compeen auhoriy (he ‘Humaniarian Ceneror daily applicaions’) or alleged, generic “poliical and securiy reasons”. On 23 Augus PCH appealed he rejecion in ron o

190 Implemenaion o Inernaional Covenan on Economic, Social and Culural ighs,E/C.12/1999/10, General Commen n. 13 o 8 December 1999, par. 1., available a: www.ohchr.org.

191 See PCH, “Alernaive epor Submited o he UN Commitee on Economic, Socialand Culural ighs in esponse o Israel’s Tird Periodic repor” (E/C.12/IS/3), 18Ocober 2010, p.15-20, a www.pchrgaza.org,





P o p u l a t i o n

he Israeli Atorney General, again horoughly documening hesae o hilliness o Nisreem’s aher and asking or an urgen permiin order or her o visi him. On 26 Sepember – given he lack o responses – PCH sen a reminder o he Atorney General, whoresponded only on 10 November 2010 rejecing he appeal, onceagain denying Nisreem he permi o visi her aher claimingha his “healh condiions are no serious enough”. Te decisioncame nowihsanding he ac ha he seriousness o he healhcondiions had been ceried by Israeli docors.

Cases such as Nirmeen’s unorunaely are no isolaed. Te sric regimeo closure o he Srip resuls in siuaions such as ha o A.B. rom Gaza,

who canno live ogeher wih his wie and amily in Jaa or even visi hem.Since 2007, when he was sen back o Gaza, he is orceully separaed romhis amily, nowihsanding an Israeli Cour decision graning him a permi

o live in Israel. Tis decision was never implemened by he Israeli securiy auhoriies. His wie has been allowed o visi him in Gaza once a year orve days.

Indeed one o he mos blaanly negaive social eecs o he prolongedisolaion and illegal closure o he Gaza Srip is he orced separaion o housands o Palesinian amilies whose members are no only prevened

rom living in he same place, bu are ofen unable o visi each oher inhe Wes Bank and Gaza (and o course in Israel). Due o he illegal Israeliresricions on he reedom o movemen o he Palesinian populaion,he Wes Bank and Gaza have progressively become wo virually separaeeniies, in violaion o inernaional laws and agreemens (see supra secion2.3. and ollowing).

Tis siuaion is no jus a new eec o he las hree year’s absolueclosure o he Gaza Srip; raher i is he inenional produc o a muchlonger policy, which Israel implemened a leas over he pas 20 years onhe occupied Palesinian erriory. Under he policy o closure and sricconnemen, he Palesinian populaion are subjeced o an incredibly complicaed and arbirary sysem o permis - o be graned by he Israelimiliary commanders – in order o do even he mos basic hings, including

visiing one owns parens, spouse, children, living on he “oher side” o hePalesinian erriory or in Israel.





P o p u l a t i o n

employees (6,000), constitutes a mere 17% o the number o employedprior to June 2007.194 Paradoxically, under these conditions, the increasedquantity o oodstu rom Israel since June 2010 is killing the residualeconomy o Gaza: the Al Awda actory o biscuits, or instance, which wasone o the biggest actories in Gaza and normally employed 300 peopleand used to export 60% o its products, is now virtually closed afer thelocal market being ooded with cheap biscuits rom Israel, a situationcompounded by the act that exports rom Gaza are still completely

banned.195

A compleely man-made humaniarian disaser currenly conrons Gazaas a direc resul o Israel’s policy o complee closure o he Gaza Srip:unemploymen raes in he Gaza Srip are now abou 45%196 , and povery raes exceeded 60%.197

Furhermore, he resricion on he movemen o people has deniedhousands o Palesinians o heir jobs in Israel or abroad, orcingunemploymen o is highes recorded rae and increasing he number o amilies who are incapable o ensuring heir basic needs o ood, medicineand oher essenial goods. In 2000, or example, 26,000 Palesinian workerscommued ino Israel everyday via he Israeli-conrolled Erez crossing,

while in July 2010 he number had dropped dramaically o an average o 95

workers raveling o Israel per day 198

.

Trough he illegal closure policy Israel negaively aecs he righ o Palesinians o work, in violaion o is obligaions under inernaionalhuman righs law.

