Conclusion and Recommendations

 The report compiled by the PHRMG in September 2000 on the fate of suspected Palestinian “collaborators” since the establishment of the Palestinian Authority concentrated on the way in which collaborators were treated in “peace time,” and only briefly summarized the problems faced during the first intifada by suspected collaborators. The picture that appeared was that of “collaborators” caught between Israel’s pressure to obtain information about resistance activities, and Palestinian retribution. The latter took the form of fierce vigilante justice from Palestinian activists during the first intifada, and from ruthless security forces after the establishment of the Palestinian Authority.

 Then the al-Aqsa Intifada erupted on 29 September 2000, giving rise to numerous activist groups outside of the Palestinian Authority.  In this situation, suspected collaborators are threatened by three sides. They are still pressured by Israel, which increased pressure on potential collaborators at the time of the second Camp David summit in July 2000, when an Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied Palestinian territories appeared imminent and alternative sources of information had to be found. But they are also persecuted by their own society, which feels a need for national unity in the face of the brutal Israeli repression of the intifada, and whose will is now enforced both by the official Palestinian security forces and by cells of activists.

 Representing the Palestinian Authority, the security forces have a duty to enforce law and should therefore be responsible for arresting and prosecuting suspected collaborators. However, if they do not perform these tasks to the satisfaction of the population, cells of activists will take over and perform their own justice – usually at gunpoint. Following the execution of two convicted collaborators on 13 January 2001, executions were informally prevented by international pressure. A genuine race has begun between the security forces and the activist cells, who know that arrested collaborators will not be executed, even if they are sentenced to death, and therefore try to “get” to them first. Activists also know that formal arrests by the Palestinian Authority raise a lot of international attention, and prefer to eliminate collaborators "quietly."[1] Suspected collaborators obviously lose on all sides, and have no hope for justice.

 The five cases selected for this report illustrate the wide range of problems faced by suspected collaborators in the al-Aqsa Intifada. In three of these cases, suspected collaborators were arrested by the Palestinian Authority. Two of them were prosecuted and sentenced to death in trials that did not respect minimum fair trial standards, and in one case, the death sentence was implemented. None of them could find adequate legal representation. In the third case, the suspect died in custody, and there are strong suspicions that he died as a result of torture. The final two cases illustrate the problem of vigilante justice, and the doubtful evidence that activist cells rely upon to pronounce their death sentence. In one case, the suspected collaborator had been acquitted of the charges of collaboration by a Palestinian court in 1997, but was shot by masked men in front of his house during this intifada. In the other case, the suspect was killed by fellow inmates inside an Israeli detention center.

 The problems identified in this research are essentially the same as those outlined in PHRMG’s previous report on suspected collaborators: arbitrary arrests, torture, disregard for the right to a fair trial, the right to liberty and security of the person, and the right to life. The recommendations presented at the end of the report will also be essentially the same:

To Israel:

1. As stated at the beginning of this research, Israel is in breach of its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention for its methods of recruiting collaborators.[2] Palestinian dependency on services provided by Israel cannot be used as leverage to obtain information, nor can any other form of blackmail. Furthermore, the absolute form of the prohibition means that pressures to collaborate cannot be justified under any circumstance, even the likelihood of terrorist attacks. The PHRMG demands that the Israeli military and intelligence apparatus cease coercing innocent Palestinian men and women into providing them with information or other services.

2. The PHRMG also strongly denounces Israel’s policy of assassinations, whose inception corresponds with the first cases of collaborators killed during the al-Aqsa Intifada. This policy not only contributed significantly to the escalation of violence between Israel and the Palestinians, it also increased the level of violence within Palestinian society by triggering this frenzied pursuit of suspected collaborators.

3. Particular responsibility falls upon Israel for the protection of Palestinian inmates in its custody. It is well known that inmates suspected of collaboration, whether or not the suspicion is well founded, will see their lives threatened by other inmates. Protective custody mechanisms should immediately be set up to ensure the personal security of such inmates.

 To the Palestinian Authority: 

4. The Palestinian Authority must ensure that the arrest procedure is properly initiated and supervised by the office of the Attorney General, and that no suspect is arrested or interrogated without the knowledge and previous written authorization of the Attorney-General. The Attorney General’s authority over the security forces must be asserted.

5. The PHRMG is particularly concerned by the widespread use of torture by the Palestinian security services. It appears from testimonies collected by the PHRMG that suspected collaborators are systematically subjected to severe beatings and other forms of torture during interrogation. These practices must cease immediately, incidents must be properly investigated, and offenders must be held accountable.

6. Cases of death in custody in particular, must be carefully investigated by an independent body, and the results of the investigation must be made public.

7. The Palestinian Legislative Council should pass appropriate legislation regarding the treatment of detainees, and, in particular, a law on torture and other inhumane or degrading treatment.

8. The Palestinian Authority has a duty to ensure that suspected collaborators are granted all the guarantees of the right to a fair trial. In particular, they must be provided with effective legal assistance and granted access to their lawyers, they must have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of their defense, and they must not be compelled to confess guilt. If convicted, they must have the right to have this conviction reviewed by a higher tribunal.

9. The PHRMG is firmly opposed to the application of the death penalty, a sentence irreconcilable with the fundamental right to life and the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment, a sentence that cannot be reversed, and whose deterrence value is highly debatable. We call on the Palestinian Authority to abolish the death penalty without delay.

10. The Palestinian judiciary must live up to its duty of independence and impartiality, and not be influenced by popular verdicts and moods. The Palestinian Authority must respect and support the role of the Palestinian judicial system.

11. Incidents of killings of suspected collaborators in the street must be duly investigated to determine the circumstances and exact motive of the killing, and those responsible must be brought to trial and punished.

To the Palestinian civil society:

12. The Palestinian Bar Association must reverse its directive in order to allow and encourage Palestinian lawyers to defend cases of collaboration.

13. The Palestinian media must ensure that ethical standards of journalism are respected when reporting on cases of collaboration, especially when trials are ongoing. Every person is presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.

14. The Palestinian human rights community has a duty to demand that suspected collaborators be treated according to human rights standards, and to educate the population so that they demand only a just and appropriate punishment of those proven guilty of collaboration, since collaborators are usually themselves victims of the Israeli occupation. The silence and distance kept by many human rights organizations on this subject is unacceptable.