Human rights in Israel

The State of Israel is a multiparty parliamentary democracy and the world's only Jewish state, though its population includes citizens from many different ethnic and religious backgrounds.

Various countries, non-governmental organizations and individuals have evaluated Israel's human rights record, often in relation to the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Declaration of Independence

The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel proclaimed on May 14, 1948 that "the right of the Jewish people to national rebirth in its own country" ... "was recognized in the Balfour Declaration of the 2nd November, 1917, and re-affirmed in the Mandate of the League of Nations which, in particular, gave international sanction to the historic connection between the Jewish people and "Eretz-Israel [Land of Israel] and to the right of the Jewish people to rebuild its National Home." It also declared that the state "...will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations."

Status of freedom, political rights and civil liberties in Israel

Rights and liberties ratings

Rating of Israel, its occupied territories, and its immediate neighbors

Country / Entity	Freedom rating(FH) Free, Partly Free, Not Free	Political rights (PR)(FH)	Civil liberties (CL)(FH)	Corruption perceptions(TICP)
Israel	Free	1	2	6.3
Israeli occupied territories	Not Free	6	5	6.3
Territories under Palestinian National Authority	Partly Free	5	5	2.6
	Partly Free	5	4	3.1
Syria	Not Free	7	7	3.4
Jordan	Partly Free	5	4	5.7
Egypt	Not Free	6	5	3.4

Notes.

(FH): Per Freedom House 2006 ratings. For indices PR and CL, 1 represents the most free and 7 the least free rating.

(TICP): According to the annual Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index, the score ranges from 10 (squeaky clean) to 0 (highly corrupt).

See also: Freedom in the World 2006 and List of indices of freedom

Elections, political parties, and representation

Main article: Elections in Israel

According to 2005 US Department of State report on Israel, “[t]he law provides citizens with the right to change their government peacefully, and citizens exercised this right in practice through periodic, free, and fair elections held on the basis of universal suffrage...The country is a parliamentary democracy with an active multiparty system. Relatively small parties, including those primarily supported by Israeli Arabs, regularly win Knesset seats.”

In some instances, however, parties have been disqualified from listing candidates for election.

The Kach Party had run candidates under a platform which proposed forced transfer of Arabs from Israel and establishment of a theocracy in Israel ruled by traditional Jewish law. This platform was felt to be inciting of racism by the Knesset and was banned from participation in elections. In 1988, the Supreme Court of Israel upheld this Knesset decision. After a member of the Kach party slayed 29 Palestinians, the party was outlawed completely. See also Reactions in Israel to the Cave of the Patriarchs massacre.

A concurrent 1985 decision to disqualify the Progressive List for Peace, a party which was founded to negate the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people was conversely overturned by the Supreme court in 1988.

Freedom of religion

Main article: Religion in Israel

All religious groups have freedom to practice and maintain communal institutions in Israel. According to the 2005 US Department of State report on Israel, “[t]he law provides for freedom of religion, and the government generally respected this right in practice.” After taking control of the West Bank in 1967, Israel guaranteed Muslim access to mosques including the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Christian access to Churches , although this right was not extended to Israeli Jews when Jordan had control of the West Bank between 1948 and 1967. Israel has extended protection to religious sites of non-Jewish religions; most famously the IDF foiled a Kach party attempt to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque. However, as part of a larger military operation, the Israeli Defense Forces outlawed all outdoor Christmas decorations and festivities in Bethlehem during 2003.

The US State Department report cited above criticized Israel for “discrimination in personal and civil status matters against non-Orthodox Jews.” Israel does not give funding to some religious communities including Protestants . Israel only recognizes Orthodox Rabbis for the purpose of marrying couples, not allowing Reformist or Conservative Rabbis to perform the ceremony. This is a major issue, due to the lack of civil marriage, as opposed to religious marriage, in Israel. A couple wishing to marry must do so through a religious ceremony, be it Jewish, Muslim, Christian or other. This creates a problem for non-religious couples, who must undergo a religious ceremony to marry. This is also a problem for persons with no recognized religion, as is true for many of the immigrants from the former Soviet republics, who received citizenship based on a Jewish relative, but who are not recognized as Jews by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel. This difficulty is partly mitigated by Common-law marriage, which gives couples most of the rights married couples enjoy.

