The Impact of the Blockade and of The Military Operations on the People of Gaza and Their Human Rights

[.sergio.]

The Impact of the Blockade and of The Military Operations on the
People of Gaza and Their Human Rights
Lunedì 30 Novembre 2009 21:00 From the Goldstone Report
15 September 2009

“A military commander’s obligation does not end with avoiding harm to
the lives and the dignity of the local residents, a “negative
obligation”, but his obligation is also “positive”- he must protect
the lives and dignity of the residents, within the constraints of the
time and place….” Justice Barak (HCJ 764/04)
“As long as Israel has control of the transfer of necessities and the
supply of humanitarian needs to the Gaza Strip, it is bound by the
obligations of international humanitarian law to allow the civilian
population to have access, inter alia, to medical facilities, food and
water, as well as additional humanitarian items”. Justice Beinisch
(HCJ 201/09)

1213. During its visits to the Occupied Palestinian Territory, and its
meetings and hearings in Gaza, Amman, Geneva and other places, the
Mission saw for itself and received reports and testimonies about the
negative effects that the severe restrictions on the movement of goods
and people from and to the Gaza Strip had caused to the full enjoyment
of a range of social, economic and civil rights by women, men and
children. These reports and testimonies come from a variety of
sources, including businesspeople, industry owners, ordinary
residents, public officials and NGOs in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory and abroad.

1214. People in Gaza, as in other parts of the Occupied Palestinian
Territory, have been living under foreign occupation for decades and
enduring the restrictions and other effects of the policies
implemented by the occupying Power. While the start of the blockade
and the most recent military operations have undoubtedly added to
those restrictions and scarcities, people in Gaza have not been living
in what can be called a “normal” situation for a long time.

1215. The restrictions imposed by Israel on the imports to and exports
from the Gaza Strip through the border crossings as well as the naval
and airspace blockade have had a severe impact on the availability and
accessibility of a whole range of goods and services necessary for the
people of Gaza to enjoy their human rights. Their already eroded
ability to access and buy basic goods was compounded by the effects of
the four-week Israeli military campaign, which further restricted
access to those essential items and destroyed goods, land, facilities
and infrastructure vital for the enjoyment of their fundamental
rights. In conjunction, the blockade and the military hostilities have
created a situation in which most people are destitute. Women and
children have been particularly affected. The current situation has
been described as a crisis of human dignity.

A. The economy, livelihoods and employment

1216. The Mission received information about the state of the economy,
employment and family livelihoods in the Gaza Strip. Before the
December-January military operations, the Gaza economy was already in
dire straights, with few business sectors able to operate at full
capacity. The blockade restricted or denied entry to a range of items
and energy necessary for the economy to function. These included fuel
and industrial diesel for the Gaza power plant to produce enough
electricity for factories and businesses to function and for
agricultural activities to continue on a regular basis. The net result
was a stalled economy, with many businesses, factories and farms
either closed or operating at reduced capacity.

1217. Electricity was purchased directly from Israel (51 per cent) and
Egypt (7 per cent), while the Gaza power plant produced only 34 per
cent, leaving an 8 per cent electricity deficit. Following additional
cuts by Israel in the supply of industrial fuel, the Gaza power plant
further reduced its output. The shortage of fuel caused the plant to
malfunction, while the lack of spare parts and maintenance is likely
to damage the plant in the long term.1 According to OCHA, the
electricity shortfall in the Gaza Strip was 41 per cent by 15 December
2008. Cooking gas was also restricted although less drastically.

1218. Raw materials, equipment, spare parts and other inputs necessary
for industrial and agricultural activity were not allowed into the
Gaza Strip either.

1219. The consequences for day-to-day life were considerable. Some
areas of the Gaza Strip were left without electricity for several
hours a week, many households, especially those in buildings that
depend on the use of water pumps, had access to water only a few hours
a week. Intermittent electricity supply damaged medical equipment in
hospitals and doctors’ practices, and generally disrupted civilian
life. The operation of sewage treatment facilities was also reduced
and increased quantities of untreated sewage were dumped into the sea,
causing public health risks and pollution, which in turn affected
fishing.

1220. Several companies closed or cut back their operations, laying
off employees, who consequently lost their livelihoods. Information
provided to the Mission covering June 2007 to July 2008 showed that 98
per cent of industries were temporarily shut down and five
establishments were relocated to the West Bank and Jordan. Around
16,000 workers were laid off. The ban on all exports caused losses for
the agricultural sector estimated at US$ 30 million up until July 2008
and 40,000 jobs lost. Similarly, the construction sector endured
severe losses resulting from the halt in development projects and
other construction projects owing to the absence of construction
materials. Some 42,000 workers were reported to have lost their jobs
as a result.2Those who were laid off searched for employment in other
sectors, such as agriculture, or joined the ranks of those who live on
food assistance from the United Nations and aid agencies.

1221. As a result of the closure of the crossings to the transit of
people, many families also lost the financial support they had from
relatives, usually the male head of the family, who used to work
abroad, either in Israel or in neighbouring Arab countries.3 In its
submission to the Mission, UNCTAD stated that 15.4 per cent of Gaza’s
labour force was employed in Israel by 2000. In his presentation to
the Mission, the economist Shir Hever explained that by 2009 no one
from Gaza could find work in Israel. Even Palestinian workers from the
West Bank mostly work in industrial zones in settlements rather than
in Israel.4

1222. By December 2008 the destructive impact of the blockade on the
local economy had doubled unemployment levels. While in 2007 79 per
cent of households lived below the official poverty line (US$ 4 per
capita/day) and some 70 per cent below the deep poverty line (US$ 3
per capita/day), these figures were expected to increase by the end of
2008 – even before the Israeli military operations. The Mission
received information from organizations explaining how the
agricultural sector had traditionally absorbed unemployed workers from
other sectors, but in the circumstances imposed by the blockade,
without fertilizers, pesticides, machinery, spare parts and,
crucially, without access to markets, it could no longer fulfil the
role of shock absorber.5 In its submission to the Mission, UNCTAD
noted that when the industrial and agricultural sectors lost their
capacity to provide jobs, public administration and services absorbed
up to 54 per cent of Gaza’s labour force (up from 37 per cent in
1999). UNCTAD concluded:

The ultimate impact of this momentum is the systematic erosion of the
Palestinian productive base to deprive them from the ability to
produce and feed themselves, and turn them into poor consumers of
essential goods imported mainly from Israel and financed mainly by
donors.

1223. The military operations destroyed a substantial part of the Gaza
Strip’s economic infrastructure and its capacity to support decent
livelihoods for families. Many factories and businesses were directly
targeted and destroyed or damaged. Poverty, unemployment and food
insecurity increased dramatically.

1224. Information provided to the Mission showed that some 700 private
(industry and trade) businesses were damaged or destroyed during the
military operations, with direct losses totalling approximately US$
140 million. The industrial sector appeared the most affected, as it
suffered 61 per cent of those losses, in particular in the sub-sectors
of construction and food.6 Because of the extent and gravity of the
destruction inflicted on the industrial sector, businesspeople and
industrialists who spoke to the Mission stated their belief that
Israel had as one of its military objectives the destruction of local
industrial capacity so as to harm the prospects for an economic
recovery in the Gaza Strip..7

1225. The severe restrictions on the availability of banknotes imposed
by Israel caused serious disruptions in economic transactions and
affected the ability of the public sector and the nongovernmental
sector to carry out operations such as contracting or procuring goods
and services.

1226. The agricultural sector, including crop farming, fisheries,
livestock farming and poultry farming, suffered direct losses worth
some US$ 170 million. Indirect losses have still to be definitively
calculated. One business organization estimates that 60 per cent of
all agricultural land had been destroyed, 40 per cent directly during
the military operations. 8 Moreover, 17 per cent of all orchards, 8.3
per cent of livestock, 2.6 per cent of poultry, 18.1 per cent of
hatcheries, 25.6 per cent of beehives, 9.2 per cent of open fields and
13 per cent of groundwater wells were destroyed. Agriculture had
already lost a third of its capacity since the start of the second
intifada and the frequent Israeli incursions, according to NGO
estimates used by UNDP-Gaza. 9 Parts of the land were reportedly
contaminated by unexploded munitions and chemical weapons residues
(e.g. white phosphorous) and would need to be tested and cleared
before agricultural activity could resume.10 Some 250 agricultural
wells were reportedly destroyed or severely damaged.

