Court asked: Israel still 'occupying' Gaza?
Israel's Supreme Court must weigh the country's security concerns against Palestinians' commercial livelihood.
from the February 26, 2007 edition
Page 2 of 2
Page 1 | 2
In November 2005, Israelis and Palestinians agreed to expand operation at Karni and Gaza's civilian crossing with Egypt at Rafah. Although Israel recently pledged to expand the hours at Karni, inspectors lacked funds to work at the crossing for more than one shift.
The dispute over Gaza's crossings underscores the tradeoff between Israeli security needs and the Palestinian need for the passage of people and commercial goods. In an affidavit submitted to the court, the Palestinian water utility said Gaza's main north-south highway has been flooded by sewage because Israeli authorities haven't let through the needed pipes. An Israeli army official, said that the pipe infrastructure has been dug up by militants and used in Kassam rockets to fire into Israel.
Gisha argued in January that Israel's occupation in Gaza remains in force. It claims that Israel controls everything from land crossings to tax policy to the Gaza population registry.
According to the 1907 Hague Convention on war, the litmus test to determine foreign occupation is whether an outside power exercises "effective control" over another territory.
Israel argues that it no longer occupies the Gaza Strip, having pulled out its last soldiers in September 2005. It points out that it has even turned its civilian passage with Gaza, the Erez crossing, into an international border terminal.
Israel blames the Palestinians for their economic hardship, citing continued cross- border rocket fire and the Hamas-led Palestinian government, which refuses to meet international conditions for budgetary aid.
"The claim that Israel retains effective control today is to ignore reality," says Mark Regev, a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry.
The Israeli-Palestinian peace accords in the 1990s defined the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as a single political unit, challenging Israel's claim to have ended the occupation in one area.
"It was a partial evacuation,' " says Yoram Dinstein, an expert on international law at Tel Aviv University. "There are remnants of the occupation, and access is one of those remnants."
1 | Page 2
 |
||
|
RSS feed
