The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Referring to the case of the above-mentioned parliamentarians, all of whom were elected to the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) in January 2006, as outlined in the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians (CL/187/12(b)-R.1), and to the resolution adopted at its 186th session (April 2010),

Referring also to the study produced by the Israeli non-governmental organization Yesh Din (Volunteers for Human Rights) on the implementation of due process rights in Israeli military courts in the West Bank, entitled “Backyard Proceedings”, which reveals the absence of due process rights in those courts, and to the study published in September 2006 by B’Tselem (the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories) and entitled “Barred from Contact: Violation of the Right to Visit Palestinians Held in Israeli Prisons”,

Recalling the following: the parliamentarians concerned are part of a group of initially more than 30 PLC members who had been elected in January 2006 on the Change and Reform Party list (Hamas) and were arrested following the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, on 25 June 2006, prosecuted and found guilty of membership of a terrorist organization (Hamas), of holding a seat in parliament on behalf of that organization, of providing services to it by sitting on parliamentary committees, and of supporting an illegal organization; most of them were released after serving their sentences; four of them, Ayman Daraghme (PAL/51), Nizar Ramadan (PAL/52), Azzam Salhab (PAL/53) and Khaled Tafish (PAL/54), were rearrested in March 2009 and taken into administrative detention after negotiations for the release of the Israeli soldier failed; Khaled Tafish has since been released,

Considering that Anwar Zboun (PAL/22) was released on 25 April 2010, Mohammed Abu Teir (PAL/28) on 20 May 2010, Mohammed Totah (PAL/30) on 1 June 2010, and Nayef Al-Rojoub (PAL/17) on 20 June 2010,

Considering further the following: Mr. Motlak Abu-Jheasheh was among the parliamentarians arrested on 29 June 2006 in the context of Gilad Shalit’s kidnapping; his case was closed upon his release on 2 September 2009; Mr. Abu-Jheasheh was held in administrative detention and was not prosecuted; on 20 August 2010, the Secretariat was informed by a qualified source that the Israeli authorities had refused his request for a permit allowing him to travel to Mecca to perform the hajj/pilgrimage in November 2010; that decision was forwarded to him in Hebrew and no reason was provided for the refusal; the source stresses that no criminal proceedings are pending against Mr. Abu-Jheasheh,

Recalling the following: Mr. Abu Teir, Mr. Totah and Mr. Attoun were elected in the electoral district of East-Jerusalem where they live and were born; on 28 May 2006 the then Israeli Minister of the Interior revoked their Jerusalem residency permit arguing that they had shown disloyalty to Israel by holding seats in the PLC; an appeal against that decision was lodged with the Supreme Court and the deportation order was not implemented owing to their arrest on 26 June 2006, so that the deportation was de facto suspended until their release in 2010,

Considering the following: upon their release they were immediately notified that they had to leave East Jerusalem; Abu-Teir was ordered to leave by 19 June 2010 and, refusing to do so, he was arrested; the other two parliamentarians were ordered to leave by 3 July 2010 and, likewise refusing to comply with the order, they took refuge in the ICRC building in Jerusalem; a motion for injunction to the Supreme Court seeking to halt the deportation was rejected, the Chief Justice ruling that there was no point in issuing the requested injunction because “this is not an irreversible measure”; on 6 September 2010, the Supreme Court heard their petition against the revocation of their residency permit and deportation order; the Court decided to give the petitioners a 30-day period in which to reiterate their request to the Interior Minister for a re-examination of their residency status, a 30-day period for the Minister to respond, and a further 10 days for the petitioners to react to the Minister’s reply; it adjourned the case without setting a new date for hearing,

Noting the following arguments put forward by the defence lawyers:

• The deportation violates not only the Fourth 1949 Geneva Convention, which prohibits the deportation of protected persons from occupied territory, but also the constitutional rights of the members of parliament concerned to continue to live in their place of residence and homeland without threat of expulsion, to be granted dignity and personal liberty, to own property and to enjoy family life; moreover, under Article 45 of the Hague Convention (IV) of October 1907, considered to embody rules of customary international law, the inhabitants of occupied territory such as East Jerusalem should not be compelled to swear allegiance to the occupying power;

• Palestinians with resident status in Jerusalem are residents by birth, not by immigration, as Palestinian residents of Jerusalem never entered Israel as immigrants and their status was never made conditional on any terms;

• Since the Oslo Accords, the State of Israel has recognized that the Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem are part of the Palestinian people in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which is why it allowed them to vote and stand in the January 2006 elections,

1. Is alarmed at the deportation order issued for Mohammed Totah, Mohammed Abu Teir and Ahmed Attoun;

2. Considers that, over and above the compelling legal grounds that prohibit their deportation and the fact that Israel cannot claim disloyalty given that it accepted the participation of Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem in the elections, the deportation would constitute an inhuman and cruel act against the persons concerned, their families and their community;

3. Is deeply concerned that the deportation would set a precedent and serve to justify the deportation of other Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem;

4. Takes note ofthe decision of the Supreme Court to refer the matter back to the Minister of the Interior, thus prolonging an extremely difficult situation for the persons concerned and their families; calls therefore on the Knesset, in the exercise of its oversight function, to ensure that the Minister of the Interior revokes the unlawful deportation order forthwith and issues the persons concerned with the residency permits to which they are entitled;

5. Reaffirms furthermore its position that the arrest, detention and prosecution of the parliamentarians concerned were politically motivated and hence arbitrary, since Israel was undoubtedly aware of and accepted the participation of Hamas in the election, which was recognized by the international community as free and fair;

6. Takes note of the release of three more parliamentarians having served their sentences, and observes that seven others continue to be held in jail, including three who had been freed earlier but were subsequently taken into administrative detention and can therefore be held indefinitely;

7. Calls on the Israeli authorities to release the seven remaining parliamentarians forthwith;

8. Remains appalled at the practice of administrative detention in Israel since it opens the way to arbitrariness, and urges once again the Israeli authorities to heed the recommendations made by the international human rights procedures and bodies, most recently by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in its concluding observations on Israel’s 3rd periodic report under the ICCPR, to refrain from such practices and to bring their practices into conformity with the State’s international human rights obligations;

9. Decides to close the case of the four parliamentarians who were released while deploring their arrest and detention and the proceedings brought against them;

10. Wishes to ascertain whether Abu-Jheasheh was given the permit to which he is entitled to travel to Mecca to fulfil his religious obligations;

11. Requests the Secretary General to inform the Israeli and Palestinian authorities of this resolution accordingly;

12. Requests the Committee to continue examining this case and report to it at its next session, to be held on the occasion of the 124th IPU Assembly (April 2011).

Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 123rd IPU Assembly and related meetings" in PDF format (file size 587K approximately). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.

HOME PAGEHUMAN RIGHTSMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS