OCCUPATION AND THE LAW

by R. de Geouffre de La Pradell*

1968

IN VIEW of the intensification of acts of resistance in occupied Arab territories and the reprisals resulting from them, it seems the right moment to remind world public opinion of the essential rules of Human Rights.

The basic argument on which the Nazis based their defence after the Second World War was that no texts of penal law, no international conventions protecting civilian populations existed at the time. We have never shared this point of view, for the Rights of Man need not be stipulated by specific written texts, nor need there be any such texts to define what are universally considered to be crimes against humanity.

We know that the Jews were the main victims of Nazi activities. It was, therefore, in order that such crimes should not be perpetrated anew and that those who in future might be tempted to commit them should not escape punishment by using this same argument, and that there should be no sentence passed on anyone in the absence of a previously existing text, that the Geneva Diplomatic Conference was convened in 1949.

This Conference on the one hand established a new, positive principle in international law: that of the human individual as a holder of certain specific rights. Until then, conventions were mutually binding only to the states that signed them, and individuals had no protection except through their own governments. Today, even if certain governments should denounce these conventions, individuals remain protected under their articles.

The Conference also elaborated a convention concerning the protection of civilians in wartime. This was the Fourth Convention. Its fourth article thus defines what is meant by a “protected person”:

“Protected by this Convention are those persons who, at any moment or in any manner, find themselves, in the case of conflict or occupation, under the jurisdiction of one of the parties to the conflict or of an occupying power of whom they are not citizens.”

The young State of Israel participated in this diplomatic conference and was among the first to sign and ratify the Conventions on 12 August, 1949, along with Egypt, Lebanon and Syria. Jordan later adhered to these Conventions on 29 May, 1951.

The rules of occupation are stipulated in the 3rd chapter of the Fourth Convention (Articles 27 to 78) and it is enough to recall certain passages to the reader, so that he can place any information that reaches him concerning this situation in its juridical context.

ARTICLE 31:

“No physical or moral coercion shall be exercised against protected persons, in particular to obtain information from them or from third parties.”

ARTICLE 32:

“The High Contracting Parties specifically agree that each of them is prohibited from asking any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, torpid punishments, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person, but also to any other measures of brutality whether applied by civilian or military agents.”

ARTICLE 33:

“No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.”

ARTICLE 53:

“Any destruction by the Occupying Power of movable or immovable property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, or to the State, or to other public authorities, or to social cooperative organisations, is prohibited except where such destruction is rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.”

The razing to the ground of the installations of refugee camps and Bedouin tents in the Gaza Strip as reprisals against acts of terrorism, and the systematic destruction of houses as reprisals against acts of resistance, are violations of these conventions. The perpetrators of these acts could be prosecuted regardless of whether they were carrying out orders given to them by their superiors or implementing injunctions from their governments.

It is sad to note that these texts that were specifically formulated in order to prevent the recurrence of crimes of which the Jews were the unhappy victims during the Second World War, are transgressed by these very same people.

By a bitter irony of fate, the victims of today have no links with the perpetrators of yesterday’s crimes. And it is to the prejudice of these innocent victims that the sons of yesterday’s victims today commit some of those crimes which vengeance in itself could not excuse.

It seems urgent for us to remind world opinion of the necessity for opening negotiations immediately, and that a powerful current should be started that would gather enough momentum to put an end to a situation which ultimately would mean the end of Israel. For the longer the methods of occupation now practised by the Israelis last, the more resistance there will be against the occupying power and the more the latter will tend to commit excesses which will in turn increase the hatred of those under occupation.

Apart from the facts we have mentioned, it seems that up till now Israeli forces have had enough self-control to avoid summary executions and the taking of hostages. But if the occupation continues without a diplomatic settlement, the situation will deteriorate very rapidly. The first phase of an occupation is always the mildest.

* The author is a French lawyer and writer. The article first appeared in French in Le Monde (Paris) 8 February 1968. The English translation was published in the February 1968 Supplement to The Facts about the Palestine Problem issued by the Arab Women’s Information Committee, the Friends of Jerusalem, (Beirut).