Tous les articles
|The NGO Front in the Gaza War: Lawfare Against Israel|
[*] Voir, par exemple : Eyal Weizman, "Offensive par le Droit à Gaza".
Source : NGO Monitor
As part of the political war during
This NGO Monitor Report presents Frequently Asked Questions regarding NGO lawfare on
See NGO Monitor’s monograph, NGO "Lawfare": Exploitation of Courts in the Arab-Israeli Conflict and "Lawfare Against Israel" for more information on this issue.
Q: What is lawfare?
A: Lawfare is the exploitation of courts in democratic countries in order to harass Israeli officials with civil lawsuits and criminal investigations using allegations of "war crimes," "crimes against humanity," and other alleged violations of international law. While these cases claim to be about obtaining "justice" for Palestinian victims, they are part of the larger political war.
Q: When did NGOs start using lawfare as a weapon in the Arab-Israeli conflict?
A: The tactic of lawfare against
Q: Where are lawfare cases initiated?
A: NGOs exploit universal jurisdiction statutes in
Q: Who funds these NGOs?
A: These organizations are funded by the EU, European governments (Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark), and prominent foundations such as the New Israel Fund, the Ford Foundation and the Open Society Institute.
Q: What are the positions of NGO superpowers such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch?
A: These NGOs support lawfare against Israel by providing publicity, organizing demonstrations, and issuing reports crafted as legal briefs to coincide with court hearings.
Q: How many lawfare cases have been filed against Israelis?
A: Since the adoption of the lawfare strategy, at least ten cases have been filed against Israelis in
Q: Why don’t NGOs bring cases against
Q: What NGOs have been issuing calls for lawfare since the start of the
A: PCHR is preparing for lawsuits to be filed abroad and appears to be focusing on filing a case for the killing of Nizar Rayan, one of the leading architects of Hamas atrocities and who sent his son on a suicide bombing mission in 2001. An Indian newspaper reported on January 25, that PCHR is preparing cases in six countries, targeting 87 Israelis for harassment. In the article, PCHR’s Director claims that "dozens of arrest warrants have already been issued." Other NGOs calling for lawfare in the wake of the Gaza war include the Alternative
Q: Are Israeli NGOs such as B’Tselem involved in lawfare?
A: NIF- and EU- funded Israeli NGOs such as B’Tselem, Gisha, Yesh Din, Mossawa, and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel are not at this stage overtly calling for lawfare, but have issued tens of statements leveling charges against Israel such as collective punishment, "wanton" use of force, "deliberate" and "unprecedented" harm to civilians, "blatant violation of the laws of warfare," and "suspicion" of "war crimes." B’Tselem even claimed that "it is hard to think of a clear military advantage which could be accomplished" by the killing of Rayan. These one-sided statements, the distortions of international law, and the emotive "testimonies" collected by these organizations contribute to hostility towards
Q: What is the Israeli government doing to combat lawfare?
A: The Israeli government is taking the threat of lawfare seriously. The IDF has established a team of legal and military experts to collect evidence which can be used to exonerate its officials. It has appointed an inter-ministerial team, headed by Justice Minister Prof. Daniel Friedman to defend any Israeli subject to suit. The army is also protecting the identities of battalion and brigade commanders who participated in the war. However, the government is largely reactive and has not addressed the core role of NGOs and their funders.
Q: Is there merit to the NGO claims against
A: The NGOs calling for lawfare base their allegations on faulty legal premises, factual distortions, and unreliable "eyewitness" testimony. These NGOs do not possess the military or other factual information necessary to level their charges. Many NGOs claim
These NGOs also distort international law by claiming
Many NGOs claim to have greater military knowledge than the IDF, questioning the military advantage of various targets. In fact, former British army colonel Richard Kemp noted on the BBC that there has been "no time in the history of warfare when an army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and the deaths of innocent people than the [Israel Defense forces did in
Q: Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch claim that their researchers in
A: No. NGOs researchers are not trained professionals in evidence or forensic collection. These NGOs rarely name their researchers, specify the collection methodology, or identify witnesses. There is no way of ensuring that this "evidence" is preserved according to forensic standards or that NGO researchers have maintained a recognizable chain of custody. Due to the absence of any standards or publication of their methods, NGO "evidence" is impossible to corroborate or verify. The New York-based NGO Human Rights First, has criticized NGO involvement as actually being harmful to a criminal investigation because, "[m]ost NGOs do not employ trained criminal investigators" and this "untrained collection of physical or forensic evidence" can "limit its value" before a court.
Q: Have these same NGOs called for lawfare against
A: No. In contrast to the many appeals for lawfare against
For Further Background
"Lawfare," David B. Rivkin and Lee A. Casey, The Wall Street Journal,
Israel, Gaza, and International Law, Alan Dershowitz, The
"Amnesty International’s anti-Israel stance undermines human rights and international law," Prof. Avi Bell, Jurist Hotline Blog,
"International Law and the fighting in Gaza," Justice Reid Weiner and Avi Bell, MESI,
© NGO Monitor
Mis en ligne le 24 mars 2009, par