The Bahá'í Faith maintains the seat of their governing bodies, the Universal House of Justice in Haifa. Buddhism is also active as a religion in Israel.^,

Judiciary system and criminal justice

Main article: Israeli judicial system

Israeli law provides for the right to a fair trial and an independent judiciary. The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel: notes that the sometimes ruled against the executive branch, including in some security cases. Human Rights Groups believe these requirements are generally respected. As well the system is adversarial and cases are decided by professional judges. Indigent defendants receive mandatory representation. Some areas of the country fall under the separate judicial jurisdiction of military courts. These courts are believed to be in alignment with Israel's other criminal courts on matters pertaining to civilians. Convictions in these courts cannot be based on confession alone.

Treatment of prisoners

The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel: notes that, "conditions in IPS facilities, which house common law criminals and convicted security prisoners...generally met international standards, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) had access to these facilities, and there were no reports of political prisoners in Israel.

However, the report referenced above notes that in 2005 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have filed numerous credible complaints with the government alleging that security forces tortured and abused Palestinian detainees. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, more than 40,000 Palestinians have been arrested since the start of the September 2000 Al-Aqsa intifada, and Israel currently holds 9,400 Palestinian prisoners in more than 30 jails located across Israel including over 369 jailed before the Oslo Accords and 330 minors. According to the Bureau, 70 of these minor prisoners are considered seriously ill due to lack of "basic medical attention."

Lebanese citizen Mustafa Dirani has charged that Israeli security forces tortured and raped him during interrogations. Another former detainee alleged he was subjected to painful positioning, beatings, long periods of interrogation, threats, and food and sleep deprivation. An independent rights group verified “…the complainant suffered severe back pains and paralysis in his left leg from the abuse.”

Freedom of speech

According to the 2005 US Department of State report on Israel, "[t]he law provides for freedom of speech and of the press, and the government generally respected these rights in practice subject to restrictions concerning security issues. The law provides for freedom of assembly and association, and the government generally respected these rights in practice. Examples of the government's exercise of restriction have been documented. On February 2, 2005 a public body which oversees aspects of Israeli television banned commercials which featured Palestinian figures speaking about the recent Geneva Accords. The body claimed rights according to regulations on television and commercial ethics. The Israeli Government arrested Knesset Member Azmi Bishara for making what it deemed pro-Hizballah statements in the Israeli city Umm al-Fahm and earlier in a region of Syria.

Some government officials and others have been critical of the freedom of speech rights given to settlers during their forced evacuation from Gaza and the West Bank. This led to the criticism that “the authorities took disproportional steps, unjustifiably infringing on the right to political expression and protest.”

Within Israel, policies of its government are often subjected to criticism by its press (the only country ranked "Free" (28 on the scale 1-100) in the region in 2005 by Freedom House) as well as a vast variety of political, human rights and watchdog groups such as Association for Civil Rights in Israel, B'Tselem, Machsom Watch, Women in Black, Women for Israel's Tomorrow, among others. According to the Reporters Without Borders, "The Israeli media were once again in 2005 the only ones in the region that had genuine freedom to speak out."

In 2003, Israel's film board banned from commercial screenings (in cinemas) a documentary about the 2002 Battle of Jenin. The documentary, titled "Jenin, Jenin", was a collection of interviews with residents of the Jenin refugee camp filmed in April 2002, a week after the battle. Mohammad Bakri, an Israeli Arab, directed the film. The film was banned due to its claims of war crimes committed by Israeli forces, which the board deemed false, and hurtful of the soldiers' families' feelings. In a later deposition following a slander lawsuit by Israeli soldiers' families, Bakri admitted to inaccuracies throughout his film.

Following legal proceedings, a petition was filed to the Supreme Court of Israel, which unanimously overturned the board's decision, and allowed the movie to be shown in cinemas.

Right to privacy

According to 2005 US Department of State report on Israel, “[l]aws and regulations provide for protection of privacy of the individual and the home. In criminal cases the law permits wiretapping under court order; in security cases the defense ministry must issue the order…”

Gay rights

Main article: Gay rights in Israel

Israel is the only country in the Middle East that guarantees civil rights for its LGBT population, including adoption rights and partner benefits.

Israeli law does not recognize same-sex marriages, but it does grant a common-law marriage status for same-sex domestic partners. The Sodomy law inherited from The British Mandate of Palestine was repealed in 1988. A national gay rights law that bans some anti-gay discrimination, including employment; some exemptions are made for religious organizations. Since 1993, homosexuals have been allowed to openly serve in the military, including special units.

Ethnic minorities

Ethnic minorities have full voting rights in Israel and are entitled to government benefits. However, the 2005 US Department of State report on Israel criticized Israel for “institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against the country’s Arab citizens.”

In a report submitted to the United Nations, Bedouin claim they face discrimination and are not treated as equal citizens in Israel and that Bedouin towns are not provided the same level of services or land that Jewish towns of the same size are and they are not given fair access to water. The city of Be'er Sheva refused to recognize a a Bedouin holy site, despite the high court recommendation.

Human rights group B'Tselem has claimed that Arabs in Jerusalem are denied residency rights, leading to a housing shortage in the Arab areas of Jerusalem.

Migrant workers

In June 2006, the United States Department of State issued a report which stated that "the Government of Israel does not fully comply with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking and has failed to show efforts to address conditions of involuntary servitude allegedly facing thousands of foreign migrant workers."'

People with disabilities

Israel enacted an Equal Rights for People with Disabilities Law in 1998. The US Department of State report on Israel, however, criticizes Israel for, “de facto discrimination against persons with disabilities.”

In Israel more than 144,000 people with disabilities rely solely on government allowances as their only means of support. According to Arie Zudkevitch and fellow members of the Israeli Organization of the Disabled: "The amount of money that we get cannot fulfill even the basic needs of people without special needs." In Tel Aviv, more than 10,000 people marched in solidarity with the disabled, demanding increased compensation and recognition from the Israeli Government.

A 2005 report from the Association for Civil Rights in Israel raised the concern: "It was reported this year that the Health Ministry has known for over two years that private psychiatric hospitals are holding 70 individuals who no longer need hospitalization, but continue to be hospitalized to serve the institutions` financial interests." The report suggests that, "the Health Ministry is supposed to supervise the private hospitals, but has been powerless to move these patients into an appropriate community situation." The most recent statistics of the Israeli Health Ministry showed over 18,000 admissions for psychiatric hospital care.

Enforcement of sex trafficking laws

Israel has been criticized for its policies and enforcement of laws on sex trafficking. Women from the former Soviet Republics are brought into the country by criminal elements for forced labor in the sex industry. In 1998 the Jerusalem Post estimated that pimps engaging in this activity derived on average $50,000 - $100,000 (USD) per prostitute, resulting in a countrywide industry of nearly $450 (USD) million annually. By July, 2000, Israel passed the Prohibition on Trafficking Law. In its 2003 report, the Human Rights Committee noted it "welcomes the measures taken by the State party to combat trafficking in women for the purpose of prostitution” . However this issue remains problematic. The 2005 US Department of State report on Israel noted that “societal violence and discrimination against women and trafficking in and abuse of women.” In June 2006, the United States Department of State placed Israel on a special watchlist for "failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to address trafficking in human beings."

Privatization and human rights controversy

The 2005 annual report of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) found that "accelerated privatization" is damaging human rights. According to the report, "State economic policy, including cutting stipends, reducing housing assistance, and constantly declining state participation in health-care and education costs, are forcing more elderly, children and whole families into poverty and despair. The increasing damage to citizens' rights to earn a dignified living - both due to low wages and the lack of enforcement of labor laws - is particularly prominent."

Immigration rights

A 2003 amendment of the Nationality and Entry into Israel law prohibits Palestinians who are married to Israelis from from gaining Israeli citizenship or residency. Critics argue that the law is racist because it is targeted at Arabs, since Israeli Arabs are far more likely to have Palestinian spouses than other Israelis. The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination unanimously approved a resolution saying that the Israeli law violated an international human rights treaty against racism. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel filed a petition to have the law struck down but it was upheld by a High Court decision in 2006. Defenders say the law is aimed at preventing terrorist attacks and preserving the "Jewish character" of Israel by restricting Arab immigration.

Israel's record: human rights in the occupied territories

See also: Human rights in the Palestinian National Authority

Settlements

On April 7, 2005 the United Nations Committee on Human Rights stated it was "deeply concerned at the suffering of the Syrian citizens in the occupied Syrian Golan due to the violation of their fundamental and human rights since the Israeli military occupation of 1967...[and] in this connection, deploring the Israeli settlement in the occupied Arab territories, including in the occupied Syrian Golan, and regretting Israel's constant refusal to cooperate with and to receive the Special Committee"

Israeli military strategists defend the occupation of the Golan Heights as necessary to maintain a buffer against future military attacks from Syria. The land was captured in the second of three wars in which Syria invaded Israel.

Military activity

In a 2004 report on Israel, Amnesty International stated:

"abuses committed by the Israeli army constituted crimes against humanity and war crimes, including unlawful killings; extensive and wanton destruction of property; obstruction of medical assistance and targeting of medical personnel; torture; and the use of Palestinians as human shields."

"The Israeli army killed more than 700 Palestinians, including some 150 children. Most were killed unlawfully — in reckless shooting, shelling and air strikes in civilian residential areas; in extrajudicial executions; and as a result of excessive use of force."