1227. Fishing that provided direct employment to some 3,000 people was
also affected by the blockade and the military operations. Several
boats and some fishermen were directly hit. The Mission met
representatives of fishermen’s associations and a fisherman testified
at the public hearings in Gaza. One fisherman interviewed by the
Mission explained that he had previously owned a fishing boat, mainly
to fish sardines. It was hit by shelling as it was moored beside the
civil defence buildings that were hit by air strikes on 27 December.
Half of it was destroyed. Another small boat was also destroyed as
were the nets. The family house was also destroyed and he had been out
of work since the beginning of the military operations in December.
However, his fishing activities had already been affected before the
operations, when the Government of Israel had imposed a limit of six
nautical miles for fishing, and then further reduced it to only three.

1228. The continuation of the blockade does not permit the
reconstruction of the economic infrastructure that was destroyed. Not
only do construction materials continue to be banned but the provision
of energy is also still insufficient and irregular. Local purchasing
capacity being shattered, there is not enough market demand for many
products.

1229. Exports also continue to be prohibited, with the exception of
some truckloads of flowers that crossed the borders between January
and March 2009. Without external markets, local production of all
kinds has no prospect and so employment and livelihoods will remain
precarious and diminished. A strawberry farmer and the Head of the
Association of Strawberry Farmers based in Beit Lahia explained that
before the military operations he used to export up to 2,000 tons of
strawberries to Europe. Hundreds of donums of land were destroyed
during the operations as well as some 300 greenhouses and 2,000 acres
of citrus trees. As a result, they had lost the European market for
their products.

B. Food and nutrition

1230. The availability of food in the Gaza Strip is determined by the
amount imported through the crossings and that which is locally
produced. The Mission received credible information indicating that
during the months preceding the military operations both sources of
food suffered from the severe restrictions imposed by Israel.

1231.The closing of the Karni grain conveyor belt, the only mechanism
for importing wheat, during part of December, resulted in the
depletion of wheat stocks, forcing the six mills in the Gaza Strip to
close down or reduce operations. The el-Bader flour mill appeared to
be the only one that kept working as its owners had kept a good stock
of grain, but it was later bombed and destroyed (...). However, about
one third of the previous number of truckloads of wheat continued
entering through the Kerem Shalom crossing. The blockade was tightened
following the confrontations of November 2008, further restricting
United Nations food assistance. On 18 December, UNRWA was compelled to
halt its food distribution programme to thousands of families because
its stocks were depleted. It also had to downsize its cash-for-work
programmes as it ran out of banknotes.

1232. By December 2008 food insecurity was on the rise. Food security
is the capacity of each individual to have access to sufficient and
adequate food at all times. The Mission received information
indicating that rising food insecurity was the result falling income
levels, eroded livelihoods and higher food prices. Some food items
were also unavailable in the local markets. Consequently, the average
Gazan household was spending two thirds of its income on food. People
had to reduce the quantity and the quality of food they ate, shifting
a diet based on lowcost and high-energy cereals, sugar and oil.

1233. Changes in diet patterns are likely to prejudice the long-term
health and nutrition of the population. According to the WHO office in
Gaza, there are indications of chronic micronutrient deficiencies
among the population, in particular among children. Among the most
worrying indicators is the high prevalence of stunting among 6- to 16-
year-old children (7.2 per cent), while the prevalence of thinness
among that group was 3.4 per cent for 2008 (the WHO standard is 5 per
cent). Levels of anaemia are alarming: 66 per cent on average among 9-
to 12-month-old babies (the rate being higher for girls (69 per
cent)). On average, 35 per cent of pregnant women suffer from anaemia.
11

1234. During the military operations the availability and quality of
fresh food dropped: local production was suspended during the fighting
and local produce was spoilt. Mr. Muhammad Husein al-Atar, Mayor of al-
Atatra, told the Mission how agricultural land in his neighbourhood
was razed. The area is close to the Israeli border and 95 per cent of
the work is farming-related. Israeli military incursions had been
happening since 2000 accompanied by destruction and bulldozing. As a
result, 50,000 acres of land had not a single tree left standing and
between 10 and 15 farmers had been killed every year during the last
nine years. During the December – January military operations the area
was bombed from the air, land and sea. He had personally lost three
(industrial) refrigerators, each capable of holding 600 tons of
vegetables, for instance. His sister’s chicken farms were also
destroyed, including some 70,000 chickens (...).

1235. The destruction of land and greenhouses has an impact on the
availability of fresh food in the Gaza Strip and, consequently, on the
total supply of micronutrients to the population. Satellite imagery
commissioned by the Mission shows that for the whole Gaza Strip an
estimated 187 greenhouse complexes were either destroyed or severely
damaged, representing approximately 30.2 hectares. Of all the
destroyed greenhouses 68.6 per cent were in the Gaza and Gaza North
Governorates; and 85.4 per cent were destroyed or damaged during the
last week of the military operations. Satellite imagery also gives
strong indications that tanks and/or heavy vehicles were likely to
have been responsible for most of the damage.

1236. Despite the increased quantities of food allowed into Gaza since
the beginning of hostilities, representing between 60 and 80 per cent
of all truckloads, wheat flour was in short supply. This was probably
the result of the severe depletion of local stocks following the
tighter restrictions during December. After the ceasefire was declared
by the parties to the conflict, access to food remained problematic
for most people many prices had risen and there was a lack of income
and banknotes. It was reported that the military operations caused
food insecurity to increase and affect up to 75 per cent of the
population.

1237. In a rapid assessment, FAO and the World Food Programme (WFP)
found that food availability was back to pre-military operations
levels, but the supply of fresh food was likely to decrease in the
immediate future due to the large-scale destruction. Prices continued
to be very high and some items were prohibitively expensive (e.g.
poultry, eggs and meat) and unaffordable. However, severe access
problems persisted and were aggravated for a population whose income
and livelihoods had been shattered, despite the food assistance
provided by the United Nations and aid agencies.

C. Housing

1238. Figures about the overall damage to residential housing vary
according to the source and time of the measurement as well as the
methodology. The human rights NGO Al Mezan reports that a total 11,135
homes were partially or fully destroyed. 12 According to the human
rights NGO Al-Dameer-Gaza, 2,011 civilian and cultural premises were
destroyed, of which 1,404 were houses that were completely demolished
and 453 were partially destroyed or damaged.13 A UNDP survey
immediately after the end of military operations reported 3,354 houses
completely destroyed and 11,112 partially damaged. 14 The destruction
was more serious in the north, where 65 per cent of houses were
completely destroyed. As a result of the destruction, more than 600
tons of rubble had to be removed, with the consequent costs and
potential impact on the environment and public health. Information
provided to the Mission showed that much of the construction in Gaza
contained important amounts of asbestos, the particles of which had
been or could be released into the air at the time of destruction or
removal. The refugee population was concentrated in the north and the
destruction of residential housing appeared to have particularly
affected them.

1239. The destruction or damage of their homes forced many people to
flee and find shelter with relatives or agencies providing assistance,
such as UNRWA. At the height of the military operations UNRWA was
providing shelter to 50,896 displaced persons in 50 shelters. This
number was estimated to be a fraction of those who had become
homeless, most of whom found temporary shelter with relatives. The
Mission was informed that this situation created extreme hardship for
people who had to share already deteriorated and limited housing,
sanitary and water facilities. It saw for itself people who were still
living in tents some six months after the end of the operations.

