Boycott the Guardian!!


By suzanna
January 26, 2012
Share

Letter in the Guardian:

We applaud Harriet Sherman for bringing the violation of Palestinian children's rights to the attention of your readers (Alone and bewildered, the boy in Cell 36, 23 January). We recently visited Jerusalem and the West Bank as members of the British Association of Social Workers, and heard many similar accounts. We also witnessed the horrific sight of Palestinian children being led into a military courtroom in handcuffs and leg-irons, and saw a diminutive 14-year-old being sentenced to three and a half months in prison, together with a large fine, for allegedly throwing stones at Israeli soldiers. The Israeli prison service's justification for the use of such restraints strikes us as incredible. In a context of the utmost security, it was impossible to see the necessity of such inhuman shackling of a child. Seeing this boy's bewilderment and tearful face as he looked across to his mother is something that we will not forget in a long time.

What we witnessed were clear breaches of the human rights of children under international law. We believe, given our professional code of ethics, that we have a duty as social workers to do whatever is in our power to highlight this issue and to promote the rights of those children who are affected. We call upon other social workers to do the same, including within Israel.

Guy Shennan, David Harrop, Sarah Sturge, Rupert Franklin-Lester

Members of the British Association of Social Workers

COMMENTS

suzanna

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:05

Rate this:

0 points

Another letter:

• The report on Palestinian child prisoners is very timely. The Israeli treatment of child prisoners – physical violence, solitary confinement, shackling and denial of access to parents – breaks the convention on the child (which Israel has signed) and in 2009 elicited a report from the UN committee against torture.

According to the DCI, arrests of Palestinian children in East Jerusalem have increased markedly; it reports that 80% children detained there have been physical ill-treated during arrest, 75% interrogated in the absence of a parent, with 55% threatened with further violence.

But Palestinian children are also mentally scarred and physically ill-treated in other ways. The theft of agricultural land during the construction of the so-called separation barrier, as well as blockades and closures, have resulted in up to 30% child malnutrition (WHO 2009). The constant raids on Gaza and other areas have left children mentally traumatised; their schools are wrecked and their relatives killed (UNHRC October 2011). Sick children are frequently denied access to medical care. And do not let us forget that since 2006, nearly 700 children have been killed by Israeli army and settler violence.

Irene Brennan
West Kirby, Wirral


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:30

Rate this:

0 points

yep but the problem is it was all phoney! BTW the reporter, if one can call her that, goes by the name of Sherwood not Sherman so much for accuracy from the bash Israel brigade.
If these social workers are so exercised by the plight of Palestinian children where is the outrage at their elders use of those children to carry out terrorist acts including throwing rocks at armed soldiers? Why are they not questioning a society that sends young teenagers cynically to become "martyrs" just for the PR the can get from useful idiots like these three.
How about these fine upstanding people stand in a row and let some children throw rocks at them - they are not jailed just for throwing stones - making such a statement is disingenuous.


Mary in Brighton

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:39

Rate this:

0 points

What a windbag


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:39

Rate this:

0 points

Oh can't you see the righteous indignation steaming up from Indignant of Wirral's keyboard. But where is the indignation that these children are being used cynically to confront armed troops - would you send a child to that?
This poster is talking through her hat the erection of the security barrier to prevent terrorists from killing Jews conflated with alleged malnutrition - just laughable. Just see here http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/indicators/SH.STA.MALN.ZS/compare?countr...
for the comparison of infant malnutrition compare Jordan with the "West Bank" apaprently there is less infant malnutrition in the "West Bank" than there is in Jordan - but let's not confuse ourselves with facts.


suzanna

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:41

Rate this:

0 points

Another letter:

Harriet Sherwood's article confirms how supine our governments, past and present, have been towards the Palestinian question. My daughter spent nearly three years in the West Bank, first as an ecumenical accompanier, then as a human rights lawyer at the Womens' Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling (WCLAC). What this time revealed was that the treatment of children by the Israeli Defence Force and courts had a most profound negative mental health effect on the women and female relatives of the children.