"Most members of the Israeli army and security forces continued to enjoy impunity. Investigations, prosecutions and convictions for human rights violations were rare. In the overwhelming majority of the thousands of cases of unlawful killings and other grave human rights violations committed by Israeli soldiers in the previous four years, no investigations were known to have been carried out."

Palestinian militants have utilized a tactic of blending among civilian populations, which exacerbates civilian casulaties in Israeli attacks. Israel claims not to target civilians.

Human shields

See also: Human rights in the Palestinian National Authority § Exposure of civilian targets to military action

In April 2004, Israeli soldiers used 13-year-old Muhammed Badwan as a human shield during a demonstration in the West Bank village of Biddu. The soldiers tied Badwan to the front windscreen of their jeep to discourage Palestinian demonstrators from throwing stones in their direction.

Such actions are condemned by human rights groups as violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 27 states: "civilians who find themselves in the hands of one of the parties are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect...They shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof." In Article 28 of the Convention, the official commentary refers to this practice, which was used during World War II, as "cruel and barbaric." Articles 31 and 51 also prohibit the use of physical or moral coercion on civilians or forcing them to carry out military tasks.

The Israeli High Court has issued an injunction against the practice. "You cannot exploit the civilian population for the army's military needs, and you cannot force them to collaborate with the army," said Aharon Barak, President of the Supreme Court of Israel.

Despite this ruling, on July 17, 2006 Israel Defense Force soldiers used six civilians, including two minors, as human shields during an incursion into Beit Hanun. Two boys, one aged 14 and the other 16, were ordered to lead soldiers into an area where a heavy firefight with Palestinian militants had just taken place.

Extrajudicial killings

See also IDF: Code of Conduct against terrorists.

On July, 2002 the Israeli Defense Forces carried out an air strike targeting Salah Shahade, the commander of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, in a densely populated residential area of Gaza City. The bombing resulted in the deaths of 15 persons, 9 of whom were children and the injury of 150 others. According to the Israeli Government, Shehade was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Israeli civilians, and earlier Israel asked the Palestinian Authority to arrest him, but no action was taken. Israel maintains that Shehade was in the process of preparing another large-scale attack inside Israel and thereby constituted a “ticking bomb”.

Israel continues to utilize the policy it refers to as targeted killings, arguing that Palestinian militants organize suicide bombings and other deadly attacks against Israeli civilians while hiding among civilians, and thwarting such attacks is sometimes the only practical way to save innocent lives. The IDF claims that it pursues such military operations only to prevent imminent terrorist attacks, not as revenge for past activities, and only when there is no practical way of foiling such attacks by other means such as arrest. Defenders of this practice point out that it is in accordance with the Fourth Geneva Convention (Part 3, Article 1, Section 28) which reads: “The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations,” and so they argue that international law explicitly gives Israel the right to conduct military operations against military targets under these circumstances.

Blockades

According to Amnesty International:

"Military checkpoints and blockades around Palestinian towns and villages hindered or prevented access to work, education and medical facilities and other crucial services. Restrictions on the movement of Palestinians remained the key cause of high rates of unemployment and poverty. More than half of the Palestinian population lived below the poverty line, with increasing numbers suffering from malnutrition and other health problems."

West Bank Wall

Main article: West Bank Wall

A controversial wall built by the Israeli Government around areas of occupied territory in the West Bank has drawn much controversy. The Israeli government is known to refer to the wall euphemistically as a "security barrier", though this wording is not used by the international community. The Wall was condemned by a UN Resolution "overwhelmingly" passed by UN General Assembly which also called for all construction to halt. The wall was also condemned by the International Court of Justice which stated: "Israel also has an obligation to put an end to the violation of its international obligations flowing from the construction of the wall in Occupied Palestinian Territories...reparation must, as far as possible, wipe out all the consequences of the illegal act.." During 2003, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled: "The route [of the West Bank Wall] disrupts the delicate balance between the obligation of the military commander to preserve security and his obligation to provide for the needs of the local inhabitants." Echoing this sentiment, Amnesty International issued in a statement in 2005 saying: "Israel built a fence/wall through the West Bank, confining Palestinians in isolated enclaves cut off from their land and essential services in nearby towns and villages."

Status of Women

Human Rights Organizations cite many instances of hardship placed on women in the Occupied Territories by the State of Israel. Amnesty International states: "In addition to the women killed or injured by Israeli forces, Palestinian women were particularly negatively affected by the demolition of their homes and restrictions on movement, which hampered their access to health services and education, and by the sharp increase in poverty."