1240. Children and women were particularly affected by the hardship
caused by the destruction of homes and the displacement. Housing and
Land Rights Network – Habitat International Coalition reported that
“of those forced to seek shelter following the military damage or
destruction of their home, over half were children. While female-
headed households constitute only a relatively small percentage of the
total affected families (7 per cent), their number in absolute terms,
763 such families, is significant.”15

1241. The impact of the destruction of housing is aggravated by the
substantial destruction of the Gaza construction industry during the
military operations. In chapter XIII, the Mission described the
destruction of the Atta Abu Jubbah cement-packaging plant, which
formed a significant part of the construction materials industry in
Gaza. The Mission also noted reports regarding the destruction of 19
producing plants (representing 85 per cent of the production capacity
of the Gaza factories of ready-mix concrete). External supplies of
concrete and other building materials into Gaza are entirely
controlled by Israel, which has banned imports of cement into Gaza.
The thousands of families who have lost their shelter as a result of
the military operations are therefore prevented by the blockade
imposed by Israel from rebuilding their homes.

D. Water and sanitation

1242. The Mission received submissions, testimonies and information
about the effects of the blockade and of the military operations on
the supply of and access to water and sanitation facilities by the
population of the Gaza Strip.16 During the months preceding the
military operations the water and sanitation sectors were already
under severe strain. The lack of construction materials, pipes and
spare parts had prevented the building of additional infrastructure
and the proper maintenance of existing facilities. Desalinization
plants and works to preserve the aquifer had to be postponed. By
December 2008, OCHA reported that the degradation of the system “is
posing a major public health hazard”.17 Frequent power outages, fuel
shortages and a lack of spare parts for electricity generators had
also affected the functioning of the water and sanitation systems.

1243. By December 2008, it was reported that some 80 per cent of
Gaza’s water wells were only partially functioning while the others
were not functioning at all. This situation had already affected the
population’s access to water: over half of the residents of Gaza City
had access to running water few hours a week, with those living in
houses and buildings using water pumps spending many hours trying to
get water by other means. Of the water supplied in Gaza 80 per cent
did not meet WHO standards for drinking water owing to, among other
factors, the shortage of chlorine to purify the water. Important
health risks were consequently likely to arise. Other health hazards
were expected to arise from the practice of discharging untreated or
partially treated wastewater into the sea. More than 70 million litres
a day were discharged into the sea, creating significant environmental
damage and health risks for human beings and marine life.

1244. As with other sectors, the military operations worsened the
situation in the water and sanitation sector. Services and
infrastructure already partially paralysed or in serious need of
maintenance suffered further destruction or damage. The Gaza
wastewater treatment plant was hit sometime between 3 and 10 January
and one of its lagoons was severely damaged (...). Sewage pipes
leading to the plant and others in different parts of the city were
hit or damaged. Up to 11 water wells that supplied water for human
consumption were hit and 3 completely destroyed.18 Thousands of metres
of water and sewage pipes/networks were destroyed or damaged and
around 5,700 rooftop water tanks destroyed and some 2,900 damaged.

1245. By the end of January only 70 per cent of Gaza’s water wells
were working, either whether fully or partially, i.e. 10 per cent less
than before the hostilities. At the height of the military operations
some 500,000 Palestinians did not have access to running water at all,
whereas the rest received water for few hours a week. Sanitation and
water facilities in public shelters were overwhelmed, and raw sewage
ran through fields and streets in some areas. The water authorities’
reparations team were prevented from going to the sites to carry out
urgent repairs and had to wait in most cases until Israeli troops had
withdrawn. All urgent repairs were done on a provisional basis given
the lack or shortage of construction materials and equipment. The
Mission witnessed how precarious those repairs could be when it saw
one sewage pipe in the vicinity of the Gaza wastewater treatment plant
explode during a site visit.

E. Environment

1246. The Mission has received comments and concerns from non-
governmental organizations and concerned individuals in Gaza relating
to threatened environmental damage by reason of munitions or debris
from munitions. These concerns relate to the fear that hazardous
material might have remained or will remain in the soil and water of
parts of the Gaza Strip for indefinite periods of time and could enter
the food chain or otherwise be hazardous to life.

1247. The Mission was unable to further investigate these concerns,
but is aware of an environmental impact study being undertaken by the
United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) in the Gaza Strip.
Preliminary results from UNEP indicate that the environment in the
Gaza Strip has been seriously impacted by the Israeli military
operations of December-January. In particular, the groundwater in Gaza
show high nitrate levels exceeding WHO ceilings, putting infants at
risk of nitrate poisoning.

F. Physical and mental health

1248. The capacity of the health sector in the Gaza Strip was already
diminished by the blockade when the Israeli offensive started. While
hospitals and clinics continued operating, the quality of their
service and its accessibility were eroded. The insufficient and
erratic supply of electricity caused equipment to malfunction even
when the staff had recourse to generators. Power cuts and water
impurities damaged equipment and created additional health hazards.
The lack of maintenance and spare parts that were blocked at the
crossings further compounded the situation. In addition, the lack of
construction materials and inputs hampered the development of
additional facilities and needed infrastructure.

1249. Reported confrontation between the Palestinian Authority in
Ramallah and the Gaza authorities also affected the quantity and
quality of the service provided. The Ministry of Health in Ramallah
had been responsible for the supply of medicines to Gaza since
September 2008, but it was reported that few trucks with medicines
actually reached the Gaza Strip after that time resulting in serious
availability problems for some 20 per cent of essential medicines. The
referral of patients needing specialized treatment abroad (e.g. in
Israel, Jordan and Egypt) was also affected by the blockade
established in 2007. Before that date only some 9 per cent of patients
intending to cross the border were rejected or their permits delayed,
but that proportion had reached some 22 per cent by September 2008.

1250. The beleaguered health sector was subjected to severe strain
when the military operations started on 28 December. Hospitals and
health centres of the Ministry of Health worked on an emergency basis
under extremely difficult conditions and with limited resources. They
nevertheless responded effectively to the crisis. Urgent medical
interventions to treat critical injuries were performed under severe
circumstances. Of the 5,380 injured people reported by the Ministry,
40 per cent were admitted to the main hospitals, but because of the
policy of discharging patients as soon as feasible to free up beds and
staff, there were concerns that some injuries (e.g. burns and acute
surgical conditions) might have led to complications as follow-up care
may have been inadequate. Some injuries will result in permanent
disability (see also section G below).

1251. Medical facilities and personnel were targeted during the
fighting. Seventeen health personnel were killed and 26 injured. In
total, 29 ambulances were damaged or destroyed by bombs or crushed by
armoured vehicles, while 48 per cent of Gaza’s 122 health facilities
were either directly or indirectly hit by shelling. Medical relief and
rescue were in many cases also intentionally hindered.

1252. OCHA reported that medical supplies, including drugs and
equipment, were allowed into the Gaza Strip in larger quantities
during January in the midst of the fighting. However, logistical
difficulties and the fact that many medicines had a very short
expiration date prevented the health staff from using the increased
quantities for the benefit of patients. Finally, the situation of
patients with chronic health conditions, such as heart and kidney
problems, became a concern because patients with critical life-
threatening injuries requiring urgent attention were given priority.

1253. The destruction of sewage treatment facilities and pipes
together with the lack of purifying materials had consequences for
public health. Thousands of litres of untreated sewage dumped in
fields or in the sea created a potential health hazard. The Mission
received information about recent epidemiological tests of water
samples. The samples had been collected from all water networks and
wells, especially from areas targeted during the military operations,
to investigate the presence of microbiological pollutants. Information
on water-related diarrhoea among children under age 3 attending UNRWA
facilities was collected weekly in January and February 2009. The
analyses showed an increase of 18 per cent between 19 January and 8
February. Moreover, 14 per cent of the water samples collected in
February were polluted with microbiological pollutants. The increase
in diarrhoeal disease was also confirmed to have occurred in the areas
where the water had been contaminated.

1254. WHO also cited the preliminary results from UNEP initial
sampling in Gaza, which showed that “much of the rubble is
contaminated with asbestos; damage to the waste treatment system had
contaminated the aquifer; the health waste handling system had
completely broken down, with such waste going into domestic waste. The
results on heavy metal contamination are so far inconclusive.”19 The
Mission also investigated and confirmed allegations about the use of
weapons whose potential long-term impact on individual victims’ health
raises concern. They include allegations of the use of weapons
containing chemical pollutants such as tungsten and white phosphorus
(...).20

1255. Conditions under Israeli occupation prior to 2005, together with
poverty and the difficulties caused by the blockade, had already made
a deep impact on the mental health of the local population. The three
weeks of intense bombardment and military ground action added new,
serious psychological traumas, especially noticeable in children.
According to Dr. Iyad al-Sarraj of the Gaza Community Mental Health
Programme, over 20 per cent of Palestinian children in Gaza suffer
from post-traumatic stress disorders, the symptoms of which “will
appear over the days, months, years, or decades to come”.

1256. One particular characteristic of the conflict, namely that the
population could not flee the conflict areas as can be done in many
conflicts, and had no shelters or safe places in which to hide or
protect themselves, reinforced feelings of being trapped, defenceless
and vulnerable to more attacks with a sense of inevitability.21 Many
of those who met the Mission stated that they felt terrorized.

1257. According to Dr. Ahmad Abu Tawahina, psychosomatic disorders
have a particularly serious impact on Palestinian society, where
social stigma is often associated with mental suffering. In general,
this makes it difficult for people to express psychological problems.
This condition is frequently experienced in the form of recurrent
psychosomatic symptoms, such as migraines, pains in joints and
muscles, general fatigue and the inability to do even normal daily
activities. Most of these patients are referred not to mental health
practitioners, but to general physicians, who prescribe drugs to
alleviate the symptoms and not the causes. This in turn has given rise
to a serious problem of drug dependency.22

1258. The sense of security that comes from living in a supportive and
safe environment had already been eroded over the years by constant
attacks and military confrontation, but was further undermined by the
direct experience and/or witnessing of violence against relatives. The
widespread destruction, the displacement, the inability to find a safe
place anywhere, together with the direct exposure to life-threatening
events will continue to have a serious impact on the population. The
general state of the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip was described as a
form of alienation.

1259. Many of the mental health problems are the result of years of
conflict, living in poverty, scarcity and instability in the area and
will probably continue until the root causes are eliminated. People,
in particular children, live or grow up in a society under occupation,
with constant episodes of violence and no sense of security or
normalcy.

1260. The situation is compounded by the relative scarcity of
qualified professionals and inadequate facilities. The Gaza Community
Mental Health Programme has only about 40 members of staff specialized
in mental health, including physicians, social researchers, nurses, as
well as psychologists. According to Dr. al-Sarraj, this number is not
sufficient to cover even the needs of Gaza City district, whereas for
the entire population of the Gaza Strip a team of 300 specialists
would be necessary.23

1261. Over the past two decades, the Gaza Community Mental Health
Programme and others have worked to build resilience in people. They
told the Mission that the recent military operations had wiped out
their achievements. People suffering severe loss also detach
themselves from reality, in a phenomenon called “numbness”. According
to Dr. Tawahina, the general feeling among most people in Gaza is that
they have been completely abandoned by the international community.
This feeling of abandonment in turn increases their frustration,
creating additional pain, and leads eventually to more violence and
extremism. The Gaza Community Mental Health Programme studied
children’s attitudes towards violence and found that, as a result of
this situation, and especially when children had lost their parents
and with them the associated protection and sense of security, they
tended to look at “martyrs” and members of armed groups as adult role
models instead.

1262. A study conducted by the United Nations Development Fund for
Women (UNIFEM) revealed that men also showed more symptoms of
psychological trauma after the December-January military operations.
Based on specialists’ reports, the Mission is of the view that this
could in part be due to the additional stress that men face as heads
of families in a maledominated society when they are unable to fulfil
their role as main breadwinners or to provide protection and security
to their children, wives and other family members.

1263. Based on previous experiences with emergencies, WHO expects the
number of people with serious mental health disorders to increase by
an average of 1 per cent above the baseline and with mild to moderate
disorders by 5 to 10 per cent “provided that a protective environment
is restored”.

G. Education

1264. The Mission received information about the state of the
education sector in the Gaza Strip. UNRWA operates one of the largest
school systems in the Middle East and has been the main provider of
basic education to Palestine refugees for nearly five decades. The
Mission was greatly impressed by its activities and achievements.
UNRWA runs 221 schools, while the Government runs 383. UNRWA schools
are also a vehicle for health-monitoring and food/nutritional
programmes. That Palestinians have high levels of education is largely
the result of that work. By the same token, the Mission was shocked to
learn how badly educational facilities and activities in the Gaza
Strip have been affected as a result of the blockade and the recent
military operations.

1265. Information and testimonies received by the Mission showed that
the education system was affected in several ways by the restrictions
imposed by the blockade. The lack of construction materials had halted
all new construction. Repairs to the educational infrastructure also
had to be postponed. Around 88 per cent of UNRWA schools and 82 per
cent of Government schools operated on a shift system to cope with the
demand. The lack of educational material and equipment hampered the
ability to maintain teaching standards. This situation was causing a
decline in attendance and performance at governmental schools.

1266. The ban on the movement of people through the crossings affected
not only university students planning to study or already undertaking
studies abroad, but also the possibilities for academics and scholars
to travel abroad on academic exchanges. Between July and September
2008 only 70 students managed to leave the Gaza Strip via Erez but
hundreds saw their aspirations to study abroad truncated.

1267. The military operations destroyed or damaged at least 280
schools and kindergartens. Six of them were located in northern Gaza,
affecting some 9,000 pupils, who had to be relocated. According to the
Ministry of Education and Higher Education, 164 pupils and 12 teachers
were killed during the military operations. Another 454 pupils and
five teachers were injured. At UNRWA schools, 86 children and three
teachers were killed, and 402 children and 14 teachers injured. During
the military operations, 44 UNRWA schools were used as emergency
shelters to cope with the more than 50,000 displaced individuals.

1268. Schools were generally closed for the duration of the
hostilities, disrupting the study programme. After the ceasefire it
was unclear how many students and teachers returned to schools but
that number was reported to reach up to 90 per cent in UNRWA schools.
Children and teachers reported situations of anxiety and trauma as a
result of the extreme violence to which they had been exposed and the
loss of relatives or friends. The Mission heard that the start of the
military operations with air strikes at a time when schools were
functioning exposed children to a heightened risk and filled them with
fear and panic. Schools and the roads towards them occasionally
remained unsafe because of the presence of explosive remnants of war.
Two Palestinian children were killed by those explosives in Zeytoun
shortly after the ceasefire was declared. The Mission heard reports
that some children were injured by white phosphorus on their way to
school.

1269. The Mission saw the destruction caused to the American School.
It also saw the destruction caused at the Islamic University and in
other university buildings that were destroyed or damaged. These were
civilian, educational buildings and the Mission did not find any
information about their use as a military facility or their
contribution to a military effort that might have made them a
legitimate target in the eyes of the Israeli armed forces.

1270. The Mission was also informed of indoctrination programmes
allegedly introduced by the Gaza authorities, and of a process of
ideological and political polarization. Such programmes have a high
potential for imposing models of education at odds with human rights
values and with a culture of peace and tolerance. In this regard, the
Mission believes that efforts to incorporate human rights in the
curricula should be encouraged by the relevant authorities.

H. Impact on women and children

1271. The attention of the Mission was drawn to the particular manner
in which children and women had been affected by the blockade policies
and the military operations. In its report, WHO took figures from
PCHR: out of 1,417 persons killed, 313 were children and 116 women. It
also takes figures from the Israeli armed forces that showed that
1,166 were killed, of whom 49 were women and 89 were under 16. Among
the 5,380 injured, 1,872 were children and 800 women. The Mission
directly investigated many incidents in which women and children had
been killed as a result of deliberate or indiscriminate attacks by the
Israeli armed forces. WHO also reported that among the many injured
people who crossed the Rafah border and were accepted for medical
treatment in Egypt during the second week of the military operations
there were 10 children showing a single bullet injury to the head and
one with two.

1272. The Mission held interviews with a number of women and
representatives of women’s organizations and heard the testimony of
Mariam Zaqout of the Culture and Free Thought Association. It heard
that the blockade and the military operations had aggravated poverty,
which particularly affected women, who must find food and other
essentials for their families. Women were often the sole breadwinners
(for instance, if male family members had died or been injured as a
result of conflict or violence, or were imprisoned) but jobs were hard
to come by. Over 300 women had been widowed as a result of the
military operations and had become dependent on food and income
assistance. In addition, women bore a greater social burden, having to
deal with daily life made harsher by the crisis and, at the same time,
provide security and care for injured family members and children,
their own and others who have lost their parents. These
responsibilities sometimes compelled them to conceal their own
sufferings, so their concerns remained unaddressed.

1273. In the same interviews, the participants stated that women were
particularly affected by the destruction of homes and the invasion of
privacy. Having to live in tents without privacy or appropriate
sanitary facilities added to their hardship. Moreover, the military
operations had strained relations among family members. Psychological
pressures on men and women, together with financial difficulties, led
to family disputes, family violence and divorce. There were frequent
disputes between widows and their in-laws regarding child custody and
inheritance. Widows were also under increased pressure to get married
again to be able to sustain themselves. Consequently, there was an
increase in women seeking legal aid, as legal problems tended to
become aggravated because of shortcomings in the law and fewer
safeguards for the rights of women.

1274. The particular manner in which the conflict affected women was
dramatically illustrated for the Mission by the testimony of a woman
of the al-Samouni family (...). She had three children and was
pregnant when her family and her house came under attack. She
commented on how the children were scared and crying. She was
distressed when recounting how her 10-month-old baby, whom she was
carrying in her arms, was hungry but she did not have anything to give
him to eat, and how she tried to feed him by chewing on a piece of
bread, the only food available, and giving it to him. She also managed
to get half a cup of water from an ill functioning tap. There were
other babies and older children. She and her sister exposed themselves
to danger by going out to search for food for them. Her husband,
mother and sister were killed but she managed to survive. Her other
son was wounded in the back, and she carried both out of the house.24

1275. Many women felt helpless and embarrassed at not being able to
protect and care for their children. Others felt frustrated, invaded
in their personal space and powerless when their houses and
possessions were destroyed or vandalized. Those feelings contributed
to their psychological suffering.

1276. A UNFPA study conducted immediately after the December-January
military operations reported a 40 per cent increase in miscarriages
admitted to maternity wards, a 50 per cent increase in neonatal
deaths, a rise in obstetric complications and anecdotal evidence of
deaths or health complications because pregnant women were unable to
reach hospital to deliver their babies. Women interviewed in the
context of another UNFPA study expressed extreme fears for themselves
and their loved ones. Associated symptoms included anxiety, panic
attacks, feelings of insecurity, disturbed sleep and eating patterns,
depression, sadness and fear of sudden death.

1277. Adults and children showed signs of profound depression, while
children suffered from insomnia and bed-wetting. Numerous testimonies
received by the Mission highlight the presence of children in
situations where houses were searched or occupied with force by
Israeli soldiers, and when killings occurred.25 The Mission heard the
testimony of a mother whose children, aged 3 to 16, had witnessed the
killing of their father in their own house. With Israeli soldiers
forcefully questioning their mother and uncle and vandalizing their
house, the children asked their mother whether they would be killed as
well. Their mother felt the only comfort she could give them was to
tell them to say the Shehada, the prayer recited in the face of death.
Children were present in improvised shelters on United Nations
premises, enduring the trauma of displacement as well as feelings of
fear from the military attacks and of deep insecurity from having been
attacked in their own homes or in a shelter that was expected to be
safe. During its visits, the Mission saw many children living with
their families in the ruins of their homes and in makeshift
accommodation. The trauma for children having witnessed violence and
often the killing of their own family members will no doubt be long-
lasting. Mrs. Massouda Sobhia al-Samouni told the Mission that her son
was still traumatized. He kept placing coins in his mouth and when she
told him it was dangerous and he might die if he did so, he replied
that he wanted to join his father.

1278. Some 30 per cent of children screened at UNRWA schools had
mental health problems, while some 10 per cent of children had lost
relatives or friends or lost their homes and possessions. WHO
estimated that some 30,000 children would need continued psychological
support and warned of the potential for many to grow up with
aggressive attitudes and hatred.

I. Persons with disabilities

1279. Information provided to the Mission showed that many of those
who were injured during the Israeli military operations sustained
permanent disabilities owing to the severity of their injuries and/or
the lack of adequate and timely medical attention and rehabilitation.
Gaza hospitals reportedly had to discharge patients too early so as to
handle incoming emergencies. Other cases resulted in amputations or
disfigurement. About 30 per cent of patients were expected to have
long-term disabilities.

1280. WHO reported that by mid-April 2009 the number of people with
different types of permanent disability (e.g. brain injuries,
amputations, spinal injuries, hearing deficiencies, mental health
problems) as a result of the military operations was not yet known. It
reported speculations that there might be some 1000 amputees; but
information provided by the WHO office in Gaza and based on estimates
by Handicap International indicated that around 200 persons underwent
amputations.

1281. While the exact number of people who will suffer permanent
disabilities is still unknown, the Mission understands that many
persons who sustained traumatic injuries during the conflict still
face the risk of permanent disability owing to complications and
inadequate follow-up and physical rehabilitation.

1282. The Mission also heard moving accounts of families with disabled
relatives whose disability had slowed their evacuation from a
dangerous area or who lived with a constant fear that, in an
emergency, their families would have to leave them behind because it
would be too difficult to evacuate them.

1283. One testimony concerned a person whose electric wheelchair was
lost after his house was targeted and destroyed. Since the residents
were given very short notice of the impending attack, the wheelchair
could not be salvaged and the person had to be taken to safety on a
plastic chair carried by four people.

1284. The Mission also heard a testimony concerning a pregnant woman
who was instructed by an Israeli soldier to evacuate her home with her
children, but to leave behind a mentally disabled child, which she
refused to do.

1285. Even in the relative safety of shelters, people with
disabilities continued to be exposed to additional hardship, as these
shelters were not equipped for their special needs. The Mission heard
of the case of a person with a hearing disability who was sheltering
in an UNRWA school, but was unable to communicate in sign language or
understand what was happening and experienced sheer fear.

1286. Frequent disruptions in the power supply had a severe impact on
the medical equipment needed by many people with disabilities. People
using wheelchairs had to face additional hurdles when streets started
piling up with the rubble from destroyed buildings and infrastructure.

1287. In addition, programmes for people with disabilities had to be
closed down during the military operations and rehabilitation services
stopped (for instance, organizations providing assistance were unable
to access stocks of wheelchairs and other aids). Many social,
educational, medical and psychological programmes have not yet fully
resumed.

J. Impact on humanitarian assistance provided by the United Nations

1288. The tightening of the blockade during the two months before the
military operations entailed additional restrictions also for United
Nations programmes and activities, in particular those of UNRWA, WFP
and others that provide food and other forms of support. The Mission
was informed that, as a result of the blockade and the Israeli
limitations on the delivery of humanitarian assistance, the capacity
of UNRWA to mitigate the effects of the military operations on the
civilian population was reduced. As stated above, just days before the
Israeli military operations started, UNRWA had to suspend its food
assistance programmes and scale down other programmes.

1289. But the impact of the blockade also extended to several
humanitarian projects that had been planned or were in progress and
had to be stopped and postponed. Most of them were in health,
sanitation, water and education.