The WCLAC site documents this fully. During our daughter's time in the West Bank we visited her and was amazed at the warm, friendly welcome we were given by Palestinians, despite the lack of support for their cause by the UK government. That we were there seemed sufficient reason for their kindness and I can only urge your readers to show that many in the UK support them by also visiting Palestine.
Michael and Elizabeth Rought-Brooks
Scarborough, North Yorkshire


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:42

Rate this:

0 points

Mandy - you would say that wouldn't you? With you the words "empty-headed" come readily to mind.


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:44

Rate this:

0 points

Suzanna knock yourself out - an invite from Yorkshire to visit a non-existent country.


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:52

Rate this:

0 points

Here's something for you to consider:

On Saturday February 16th 2002, at around 7:45 p.m., an 18 year-old terrorist – wearing an explosive vest containing 25 pounds of nails for added damage – walked into a pizza parlour in the crowded shopping mall in Karnei Shomron and detonated his device.

Two teenagers were killed instantly, some thirty people (many of them children) were injured – six of them seriously – and one died of her wounds 11 days later. Rachel Thaler was 16 years old, Keren Shatsky and Nehemia Amar were both 15 when they were murdered.

One member at that time of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) – the organisation which later claimed responsibility for that terror attack – is named Shahwan Jabarin.

Strangely, (at least according to Western standards) for someone involved with an organisation with such obvious disregard for the lives of either terror victims or the brainwashed teenagers sent to perpetrate terror attacks, he is today active in the field of ‘human rights’ NGOs as director of ‘Al Haq’ and a board member of ‘Human Rights Watch’. He also sits on the board of an organisation named Defence for Children International – Palestine (DCI-Pal). Now where have i heard the name of that organization before?

http://cifwatch.com/2012/01/24/political-activism-as-journalism-harriet-...


suzanna

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:55

Rate this:

0 points

More than 300 Palestinians are held in "administrative detention" under the Israeli military system, without charge or trial.

Does that sound like a democracy?


suzanna

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 16:58

Rate this:

0 points

Jose: why doesn't the occupying army record the interviews with the children?


suzanna

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 17:01

Rate this:

0 points

Jose: On Saturday February 16th 2002.

That was ten years ago. The West Bank is no longer a centre for any resistence activity (other than peaceful resistance / protest).
So why does the occupying army abduct children?

Why does the occupying army abduct children at night?

Why are children shackled?


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 17:02

Rate this:

0 points

You addressing me or Phoney's imaginary friend it's hard to tell?


Mary in Brighton

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 17:13

Rate this:

0 points

What a windbag.


suzanna

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 17:23

Rate this:

0 points

He won't answer a direct question will he? Because he can't admit the truth of the occupation.

Best leave him to it Mary.


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 17:29

Rate this:

0 points

suzanna - the bigot's way out. In 2002 a person was responsible for sending an eighteen year old to carry out a suicide bombing mission resulting in the death and maimimg of Jewish teenagers. Today that same person sits on the committee of an organisation that is falsely accusing Israel of child abuse - and you cannot see what is wrong with that?


Mary in Brighton

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 17:45

Rate this:

0 points

Advsr let's not call it child abuse. What's in a name. Call it whatever you want.

Children are routinely taken in the dead of night by armed to the teeth soldiers.

They are whisked off to a foreign country.

Held incommunicado in less then ideal conditions.

No lawyer before interview

No lawyer during interviews

No recording of interviews

You cannot see what is wrong with that?

Regardless of your inane windbag protestations to the contrary this is not how it is in any civilised country.


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 17:50

Rate this:

0 points

The law lays down

- lawyer before interview

- lawyer during interviews

- recording of interviews

who says otherwise?


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 18:03

Rate this:

0 points

Appendix A - Order regarding Security Provisions

[Consolidated Version] (Judea and Samaria) (No. 1651), 5770-2009

Article G – Adjudicating Juveniles (Temporary Order)

Commencement and effect

135. (A) This article shall enter into effect on 29.09.2009 and shall remain in effect for one year from the day of its commencement.

(B) The provisions of this article shall not apply to a proceeding in which an indictment was filed prior to the commencement of this article.

Definitions

136. In this article –

“Military juvenile court” – a military court of the first instance, with a single judge presiding who is a juvenile judge, or a panel in which the presiding judge is a juvenile judge.