This position of Amnesty International’s has been critcized by Professor Alan Dershowitz as both not having proper statistical basis and of being indicative of AI’s anti-Israel bias.

Administrative Detention

Administrative detention is a procedure under which prisoners are held without charge or trial. The sentences are authorized by an administrative order from the Israeli Ministry of Defence or Israeli military commanders. Amnesty International believes that the practice breaches Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which "makes clear that no-one should be subjected to arbitrary detention and that deprivation of liberty must be based on grounds and procedures established by law". Amnesty International is also concerned that prisoners of conscience are being "held solely for the non-violent exercise of their right to freedom of expression and association". According to B'Tselem there are currently 645 Palestinians being under administrative detention by the Israel Prisons Service and 105 by the IDF. Most are kept in the West Bank in Ofer Military Camp or in the Ansar 3/Ketziot Military Camp in the Negev desert.

Controversy: Anti-Israel bias by human rights organizations

United Nations

Main article: Israel and the United Nations § Anti-Israel bias

There are many who claim that the United Nations has a history of negative focus on Israel that is disproportional in respect to other members, including actions and statements of the UN Commission on Human Rights. Some examples of this bias include that in 2005 the Commission adopted four resolutions against Israel, equaling the combined total of resolutions against all other states in the world. Belarus, Cuba, Myanmar, and North Korea were the subject of one resolution each. In addition, in 2004-2005 alone the U.N. General Assembly passed nineteen resolutions concerning Israel, while not passing any resolution concerning Sudan, which at the time was facing a huge humanitarian crisis in the Darfur region.

In 2006, the UN General Assembly voted to replace UNCHR with the UN Human Rights Council.

Amnesty International

Main article: Amnesty International § Alleged Selection Bias

Amnesty International has been accused of having a double standard when it comes to its assessment of Israel.

Sudan

In 2004, the NGO Monitor, a program of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, released a study comparing Amnesty International's response to the twenty years of ethnic, religious and racial violence in Sudan in which (at that time) 2,000,000 people were killed and 4,000,000 people displaced, to their treatment of Israel. When NGO Monitor focused on 2001, they found that Amnesty International issued seven reports on Sudan, as opposed to 39 reports on Israel. They further called attention to the difference in both scale and intensity: “While ignoring the large-scale and systematic bombing and destruction of Sudanese villages, AI issued numerous condemnations of the razing of Palestinian houses, most of which were used as sniper nests or belonged to terrorists. Although failing to decry the slaughter of thousands of civilians by Sudanese government and allied troops, AI managed to criticize Israel’s ‘assassinations’ of active terrorist leaders.”

Expanding their investigation to include the years 2000–2003, they found the imbalance in issued reports to be 52 reports on Sudan and 192 reports on Israel. They call “this lack of balance and objectivity and apparent political bias is entirely inconsistent with AI's official stated mission.”

In 2004, Professor Don Habibi of the University of North Carolina at Wilmington lamented the limited reports on Sudan and Darfur, in contrast to reports on Israel. He criticizes Amnesty International, among others, for their “obsession” with Israel, to the exclusion of other human rights violators. Habibi wrote:

This obsession would make sense if Israel was among the worst human rights offenders in the world. But by any objective measure this is not the case. Even with the harshest interpretation of Israeli’s policies, which takes no account of cause and effect, and Israel’s predicament of facing existential war, there can be no comparison to the civil wars in Sudan, Algeria, or Congo. Like the UN, the policies of AI and HRW have more to do with politics than human rights.

— Human Rights NGOs and the Neglect of Sudan, Don Habibi

Palestinian violence against women

American legal academic, Professor Alan Dershowitz, is also critical of Amnesty International's perceived bias. Dershowitz analyzed an AI report on violence, rape, and murder perpetrated against Palestinian women by Palestinian men in the West Bank and Gaza which placed blame on Israel. Dershowitz points out that AI ranks the "escalation of the conflict” and “Israel’s policies” higher than the “norms, traditions and laws which treat women as unequal”, implying Israel is more to blame than the Palestinian perpetrators. Dershowitz claims that when he asked Donatella Rovera, AI’s researcher on Israel and the Occupied Territories, for sources or statistical data that supported the report’s claims, he was refused anything other than a suggestion to Google "pretty much all the NGOs” in the region. He concluded that AI's excuses show that it "places its own political biases ahead of the interests of the female victims.”

See also

• Human rights in the Palestinian National Authority
• Human rights in Egypt
• Human rights in Syria
• Human rights in Jordan