194 OCHA, “Te Humaniarian Monior”, Ocober 2010, p. 10, available a: htp://www.ochaop.org/documens/ocha_op_he_humaniarian_monior_2010_11_12_english.pd

195 BBC, Gaza Businesses Boxed in by Israeli Expor Ban, 2 November 2010, available a:htp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-eas-11668080.

196 According o he Palesinian Cenral Bureau o Saisics, beween he rs and he secondquarer o 2010, he unemploymen rae increased rom 39.7 o 44.3 percen, which is oneo he highes raes in he world, c. OCHA, Humaniarian Monior, Sepember 2010, p.9,

available a: www.ochaop.org.197 Filippo Grandi, UNWA Commissioner General, poined ou ha over 60% o he Gazapopulaion live below he povery line; see PCH, “Sae o he Border Crossings, 16-30Sepember 2010”, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.

198 See Gisha, “Unraveling he Closure o Gaza. Wha has and hasn’ changed since hecabine decision and wha are he implicaions”, 7 July 2010, available a: www.gisha.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

6.9.1 Agricultural sector cut of rom export markets abroad

Te closure has caused a oal shorage o agriculural producs includingerilizers, pesicides, plasic shees used or covering srawberries, sparepars or irrigaion waer pumps, and green house rames. More pressing,however, is he inabiliy o armers in Gaza o expor heir producs: beorehe imposiion o he oal closure in 2007, he Gaza Srip produced almos400,000 ons o agriculural producs annually, one hird o which wasinended or expor. Despie he 2005 Agreemen on Movemen and Access

beween Israel and he Palesinian Auhoriy, which se a arge or exporsrom Gaza a 400 rucks per day, only 259 rucks have lef he Gaza Srip

wih goods over he las hree years. As a direc resul o no longer being ableo expor heir producs o markes in he Wes Bank, Israel and Europe,armers in Gaza Srip have repored a 40% decrease in income. In 2008alone, hey los an esimae US$6.8 million199.

Wihou he abiliy o expor, armers in Gaza ace a domesic marke oragriculural goods characerized by aricial ly inaed supply, which in urndrives prices so low ha mos armers canno survive on he basis o hem:

Abdulatah Al - Khaeeb sruggles o arm srawberries under he Israeli-imposed closure. His business and his way o lie are hreaened by he

increasing resricions despie he recen “easing” o he blockade.

199 PCH, “Te Economy o Occupaion”, Narraives Under Siege, o 20 July 2010, availablea: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

Abdulatah Al-Khaeeb, 46, srawberry armer rom Bei Lahia:“Beore 2007, one kilogram o srawberries used o cos weny-ourshekels on he Gaza marke, now i only coss hree. I can hardly coninue my lie wih prices so low. Now I am orced o live onhandous and aid. Even hough we ollow all he specicaionshe Israelis give o us, hey don’ le our srawberries pass hroughhe border. When we do wha [he Israelis] wan, hey jus creaeanoher problem.”

Te consequences o he closure or armers like Abdulatah are more han jus ough economic imes: he closure hreaens heir livelihoods and way o lie. Approximaely 2,500 dunums o land were planed wih srawberry elds beore 2007; his year some 1,500 remain unplaned, represening aleas 300 amilies who will be wihou an income or he year. More hanlikely, hese amilies will be orced o give up srawberry culivaion; hal

o all srawberry armers in Gaza have already done so. Some o hem willnd oher work, bu—wih unemploymen in he Gaza Srip approaching55%—ohers will surely no.

Making maters signicanly worse or armers in he Gaza Srip are heconsequences o he laes Israeli miliary oensive, which desroyedapproximaely 46% o all agriculural lands in he Gaza Srip, esimaed a

approximaely US$269,000,000 in damages, and over US$84,000,000 indamages o plan producion, specically. No only have armers received nocompensaion rom he perperaors o he damage, bu Israel prevens heenry o arming equipmen and machinery needed in order o rehabiliaehe land.