“Minor” – a person under the age of 16; and in regard to a suspect and a defendant, this includes a person who is under the age of 16 on the day the indictment is filed against him.

Appointment of juvenile judge

137. The president of the Military court of appeals shall assign judges – from among the military court judges of the first instance who have received appropriate training to serve as juvenile judges, in a format to be approved by the president of the Military court of appeals – to serve as juvenile judges for a period to be determined.

Judging a minor

138. (A) Notwithstanding the provisions of any law and security legislation, an offense in which a minor is charged shall be adjudicated before a military juvenile court.

(B) The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to proceedings of arrest and release under Article C of Chapter C of this order.

Adjudicating a minor and an adult together

139. (A) A minor may not be tried together with a person who is not a minor, except with the consent of the chief military prosecutor in the Military Prosecution or of someone duly empowered by him.

(B) If a minor is charged together with a person who is not a minor before a military court that is not a military juvenile court, the court is empowered, after hearing the parties, to adjudicate the case; if the military court so decides, it shall treat the minor as if it were a military juvenile court and it shall have the powers of a military juvenile court provided under this article; if the military court decides not to adjudicate the case, it shall order a separate trial for the minor and transfer him to a military juvenile court.

Minor who is brought to a court that is not a juvenile court.

140. (A) If a military court that is not a military juvenile court finds, at any stage prior to the verdict, that the defendant is a minor, it shall transfer the case to a military juvenile court, and the latter shall adjudicate the case as if it had been brought before it from the outset, and it is empowered to hear the case from the stage it had reached in the previous court.

(B) If the military court sees special circumstances that justify not transferring the case to a military juvenile court as stipulated in Subsection (A), it is empowered to continue to adjudicate it, provided that from this point onward it shall act as if it were a military juvenile court, and it shall have all of the powers of a military court provided under this article.

(C) If a military court, which is not a military juvenile court, finds after the verdict that the defendant is a minor, it shall continue to adjudicate the case as if it were a military juvenile court, and it shall have all of the powers of a military court provided under this article.

Adult who is brought before military juvenile court

141. If a military juvenile court finds during the course of the trial that the defendant is not a minor, it is empowered to continue to adjudicate the case as if it were not a military juvenile court or to transfer it to a military court, and the latter shall adjudicate it as if it had been brought before it from the outset, and it is empowered to adjudicate it from the stage it had reached in the military juvenile court.

Maintaining validity

142. A decision or ruling of a court shall not be deemed invalid solely because the defendant, due to his age, should have been tried before a different court; however, if a grave miscarriage of justice resulted from trying a defendant before a court that is not appropriate for his age, the president of the Military court of appeals is empowered to order that a court he so assigns shall conduct a retrial of the case. And the provisions of sections 157 through 162 shall apply, with the necessary changes according to the case.

Separating minors

143. (A) The military juvenile court shall conduct its hearings, as far as possible, in a place where other trials are not being conducted, or in the same place but not at the same time.

(B) As far as possible, minor defendants shall not be brought to or from the court together with non-minor defendants, and shall not be held together there.

Time for indicting a minor

144. A person shall not be indicted for an offense which he committed as a minor if two years have passed since [the offense] was committed, except with the consent of the chief military prosecutor in the Military Prosecution or someone duly empowered by him.

Indicating age of the minor

145. The indictment against a minor shall indicate, if possible to ascertain, the minor’s date of birth.

Defense

146. (A) The military juvenile court is empowered to appoint a defense attorney for the minor if it believes this would be in the minor’s best interest.

(B) Subject to the provision in Subsection (A), the provisions of Article B of Chapter D shall apply to the appointment of a defense attorney under this section.

(C) If the minor does not have a defense attorney, the military juvenile court shall help him to examine the witnesses.

Parent’s status

147. (A) A military juvenile court is empowered to order, at any time, that the minor’s parent be present in the court.

(B) Any request the defendant is entitled to submit to the military juvenile court may also be submitted on his behalf by the minor’s parent or by a person the court has approved for this, and they are entitled to examine witnesses and present arguments in the minor’s stead or together with him.