1290. During the military operations, UNRWA workers and trucks were
also hit, resulting in deaths and injuries. The Board of Inquiry
established by the United Nations Secretary-General investigated a
number of incidents in which United Nations facilities were targeted
and issued a report determining responsibilities. The Mission is of
the view that the factual findings made by the Board of Inquiry entail
legal liability for those responsible (see below).

1291. The Mission learned that seven UNRWA staff members (none of them
on duty), five job creation programme contractors (one on duty) and
three contractors were killed; 21 other contractors were injured. In
all, 57 UNRWA buildings were damaged by shelling or airstrikes,
including 36 schools (six serving as emergency shelters), seven health
centres, three sanitation offices, two warehouses and five other
buildings.

1292. Thirty-five UNRWA vehicles, including three armoured vehicles,
were damaged. From its remaining 321 vehicles, only 286 are
operational and 7 are damaged beyond repair.

1293. UNRWA informed the Mission that between 27 December and 19
January, 536 UNRWA trucks entered the Gaza Strip through the Kerem
Shalom border crossing. By 21 January, 394 trucks had entered through
Karni and 2089 through Kerem Shalom (including private, humanitarian
and UNRWA trucks). UNRWA considered these amounts to be insufficient
to meet the humanitarian needs of the population of the Gaza Strip.26

1294. The Israeli Government stated that “from the commencement of the
Gaza Operation and for its duration” a total of 1,511 trucks with
supplies from Israel as well as diesel, cooking gas and other fuel
were allowed into the Gaza Strip. It would appear that some 60 per
cent of these supplies were foodstuffs. The Israeli Government states
that (presumably during the same period) it also coordinated the
passage of 706 trucks carrying donations from international
organizations and various countries. Information from UNRWA suggests
that these quantities were irrelevant given the situation prevailing
during the military operation and the local needs. For instance,
although fuel for the power plant was let in, it was inadequate,
forcing the power plant to shut down and causing 16-hour power cuts in
some areas. Israel also reported allowing in 2,277,000 litres of
diesel during the military operations, but according to UNRWA records
only 199,400 litres were allowed in, while OCHA records suggest only
92,000 litres were allowed in, compared to 6,628,400 litres in January
2007.27

1295. The Israeli Government also provided information about medical
supplies that were brought into the Gaza Strip, but the figures are
imprecise or incomplete as it was unclear what unit of measure was
being used. In addition, many of the agencies listed were not actually
bringing in medical supplies. For instance, its report lists that WFP
brought in "3,611" medical supplies, but information made available to
the Mission indicated that WFP was bringing in only flour and hygiene
kits.

K. Legal analysis

1296. Obligations under international humanitarian law are relevant
for the assessment of the facts described above. As mentioned earlier,
the Fourth Geneva Convention as well as provisions of Additional
Protocol I reflecting customary international law apply to the actions
of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory before and during the
military operations. The protections owed under international
humanitarian law to the civilian population of the Gaza Strip by all
parties to the conflict include the duty to allow the free passage of
humanitarian medical supplies, as well as consignments of essential
foodstuffs and clothing for children, pregnant women and mothers at
the earliest opportunity (article 23 of the Fourth Geneva Convention).
Article 70 of Additional Protocol I provides that parties to a
conflict are obliged to allow the passage of articles that are
essential for the civilian population, at the earliest opportunity and
without delay.

1297. The relevant provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention relating
to the duties of an occupying Power should also be taken into
consideration, in particular the obligations contained in articles 50
(duty to facilitate the working of care and education institutions),
55 (duty to ensure food and medical supplies to the population), 56
(duty to ensure and maintain medical and hospital establishments and
services), 59 (duty to agree on relief schemes if the occupied
territory is not well supplied) and 60 (duty to continue performing
obligations even if third parties provide relief consignments).
Several provisions of Additional Protocol I reflecting customary
international law are also relevant here, including articles 51 and
52, which prohibit attacks on civilians and on civilian objects, and
article 54, which prohibits the destruction of objects indispensable
to the survival of the civilian population.

1298. Access to adequate food, shelter and clothing, as part of an
adequate standard of living, are human rights recognized in article 11
of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
The same instrument recognizes the rights to education and to the
highest attainable standard of physical and mental health (art. 12).
The content of these rights and the corresponding State duties has
been clarified by the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights. The Convention on the Rights of the Child protects
the child’s right to life, survival and development (art. 6) and to be
protected from all forms of mental or physical violence (art. 19), to
the highest standard of health (art. 24), to an adequate standard of
living (art. 27) and to education (arts. 28 and 29). Although these
instruments protect women and men, girls and boys alike, the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against
Women adds more specification and scope to those obligations with
regard to women. All these human rights obligations are applicable to
Israel with respect to its actions in the Gaza Strip since they apply
also in situations of armed conflict.

1299. Some rights contained in the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights are subject to progressive realization.
This means that they can be achieved only over time. States have an
obligation to move as expeditiously and effectively as possible
towards that goal. Deliberate retrogressive measures are permitted
only under stringent conditions.28

1300. The Mission recalls in this regard its analysis of the Israeli
objectives and strategies during the military operations in chapter
XVI. There the Mission referred to statements made by Deputy Prime
Minister Eli Yishai on 6 January 2009: "It [should be] possible to
destroy Gaza, so they will understand not to mess with us”. He added
that “it is a great opportunity to demolish thousands of houses of all
the terrorists, so they will think twice before they launch rockets”.
The Mission also referred to the so-called Dahiya doctrine, which
requires widespread destruction as a means of deterrence and seems to
have been put into practice. These objectives and strategies should be
kept in mind with regard to the following analysis.

1301. The Mission considers that the closure of or the restrictions
imposed on border crossings by Israel in the immediate period before
the military operations subjected the local population to extreme
hardship and deprivations that are inconsistent with their protected
status. The restrictions on the entry of foodstuffs, medical supplies,
agricultural and industrial input, including industrial fuel, together
with the restrictions on the use of land near the border and on
fishing in the sea have resulted in widespread poverty, increased
dependence on food and other assistance, increased unemployment and
economic paralysis. The Mission can conclude only that Israel has and
continues to violate its obligations as an occupying Power under the
Fourth Geneva Convention.

1302. The Mission has given consideration to the argument put forward
by the Israeli Government that the above policies and restrictions are
being imposed as a form of sanction. However, such blanket sanctions
are not permitted under international law. The Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights has addressed economic sanctions and their
effects on the enjoyment of economic and social rights, and held:

[…] whatever the circumstances, such sanctions should always take full
account of the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights [and]

[…] it is essential to distinguish between the basic objective of
applying political and economic pressure upon the governing elite of
the country to persuade them to conform to international law, and the
collateral infliction of suffering upon the most vulnerable groups
within the targeted country.29

1303. In respect to the right to water, the Committee stated: “States
parties should refrain at all times from imposing embargoes or similar
measures that prevent the supply of water, as well as goods and
services essential for securing the right to water.” Similar
considerations apply to food and health services and goods.30

1304. The Mission also notes that reprisals and collective penalties
are prohibited under international humanitarian law.

1305. The Mission has considered the question of military security. As
serious as the situation that arises when rockets and mortars are
fired on or near border crossings may be, the Mission considers that
it does not justify a policy of collective punishment of the civilian
population of the Gaza Strip. The Mission is aware of the Government
of Israel’s declaration of the Gaza Strip as a “hostile territory”.
Again, for the Mission, such a declaration does not relieve Israel of
its obligations towards the civilian population of the Gaza Strip
under international humanitarian law.

1306. Moreover, the Mission takes note that following the decision of
the Supreme Court of Israel in what is known as the Fuel and
electricity case, Israel reconsidered its obligations relating to the
amounts and types of humanitarian supplies that it allowed into the
Gaza Strip to meet “vital humanitarian needs”. Whatever that somewhat
vague standard may be, the Mission stresses that Israel is bound to
ensure supplies to meet the humanitarian needs of the population, to
the fullest extent possible.

1307. In sum, the Mission restates its view that Israel has not
fulfilled its duties as an occupying Power in relation to the Gaza
Strip.

1308. Again, reference is made to the blockade and Israel’s obligation
to respect, protect, facilitate or provide, to the extent possible,
for the enjoyment of the whole range of economic, social and cultural
rights in the Gaza Strip. At the very least, Israel is “under an
obligation not to raise any obstacle to the exercise of such rights in
those fields where competence has been transferred to Palestinian
authorities”.31 Israel’s actions have led to a severe deterioration
and regression in the levels of realization of those rights.
Consequently, the Mission finds that Israel has failed to comply with
those obligations.

1309. The Mission has also given consideration to the extent and type
of military operations conducted by Israel in the Gaza Strip between
27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009. As mentioned earlier, provisions
of the Fourth Geneva Convention and of Additional Protocol I that
reflect international customary law apply to those operations. Their
obligations include that under the Fourth Geneva Convention to give
particular protection and respect to the infirm and expectant mothers
(art. 16), to respect and protect civilian hospitals and medical
personnel (arts. 18 and 20), and to allow the free passage of all
consignments of medical and hospital objects, food and clothing
subject to certain conditions (art. 23). The Mission will address here
only respect for the provisions contained in article 23, which it
considers to be part of customary international law. With regard to
Additional Protocol I, the Mission will address here Israel’s
compliance with article 54.

1310. The Government of Israel has provided information about the
actions it took to ensure the supply of humanitarian assistance to the
Gaza Strip and to ensure that medical relief and rescue as well as
essential facilities would function during the hostilities. These
actions allegedly comprised: the continuous supply of humanitarian aid
through the crossings; coordination of evacuation within the Gaza
Strip and outside; a unilateral suspension of military operations each
day to enable the resupply of assistance for the population and
actions to ensure the functioning of essential infrastructure in the
Gaza Strip. To this end, the Government of Israel reported that it
established a number of coordinating and liaison bodies with
Palestinian authorities and organizations, the United Nations agencies
on the ground and humanitarian agencies, such as ICRC. The Government
also reported that a number of trucks carrying humanitarian goods from
Israel and from other countries, including from international
organizations, were given passage.

1311. In response, the Mission draws attention to the fact that no
consideration was given to the situation that prevailed in the Gaza
Strip before the military operations. In particular, the Mission notes
that the amounts and types of food, medical and hospital items and
clothing were wholly insufficient to meet the humanitarian needs of
the population. Given that since the end of the operations the number
of truckloads allowed through the crossings has again fallen, the
humanitarian supplies are even less sufficient.

1312. At the height of the military operations, several NGOs appealed
to the Government of Israel to ensure a sufficient supply of
electricity and fuel to the Gaza Strip to allow for the functioning of
vital services.32 At the same time, two petitions were filed with the
Supreme Court of Israel on 7 and 9 of January, respectively, to order
the Government to ensure that the Israeli armed forces did not attack
ambulances and medical personnel and that sufficient electricity and
fuel were supplied to enable hospitals, water and sanitation systems
to function during the conflict. On 19 January, as military operations
ended, the Supreme Court ruled denying both petitions.33

1313. The Government of Israel seems to see the hardship and suffering
of Palestinians as an inevitable consequence of a situation of war.
The Government’s statement that “civilian populations inevitably and
tragically suffer during a time of armed combat, particularly where
the combat operations take place in densely populated urban areas” may
be correct, but this does not relieve Israel from its obligations
under international humanitarian law.

1314. From the facts it ascertained and the foregoing analysis, the
Mission finds that Israel has violated its obligation to allow the
free passage of all consignments of medical and hospital stores and
objects, food and clothing (article 23 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention).

1315. Article 54 of Additional Protocol I contains the prohibition:

to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to
the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs,
agricultural areas… , drinking water installations and supplies and
irrigation works for the specific purpose of denying them for their
sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse party,
whatever the motive […].

The Mission regards this rule as reflective of international customary
law. In this context, Israel’s obligations to respect, protect and
facilitate or provide for the realization of economic, social and
cultural rights, and its obligations under the Convention on the
Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women are also relevant, and have been
undermined by the blockade and restrictions on the Gaza Strip, as well
as the actions taken during the military operations.

1316. (…) [T]he Mission concludes that in the destruction or damaging
of greenhouses, agricultural land, water wells for irrigation and
irrigation networks there was the specific purpose of denying their
use for the sustenance of the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.
Furthermore, this appears to be done as part of a policy of collective
punishment of the civilian population as elaborated below.

1317. With respect to the right to water, the Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights stated:

The obligation to respect [the right to water] requires that States
parties refrain from […] limiting access to, or destroying, water
services and infrastructure as a punitive measure, for example, during
armed conflicts in violation of international humanitarian law.

1318. This language is similar to that of a resolution adopted by
consensus at the 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent that calls upon parties to a conflict to “take all
feasible measures to avoid in their military operations, all acts
liable to destroy or damage water sources.”35

1319. Similar considerations apply to the right to adequate housing.
The widespread destruction of residential housing, water wells and
pipe networks cannot be seen as an inevitable or necessary incidence
of military hostilities. Israel had a duty to distinguish between
civilian and military objects and not to direct any attacks at
civilians or civilian objects. The Mission has not received any
information suggesting that all the houses destroyed served as
hideouts for Hamas fighters or were booby-trapped and does not accept
that this was the case. The patterns of destruction described in the
present chapter and in others reveal that many houses were fired at or
demolished after their occupants had been ordered to leave them. There
was then no clear necessity for Israeli soldiers to occupy such
properties or to destroy them. They were in effective control of the
area. In other cases, houses were demolished with bulldozers during
the last few days of the military operations when, again, Israeli
forces were in total control of the areas in which the houses were
located. Military necessity and the need to prevent rockets being
fired from the houses into Israel do not seem to the Mission plausible
reasons for this widespread destruction. These considerations apply
equally to the destruction of agricultural land and greenhouses, which
are so important for local food security.

1320. From the facts available to it and by virtue of the foregoing
considerations, the Mission believes that the destruction of private
residential houses, water wells, water tanks, agricultural land and
greenhouses violates Israel’s duties to respect the right of the
people in the Gaza Strip to an adequate standard of living (including
food, housing and water).

1321. The Mission is aware of the statement of the Committee on the
Rights of the Child that many of the fundamental rights of the child
“have been blatantly violated during this crisis”. On the basis of
this finding and on the facts as described above, the Mission also
considers that Israel has violated its obligations under the
Convention on the Rights of the Child during its military operations
in the Gaza Strip and in particular of article 24 (1), stipulating
that “States Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment
of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities for the
treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health. States Parties
shall strive to ensure that no child is deprived of his or her right
of access to such health-care services”; article 38 (1), stipulating
that “States Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for
rules of international humanitarian law applicable to them in armed
conflicts which are relevant to the child”; and article 38 (4),
stipulating that “States Parties shall take all feasible measures to
ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed
conflict”.

1322. The Mission also notes that Israel is in continuing violation of
article 39 of the Convention in that, by actively preventing
reconstruction efforts, it does not fulfil its obligations to “take
all appropriate measures to promote physical and psychological
recovery and social reintegration of a child victim of: […] armed
conflicts. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an
environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the
child”.

1323. The Mission is also aware of the statement made by the Committee
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women that
“the human rights of women and children in Gaza, in particular to
peace and security, free movement, livelihood and health, have been
seriously violated during this military engagement.” It concurs with
this statement. The Mission also notes that the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities, article 11, requires States
parties to take “all necessary measures to ensure the protection and
safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including
situations of armed conflict”. Israel has signed, but not yet
ratified, this Convention and is thus under an obligation not to
defeat its object and purpose.

1324. The Mission also considered whether the Gaza population was
subject to collective punishment or penalty. According to article 33
of the Fourth Geneva Convention, “collective penalties and likewise
all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited”. Article
75 (2) (d) of Additional Protocol I includes collective punishment as
an act that is “prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever”.
Reprisals against protected persons are also prohibited under article
33. These prohibitions are part of customary international law.