6.9.2 Fishing industry conronted with shrinking sea

As a resul o he closure, shermen are unable o access shing nes, rope,wine, spare pars and new moors. From he end o 2008 he area in whichhey are permited o sh was unilaerally resriced by Israel o hree nauicalmiles, despie he inernaionally recognized limi o weny nauical milesxed by he 1994 Gaza-Jericho agreemen. Currenly Gazan shermenare also prevened rom shing in areas exending up o 1.5 nauical miles

bordering he norhern (Israeli) and he souhern (Egypian) border o heSrip, which are compleely inaccessible.20 0

200 See OCHA-WFP epor, “Te humaniarian impac o Israeli-imposed resricions onaccess o Land and sea in he Gaza Srip”, Augus 2010, p. 10-11.





P o p u l a t i o n

Te laes exreme resricions are jus he ulimae sep o a much longerpolicy o limiaions imposed by Israel on Gazan shermen’s access o hesea. Since 2000 he area has progressively being reduced, passing rom weny o welve nauical miles rom he coas201. In ac, he shing area speciedin Oslo was never adhered o, as Israel consisenly imposed much sricercondiions, making enire areas oally inaccessible. In 2006 he Israeliauhoriies ocially imposed he prohibiion o shing aciviies beyond six nauical miles rom Gaza’s coas, which were urher illegally reduced by hal,resuling in he oday’s iny hree mile limi. Going beyond hese sric limismeans or he shermen being atacked by Israeli miliary naval orces, whicharge and/or conscae he boas and open re on he sherman202.

During he laes oensive on he Gaza Srip (rom 27 December 2008 o18 January 2009), Israeli army imposed a complee sea closure on he GazaSrip whereby Palesinian shermen were prevened rom reaching seapors,

sailing or shing. Te period ollowing he oensive winessed a parial seaclosure which prevened shermen rom perorming heir work reely 203.

As documened by PCH, incidens relaed o sherman occur almos ona daily basis. Beween January and April 2010 here have been 10 cases o shooing, resuling in he wounding o 2 shermen, 3 arress, 4 conscaionso boas and/or nes, 2 cases o desrucion o shing ools.204 Moreover, rom

January o Sepember 2010 hree shermen have been killed and ve ohershave been injured in similar incidens.205 Over 300 incidens o conscaiono shing boas and equipmen have been recorded since Israeli miliary operaion agains Gaza o December 2008-January 2009.206

Fishing in Gaza consiues or many a generaions-old way o lie. Ye, inatemping o carry on his radiion, sherman in Gaza now risk heir lives

on a daily basis as Israelis gunships atack hem requenly: Saber Al-Hissieis a sherman rom Gaza Ciy: “I’ve been a sherman or feen years now,ever since I was feen years old. My aher was a sherman and so was my

201 Te welve nauical miles were xed in 2002 so-called “Berini Commimen”.202 See PCH, “Israeli Atacks on Palesinian Fishers in he Gaza Srip (1 June 2008 – 31 Augus

2009)”, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.203 Ibid.204 PCH, “Te Buer Zone in he Gaza Srip”, Fac Shee, Ocober 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.

org.205 OCHA, “Humaniarian Monior”, Sepember 2010, available a: www.ochaop.org206 epor by OCHA/FAO, “Farming wihou Land, shing wihou waer: Gaza agriculure secor

sruggles o survive”, May 2010.





P o p u l a t i o n

grandaher. I have spen hal my lie a sea. Bu everyday we ace problemsrom he Israeli gunships: hey ollow us and hen hey sar shooing a us

because hey wan o orce us o sop working.” Te hree-mile limi imposed by he gunships makes i very dicul or Palesinian sherman o haul in anadequae cach: en years ago, shermen in Gaza were hauling approximaely 3,000 ons o resh sh a year, bu now he shermen are bringing in lesshan 500 ons o resh sh per year, and hey are being orced o over-sh heshallow waers in close proximiy o Gaza. “Bu i we go any urher ou osea, he Israelis always harass us,” Saber explains. “Tey circle he boas, hey shoo owards us, and recenly hey sared using waer cannons o atack us.”207

“Te Israelis atack us every day,” adds Abu Mahmoud, one o hecrew members on Saber’s boa. “Unil you see i or yoursel, youcanno believe he siuaion we are acing.”