Report

(A) If a minor is convicted, the military juvenile court is empowered, if it deems it necessary for the purpose of sentencing the minor, to demand a report in writing from an officer of the Social Welfare Affairs staff at the Civil Administration or from a person appointed by him for this purpose, regarding all of the following, to the extent that it is possible to determine:

(1) the minor’s past;
(2) the minor’s family situation, with complete details, as far as possible, about his parents, spouse, children, brothers and sisters;
(3) the minor’s economic situation;
(4) the health situation of the minor and of the members of his family;
(5) special personal circumstances – if such exist – that led him to commit the offense.

(B) In the report stipulated in Subsection (A), the person who prepares the report is empowered to advise the court regarding the chances of rehabilitating the minor.

(C) A copy of the report in accordance with this subsection shall not be provided to the parties in the case or to their representatives unless the court instructs otherwise. However, the prosecutor and the minor’s defense attorney are entitled to examine these documents in the court file.

Detention centers for minors

149. (A) A minor shall not be held in detention or imprisonment except in a separate prison or jail facility for minors, or in a wing of a general prison or jail facility provided that the wing is completely separate, designated for minors only and without any access between it and the other wings of the prison or jail facility or their inhabitants.

(B) Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection (A), it is permissible to hold a minor at a police station, provided that he is held separately and there is no contact between him and non-minor suspects or prisoners.


Mary in Brighton

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 18:07

Rate this:

0 points

Which law ? Are you talking about Israeli civil law ? And if this is the law pertaining to Palestinian children in the West Bank why is there any argument about what happens to these children after their abduction ? Are you saying they are interviewed in the presence of their lawyers ? Are you saying their interviews are recorded ?

It should, then, be easy to prove those that give testimony are lying.

Phew what a relief.

I was beginning to get a lil worried about Israel.


Mary in Brighton

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 18:17

Rate this:

0 points

Now there I am all disappointed and worried again.

There is nothing in the windy stuff in your 17.03 that says after a child is abducted in the dead of night by armed to the teeth soldiers and whisked off to a foreign country he shall not be held incommunicado.

Or that he should not be interviewed before access to a lawyer

Or that he should not be interviewed except in the presence of a lawyer

That all interviews should be fully recorded and the child's lawyers should have access to the recordings.

Come on Advsr set my mind at rest before dinner time. I want to enjoy my meal.


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 18:28

Rate this:

0 points

I am saying just that I am also saying that if any officer carryi ng out the questioning of a juvenile exceeds his powers he faces punishment.
there is also a website you might wish to visit [http://nolegalfrontiers.org/en/reports/77-report-juvenile-court] which is highly critical of the way that juveniles are handled by the IDF and contains details of how one interrogation was handled confirming that the interrogation was taped as a matter of course.
The fact is that the people conducting the research were given total access notwithstanding that their report is highly critical - how many other countries would allow that? Israel has laws to protect juveniles whether they be Israeli or Palestinians but you people are so blinded by hatred even when this is pointed out to you you shrug and say you would say that wouldn't you? No one says it's perfect there is always room for improvement but it is no less than the rights accorded to juveniles in countries which do not have a constant terrorist threat and where terrorist organizations see nothing wrong in using juveniles to carry out terrorist acts.
Now go and have your dinner you have flogged this one to death and have pointed the finger at israel and not for one moment considered the abuse and cynical use of the children brought to court by their elders.


Advis3r

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 18:33

Rate this:

0 points

Real abuse of Palestinian Children

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcHpgu2-7Gk&feature=player_embedded

Mandy has no comment.


Mary in Brighton

Thu, 01/26/2012 - 18:37

Rate this:

0 points

Can we be clear here about what you are saying

Are you saying that there is a law which says that after a Palestinian child is abducted in the dead of night by armed to the teeth soldiers and whisked off to a foreign country he shall not be held incommunicado?

And that he should not be interviewed before access to a lawyer?

And that he should not be interviewed except in the presence of a lawyer?

And that all interviews should be fully recorded and the child's lawyers should have access to the recordings?

If you are this is encouraging once again.

Can you point me in the direction of this law.

The most exciting thing about this is that it will enable it to be settled once and for all who is lying.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS