|
Internal and External
Obstacles Preventing Development in the Field of Human Rights
Human rights
organisations’ fight to protect and promote Palestinian’s human
rights has always faced many obstacles. Since the coming of the
PNA in 1993, these obstacles have increased in number.
Under Israeli occupation since 1967 (and during the 1980s in
particular), the Palestinian human rights movement has
flourished. Its progress continued during the Palestinian
Uprising (1998-1991) and up to the signing of the Oslo Agreement
in September 1993. This flourishing may be explained by two
principle factors:
1. Human rights organizations have received extensive financial
support from international funders. This has enabled a steady
increase in the monitoring of human rights violations.
2. Most human workers are affiliated to political parties.
Consequently, these workers consider their work a national duty
that will help rid Palestinians of the Occupation and will,
without discrimination, protect and promote Palestinian rights.
Political support provided workers with the strength and courage
needed to face the challenges of recording violations by the
Occupation.
Since the coming of the PNA, these human rights organisations -
not all of whom have turned their attention to the PNA – have,
as a collective force, become weaker. This may be explained
thorough internal and external reasons:
Internal reasons:
1. The PNA believes that human rights organizations’ criticism
damages the reputation of the PNA and serves Israeli interest.
Human rights work has thus turned into a confrontation between
the PNA and the Palestinian human rights movement. For this
reason, the PNA started detaining human rights activists in
order to mute the voices criticising the PNA. Such measures
undoubtedly led to a reduction in the criticism of the PNA.
2. The Law of Charitable and Non-government Organizations which
the PNA tried to pass through the PLC dealt unfairly with those
organizations and their employees. In this law, the PNA
attempted to impose control over the work of these organizations
so as to weaken the human rights movement.
3. The PNA attempted to establish new human rights organizations
with a view to replacing the old effective ones that had been
critical of PNA violations. The new powerful organizations
supported by the authority began criticising genuine human
rights organisations that were working efficiently in order to
establish a democratic civil society. This situation resulted in
the undermining of actual work in the field.
4. The failure of the PNA and human rights organizations to
establish communication channels between each other led to
deterioration in relations. Neither party attempted to find a
way out of the ensuing vicious circle. This deterioration might
have been caused by the PNA’s failure to recognise the important
role played by such organisations.
5. One of the most problematic internal factors is the
indefensible competition existing between various human rights
organizations. This phenomenon is increasing so rapidly, that it
jeopardises the very future of the human rights movement in this
country. Not only is there a lack of cooperation between these
organizations: they also exchange antagonistic language in
public. As a result of this, the output of the organizations has
deteriorated and it has become obvious that if the situation
continues, these organisations will not achieve their vital
objectives. In addition, because of this competition, the
Palestinian community (whose interests these organisations are
supposed to be protecting) is loosing confidence in these
organizations.
6. In spite of the numerous projects and schemes receiving
sponsorship from international funds, human rights organizations
have failed to educate and enlighten the local community of this
fact. This problem is related to the lack of education and
culture which needs more development in order to enable the
ordinary citizen to comprehend the concept of human rights. In
the context of increasing violence between members of the
Palestinian community, such education has becomes all the more
crucial.
7. The conservative sector in society does not help to improve
the state of human rights. Some religious people in society
believe that the concept of human rights is a western principle
that contradicts Islamic teachings and that aims, so they claim,
to lead the community towards evil. This idea limits the chances
for progress in this field. An example of this is the case of
the two Abu-Sultan brothers from Gaza who received capital
sentences on 30 August 1998. This judgement received great
approval as people believed that “a killer must be killed”, a
rule contained in the teachings of Islam. Such an attitude
represents a major obstacle to the advancement of human rights.
8. The lack of legislation regulating governmental institutions
and individuals’ rights has become an obstacle threatening the
existence of human rights. The seriousness of this legal lacuna
is reinforced by the fact that the PNA does not yet represent a
State, meaning that it has been unable to sign and ratify
international human rights conventions. (It should however be
stressed that the PNA has already committed itself, through
public statements, to respect international human rights
principles and standards.)
External reasons are:
1. The political pressure exerted by Israel and the United
States on the PNA has encouraged, and at times obliged, the PA
to violate human rights. These violations have been necessary in
order to satisfy the interests of the opposing side, which has
demanded increased security measures for the purpose of
protecting Israelis. It is worth mentioning that when President
Arafat decided to establish the State Security Court in April
1995 by Presidential decree, Israel and the United States not
only gave their blessing to its establishment but also supported
the illegal way in which it has functioned since 1995. This
external interference in Palestinian internal matters creates
many problems for the Palestinians and reflects the lack of
Israeli and American concern for the development of Palestinian
civil society. Specific examples of this include the harsh
treatment by the PNA of the Palestinian political opposition
movement.
2. It is dangerous and harmful that most human rights
organization depend a great deal on the external funding. In
particular, if such organisations have failed to find internal
sponsors for their projects, the drying up, for whatever reason,
of external support endangers their very existence. In general,
Palestinian NGOS have not attempted to receive support from
local businessmen and establishments, nor have they attempted to
collect contributions from the local community for their noble
purposes. By isolating themselves from the local community, the
way in which human rights organizations are funded has become an
issue giving rise to suspicion.
3. External funders appear to have their own set of priorities.
By supporting the building of Palestinian civil society, they
indirectly aim to reinforce Israel’s security. They achieve this
by opening joint Israeli-Palestinian projects, by securing
millions of US dollars for such projects and by encouraging
scholars and researchers from both sides to participate in these
projects. In many cases there is no monitoring in order to
establish whether the objectives of these projects are actually
fulfilled.
4. This unmonitored external funding has encouraged the founding
of more and more human rights organizations. This non-unifying
multiplication of organisations has led to a doubling of efforts
(duplication of work, etc.) which has weakened the functioning
of human rights organisations. Instead of being united,
competition has been created and this has made it even more
difficult for the human rights movement to help the people.
Recommendations and suggestions to develop the effectiveness of
human rights work:
1. A commitment by the PNA to implement principles of customary
international human rights law and international human rights
conventions.
2. The securing of funding from Arab sources in order to
increase the chances for continued human rights activity. This
would be an alternative to submitting to conditions imposed by
some foreign donors who function on the basis of political,
rather than humanitarian, motives. By doing this, Arab support
could replace questionable foreign funding.
3. The creation of certain mechanisms that would put pressure on
human rights organizations to engage in healthy cooperation
between each other. Donors should make this a basic and specific
precondition for the provision of funding and support to human
rights organisations.
4. The establishment, by human rights NGOs, of a monitoring
mechanism in order to observe and regulate the way in which
these NGOs deal with each other and with their community. It
appears that at present some of these NGOs, like the PNA, appear
to be a one-man show. Human rights NGOs should reflect the
notions of democracy and civility in their functioning and
should be models for others to follow.
5. The undertaking of training projects by all existing human
rights organizations in order to develop and improve their
performance and in order to acknowledge the distinguished and
important role that they play in building a civil democratic
society. Such a program should include meetings, seminars,
workshops and ongoing educational courses in this field that
would help these organizations to improve their planning and
execution of their crucial work.
* The author of this article is the Executive Director of the
Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group (PHRMG) based in East
Jerusalem.
|