Saber Al-Hissie has been shing in Gaza or feen years. His boa is scarred wih bulle holes rom Israeli gunships, which atack Palesinian shermanon a daily basis while imposing an ever-shrinking shing area.

Te impac o he closure and he resricions imposed on he sea areasin ron o he Gaza Srip have been disasrous or he shing indusry,

which is a radiional cenerpiece o Gaza economy and sociey: more han

6,500 o he approximae 10,000 employed in he shing indusry are now unemployed.

6.9.3 Industry/construction sectors without raw materials

95% o he 3,900 indusrial esablishmens in he Gaza Srip have closedor suspended heir work due o he resricions placed on he impor o

raw maerials and as a resul o he inabiliy o expor heir producs. Teremaining 5% work a 20-50% o heir capaciy.

Te decimaion o Gaza’s indusry has resuled in he loss o beween100,000-120,000 jobs. Afer he laes Israeli oensive in December 2008/

January 2009, only 1,878 employees o 65,000 employed prior o he currenclosure coninued o be employed in he indusrial secor in Gaza.

According o he Palesinian rade Cenre, he number o workers employed

207 See PCH “Te Israelis Atack Us Every Day”, Narraives Under Siege, November 2008, availablea: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

in he indusry beore he closure, which was 35,000 dropped o a mere6,000, as o Sepember 2010.208

Te consrucion and inrasrucure secor, oo, has been compleely haleddue o he comprehensive ban placed on raw maerials, such as cemen, iron,consrucion maerials and pain. Te number o workers in he consrucionsecor as o Sepember 2010 was 1,500 (including small mainenance worksand rubble vis-à-vis he 50,000, who were employed beore he closure.209

All acories producing consrucion maerials have closed, including: 13oor ile acories, 30 concree acories, 145 marble acories and 250 brick acories. 3,500 workers have been laid o as a resul. All consrucion projecs,esimaed a US$350 million, have been suspended. UNDP erminaed allis conracs or inrasrucure projecs, valued a US$60 million, includinghe rehabiliaion o roads and waer and sewage neworks.

6.10 Human dignity deprived

Te worsening socio-economic siuaion, as deailed in he previous secions,illusraes a man-made humaniarian disaser which deprives a wholepopulaion o is mos basic human righ: o live in digniy. Indeed, his ishe mos proound impac o he Israeli-imposed closure. Such an impac,

alhough dicul o calculae, is apparen in and aecs every aspec o liein Gaza. By denying a people heir abiliy o work and heir righ o move; by depriving amilies o he abiliy o rebuild heir homes which have beenreduced o rubble, consequenly orcing hem o live in ens; and by orcingindividuals o give up generaions-old amily radiions and spend heir days

waiing in lines o pick up ood and clohing packages, a populaion o proudand independen individuals are being reduced o being ‘vicims’ o a man-

made humaniarian crisis.

o his end, he mos proound impac o he closure canno be described by gures or saisics. Te sysemaic humiliaion, inimidaion, and generaldegradaion ha are he aim o he closure policy erodes he very abric o lieor Palesinians in Gaza and seeks o deprive hem o heir human qualiiesand righs. By manuacuring a humaniarian crisis in he Gaza Srip, Israel

has eecively divered atenion rom he illegaliy o he closure policy

208 Palesinian rade Cener, Crossing Annual Monioring epor, Ocober 2010, p. 8, avail-able a: www.palrade.org.

209Ibid.





P o p u l a t i o n

isel. Te inernaional communiy, insead o addressing he roo causeo he problem, is now dealing wih he immediae eecs o he closure,hrough he provision o humaniarian assisance.

Te closure has ransormed he enire Gaza Srip ino an open air prisonand has condemned he 1.7 million Palesinians living here as prisoners,serving indenie senences. In his sense, i is clear ha he closure is a ormo collecive punishmen, illegal under inernaional law, he social andeconomic eecs o which work in andem o deprive a whole people o isundamenal righs. A is core, he closure aims o deny Palesinians heirhumaniy by denying hem he righ o deermine heir own exisence andrealiy.





P o p u l a t i o n





P o p u l a t i o n

ConCluSIonS

7. Te criminal responsibility o the Israeli authorities or

implementing the illegal closure

As PCH have highlighed hroughou his repor, he closure consiues aorm o collecive punishmen o he civilian populaion which is absoluely prohibied under inernaional humaniarian law, as enshrined in Aricle

50 o Te Hague egulaions o 1907; Aricle 33 o he Fourh GenevaConvenion o 1949; and Aricle 75(2)(d) o he Firs Addiional Proocol ohe Geneva Convenions o 1977.

Moreover, i is a general principle o criminal law ha no one shall bepunished or a (criminal) oence commited by ohers, hus conrming heillegaliy o collecive punishmens under inernaional cusomary law.

aking measures in conravenion o he prohibiion o collecivepunishmen is a grave breach o undamenal principles o humaniarian law,

which can amoun o a war crime under Aricle 8(2)(b) o he ome Saueo he Inernaional Criminal Cour. As such, he decision o impose heclosure on Gaza enails individual criminal responsibiliy or hose involvedin he planning, organizing, and acive implemening such illegal policy.

Moreover, as concluded by UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic,here are sucien elemens o consider Israel’s policy o closure no only illegal, bu also criminal, and possibly amouning o persecuion as a crimeagains humaniy.210

Te harsh policy o closure imposed on Gaza is declared by Israel o be paro a plan aimed a applying pressure or sancioning he Hamas regime. TeUN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic ound ha:

“Te cumulaive eec o he blockade policies, wih he consequenhardship and deprivaion among he whole populaion, and o hemiliary operaions coupled wih saemens by Israel made o he

eec ha he whole o he Gaza Srip was a ‘hosile erriory’ srongly sugges ha here was an inen o subjec he Gaza populaion ocondiions such ha hey would be induced ino wihdrawing heir

210 epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 1335.





P o p u l a t i o n

suppor or Hamas.” And i goes on by noing ha: “Tis was apparenly

conrmed by hen Miniser o Foreign Aairs o Israel commeningon he decision by he Supreme Cour o uphold he uel cus: ‘TePalesinians need o undersand ha business is no usual, I meanhere is no equaion in which Israeli children will be under atacks by Kassam rockes on a daily basis and lie in he Gaza Srip can be asusual’”211.

Te policy clearly resuls in he inicion o grea suering on he civilianpopulaion. I should be noed ha “willully causing grea suering orserious injuries o body or healh” o he civilian populaion o an occupiederriory is criminalized according o he grave breaches regime o heGeneva Convenions. I enails individual criminal responsibiliy or hoseinvolved in his policy a various levels, especially a he level o planning,organizaion, and acive implemenaion o he closure.

Te Saes paries o he Geneva convenions have he duy o respecand ensure respec or he Convenions. All Sae-paries have he duy oinvesigae and prosecue grave breaches o he Convenions and bring heperperaors o rial beore heir own naional cours (ar. 147 IV GC).

Te closure also violaes inernaional human righs law, inringing upon

several undamenal human righs, including he righ o lie, he righ ohe highes atainable sandard o healh, he righ o reedom o movemeno persons and goods, he righ o adequae sheler, and he righ o live inhuman digniy.

Te sysemaic and widespread violaion o undamenal human righs o he Palesinian populaion may amoun o a orm o crime agains humaniy.In paricular Israel’s policy iniced agains he populaion o Gaza appearso inegrae he crime o persecuion, which is dened as “he inenionaland severe deprivaion o undamenal righs conrary o inernaional law

by reason o he ideniy o he group or colleciviy”212.

I is recognized in inernaional law ha “he crime o persecuionencompasses a variey o acs, including, iner alia, hose o physical, economicor judicial naure ha violae an individual’s righ o he equal enjoymen o

211epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par. 1329.212 Aricle 8(2)(g) Saue o he Inernaional Criminal Cour.





P o p u l a t i o n

his basic righs”.213 Acs o persecuion mus no be considered in isolaion bu be regarded in heir conex “and weighed or heir cumulaive eec”. Inac he single acs will usually orm par o a policy or a leas o a paternedpracice.214

As noed by he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, he serieso acs ha deprive he Palesinians in he Gaza Srip rom heir means o subsisence, employmen, housing and waer, as well as heir reedom o movemen, and oher undamenal righs, “migh jusiy a compeen Cournding ha crimes agains humaniy have been commited”.215

Persecuion, as a crime agains humaniy wih cusomary saus underinernaional law, enails individual criminal responsibiliy. Individualsallegedly responsible o he crime o persecuion can be invesigaed and,i appropriae, prosecued by hird Saes under he principle o universal

jurisdicion.216

213 ICY, Prosecuor v. adic, rial Chamber, case no. I-94-1-, Judgmen o 7 May 1997,par. 710.

214 ICY, Prosecuor v. Kupresiskic e al., rial Chamber, case no. I-95-16-, Judgmen o

14 January 2000, par. 615.215epor o he UN Fac Finding Mission on he Gaza Conic, A/HC/12/48, par.

1335.216 See PCH, “Te Principle and Pracice o Universal Jurisdicion: PCH’s Work in he

occupied Palesinian erriory”, January 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.





P o p u l a t i o n

(BOXES Footnotes)

1 Te Gaza Srip was creaed ollowing he 1948 war, as a resul o he armisice agreemen beween Israel and Egyp.

2 Te crossing border was operaed by he Israeli Airpors Auhoriy. From 25 April 1982unil he oubreak o he second Iniada in Sepember 2000 he crossing poin o aah was regularly open, regisering a passage o beween 1200 o 1500 Palesinians every day in boh direcions, see Gisha, aah crossing: Who holds he keys?, p. 18, available a: www.gisha.org

3 See B’selem, “Gaza Prison: reedom o Movemen o and rom he Gaza Srip on he Eve

o he Disengagemen Plan”, March 2005, available a: www.bselem.org4 Join Press conerence by Condoleeza ice (US Secreary o Sae, who led he negoia-ions), Javier Solana (EU represenaive in he negoiaion eam) and Jim Wolensohn, onhe aah AMA, o 15 November 2005, Jerusalem, available a: htp://2001-2009.sae.gov/secreary/rm/2005/56890.hm.

5 See, wih ull deails, Gisha, “aah Crossing: Who holds he keys?”, a www.gisha.org.6 Hamoked, “Movemen beween he Wes Bank and Gaza”, available a: htp://www.

hamoked.org/opic.aspx?id=sub_30.7 See PCHR press release, “PCHR Condemn New Israeli Miliary Order aimed a expelling

Wes Bank Palesinians”, o 12 April 2010, available a: www.pchrgaza.org.8 Hamoked, “Movemen beween he Wes Bank and Gaza”, available a: htp://www.

hamoked.org/opic.aspx?id=sub_30.9 PCH, “Te Buer-zone in he Gaza Srip”, Ocober 2010, Facs Shee secion, available

a: www.pchrgaza.org.10 OCHA, “Beween he Fence and a Hard Place”, Augus 2010, p. 19, available a: www.

ochaop.org.11 PCH, “Te Buer-zone in he Gaza Srip”, Ocober 2010, Facs Shee secion, p. 3, avail-

able a: www.pchrgaza.org.12 Ibid. See also inra secion 6.9.2.13 See he epor “Dashed Hopes, Coninuaion o he Gaza Blockade”, p. 5, also available

a www.pchrgaza.org.14 Te prohibiion o amily visis is in violaion boh o Inernaional Humaniarian Law

principles and Human ighs norms. See in paricular Aricle 116 o Fourh Geneva Con- venion (which applies o “inernees”); Aricles 36 and 38 o he UN Minimum Sandardsor he reamen o Prisoners; aricle 19 o he UN Body o Principles or he Proeciono All Persons under Any Form o Deenion or Imprisonmen Moreover he righ o

“Illegal Closure of the Gaza Strip: Collective Punishment of the Civilian Population”.

Documents

Transcript of “Illegal Closure of the Gaza Strip: Collective Punishment of the Civilian Population”.