The Mission notes that the scope of collective penalties goes beyond
physical or criminal sanctions to encompass also “sanctions and
harassment of any sort, administrative, by police action or
otherwise”.. The cumulative effect of the blockade policies, with the
consequent hardship and deprivation among the whole population, and of
the military operations coupled with statements by Israel made to the
effect that the whole of the Gaza Strip was a “hostile territory”
strongly suggest that there was an intent to subject the Gaza
population to conditions such that they would be induced into
withdrawing their support from Hamas. This was apparently confirmed by
the then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Israel commenting on the
decision by the Supreme Court to uphold the fuel cuts: “The
Palestinians need to understand that business is not usual, I mean
there is no equation in which Israeli children will be under attacks
by Kassam rockets on a daily basis and life in the Gaza Strip can be
as usual”.36

1325. The above statements should also be seen in the light of what
the Mission has identified as the objectives and strategies of Israel
before and during the operations (...). Israel, rather than fighting
the Palestinian armed groups operating in Gaza in a targeted way, has
chosen to punish the whole Gaza Strip and the population in it with
economic, political and military sanctions. This has been seen and
felt by many people with whom the Mission spoke as a form of
collective punishment inflicted on the Palestinians because of their
political choices.

The facts ascertained by the Mission, the conditions resulting from
the deliberate actions of the Israeli armed forces and the declared
policies of the Israeli Government – as they were presented by its
authorized representatives – with regard to the Gaza Strip before,
during and after the military operation, cumulatively indicate the
intention to inflict collective punishment on the people of the Gaza
Strip. The Mission, therefore, finds a violation of the provisions of
article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

1326. The Mission has also considered the question of whether the
crime of persecution as a form of crime against humanity had been
committed against the civilian population of the Gaza Strip. To
establish that a crime against humanity was committed it would have to
be established that there was a widespread or systematic attack on a
civilian population that blatantly discriminated and infringed a
fundamental right recognized under international customary law or
treaty, and was carried out deliberately with the intention so to
discriminate.

(…)

1327. In Prosecutor v. Kupreskic judgement, the Trial Chamber of the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia describes
the types of acts that would constitute the crime of persecution in
the following terms:

[…] (c) Persecution can also involve a variety of other discriminatory
acts, involving attacks on political, social, and economic rights. […]

(d) Persecution is commonly used to describe a series of acts rather
than a single act. Acts of persecution will usually form part of a
policy or at least of a patterned practice, and must be regarded in
their context. […]

(e) […] discriminatory acts charged as persecution must not be
considered in isolation. (…) These acts must not be considered in
isolation but examined in their context and weighed for their
cumulative effect.

1328. The Mission has described above a series of acts that deprive
Palestinians in the Gaza Strip from their means of subsistence,
employment, housing and water. Palestinians are further denied freedom
of movement and their right to leave and enter their own country.
Later the report will address the extent to which Palestinian rights
to access a court of law and an effective remedy are limited or denied
by Israeli laws (...)

1329. From the facts available to it, the Mission is of the view that
some of the actions of the Government of Israel might justify a
competent court finding that crimes against humanity have been
committed.

1 OCHA, “Gaza humanitarian situation report: the impact of the
blockade on the Gaza Strip”, 15 December 2008.

2 Palestine Trade Center (PALTRADE), “Gaza Strip: A year through
siege”, July 2008.

3 GISHA Legal Center for Freedom of Movement and Physicians for Human
Rights – Israel, Rafah Crossing: Who holds the keys? (March 2009).

4 Mission meeting with Shir Hever, Alternative Information Centre, 2
July 2009.

5 Meetings with representatives from the agricultural sector in Gaza,
30 June 2009; meeting with representatives of Campaign to End the
Siege, Gaza, 29 June 2009.

6 Private Sector Coordination Council Gaza Governorates, “Gaza private
sector: Post-war status and needs”, 25 February 2009.

7 Interviews with Amr Hamad of the Palestinian Federation of
Industries and with Ali Abu Shalah of the Palestinian Business
Association.

8 Gaza private sector: post-war status…”, p. 5.

9 UNDP, FAO and Ministry of Agriculture, “Assessment of impact of cast
lead operation: estimated direct losses to agriculture in the Gaza
Strip between 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009”.

10 "Gaza private sector: post-war status…”, p. 5; FAO, “Impact of Gaza
crisis: Agricultural sector report”, p. 16; WHO Report, p. 29.

11 Nutrition indicators for 2008 and 2009 provided by WHO office in
Gaza to the Mission.

12 Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, “Cast lead offensive in
numbers”.

13 Al-Dameer Gaza, “IOF targets civilian premises and cultural
properties during its offensive on the Gaza Strip”, May 2009.

14 The Humanitarian Monitor, No. 33, p. 7. A figure similar to this
was provided by the Palestinian Authority in its reply to questions by
the Mission, 5 August 2009.

15 Submission to the Mission by Housing and Land Rights Network --
Habitat International Coalition, “Targeting shelters and shelter
seekers during operation Cast Lead in the context of Israeli military
practice”.

16 Submission by the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE);
Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, “The impact of the Israeli offensive
on the right to water in the Gaza Strip”, February 2009.

17 “Gaza humanitarian situation report: the impact…”.

18 “Damage assessment report…”. Al Mezan reports that 112 wells were
destroyed but it clarifies that this figure includes agricultural
wells; COHRE submission to the Mission.

19 WHO Report, p. 29.

20 Report of the Mission by Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, p. 75–
76.

21 WHO report, p. 12.

22 Dr. Ahmad Abu Tawahina, Gaza Community Mental Health Programme,
public hearing, Gaza, 29 June 2009, available at:
http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=090629

23 Dr. Iyad al-Sarraj, public hearing, Gaza, 29 June 2009, available
at: http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/archive.asp?go=090629

24 Mission interview with Mrs. Massouda Sobhia al-Samouni, Gaza, 3
June 2009.

25 (…) See also the testimony of Mrs. Abir Hajji at the public
hearing, Gaza, 6 June 2009, recounting the killing of her husband in
the presence of her children.

26 By 1 February UNRWA was providing food assistance to 900,000
registered Palestine refugees, 504,000 of them children, in the Gaza
Strip. There are 1,048,125 refugees in the Gaza Strip (74 per cent of
the population), see UNRWA, “Fact sheet: Consequences of the conflict
in the Gaza Strip 27 December 2008- 18 January 2009”.

27 OCHA also reported that in January 2009 no imports of petrol to
Gaza were registered, compared to 1,522,250 litres in January 2007;
915,310 kilograms of cooking gas was imported in January 2009,
compared to 5,238,030 in January 2007; and 3,760,400 litres of
industrial diesel, compared to 8,370,290 in January 2007.

28 General comment No. 3 (1990), para 9.

29 General comment No. 8 (1997), paras. 4 and 16.

30 General comments No. 15 (2002) and No. 12 (1999), para. 8.

31 Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied
Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004, I.C.J. Reports
2004, para. 112

32 An excerpt from the Hebrew appeal is available in an English press
release at:http://www.gisha.org/UserFiles/File/Press%20Materials/HR
%20groups%20%20resumption%20of%20gaza%20fuel%20supplies%201-1-09%20-
%20online%20version.pdf

33 Physicians for Human Rights et. al. v. The Prime Minister et. al.,
case No. 201/09, and Gisha Legal Centre for Freedom of Movement et al.
v. Minister of Defense, case No. 248/09, Judgement of 19 January 2009,
para. 26, available at http://elyon1.court.gov.il/files_eng/09/010/002/n07/09002010.n07.pdf

34 Customary International Humanitarian Law…, p. 150.

35 Global Security, “Israel’s Supreme Court upholds fuel cuts to
Gaza”, 30 November 2007, available at:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2007/11/mil-071130-voa02.htm.
The issue is also addressed in the submission to the Mission by
Diakonia.

From http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/docs/UNFFMGC_Report.pdf