ATC170503: Report of the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation on the hearing of a petition by the National Coalition for Palestine (NC4P) pledging solidarity with the people of Palestine, dated 3 May 2017

International Relations

Report of the Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation on the hearing of a petition by the National Coalition for Palestine (NC4P) pledging solidarity with the people of Palestine, dated 3 May 2017
 

1. Background

 

The Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation (the Committee), the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry, the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources and the Portfolio Committee on Economic Development held a hearing on a petition by the National Coalition for Palestine (NC4P) pledging solidarity with the people of Palestine at Parliament on 23 November 2016.

 

1. The guiding mandate

 

Sections 56(d) and 69(d) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996, provides for the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces to receive petitions, representations or submissions from any interested persons or institutions. The National Assembly requires that a petition be formally presented by a Member of Parliament (MP), for consideration. Therefore the petition must be supported by an MP.

 

According to the Rules of the National Assembly, Rule 167(b) thereto provides that for the purposes of performing its functions, a committee may receive petitions, representations or submissions from interested persons or institutions. Furthermore, Rule 167(c) goes on to provide that the committee may permit oral evidence on petitions, representations, submissions, and any other matter before the committee. Submission of petitions is therefore one way that Parliament promotes and support public participation and public involvement in the work of the institution.

 

1. The Petition

 

The petition by the National Coalition for Palestine (NC4P) was accordingly received by Hon M Mandela on 9 August 2014. It was subsequently referred to Portfolio Committees on International Relations and Cooperation, Trade and Industry, Minerals, Economic Development, Defence and Military Veterans and Joint Standing Committee on Defence.

 

The Petition submitted by the NC4P noted that the British Mandate over Palestine had a primary objective the implementation of the Balfour Declaration issues by the British Government in 1917, for the establishment in Palestine of a national home for Jewish People.

 

The United Nations (UN) Resolution 181(ii) of 1947 proposed the partitioning of Palestine into two independent states. This partition plan allocated 56.47 per cent of the land to the 33 per cent of the Jewish Population who owned no more than 7 per cent of the land. The six day war of June 1967 saw Israel occupying additional territory in Palestine.

 

On 22 November 1967, the Security Council called on Israel to withdraw from territories occupied after the 1967 war. Resolution 242 of 22 November 1967, adopted unanimously, stated “and for the termination of claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace with secure and recognised boundaries free from threats and acts of force”.

 

The right of return by the Palestinian refugees must be accepted by Israel in accordance with the General Assembly Resolution 194 of 1948.

 

The fourth Geneva Convention 1949, Article 49, states that the occupying power shall not depart or transfer parts of its civilian population into the territory it occupies.

 

Resolution 465 of 1980, determined that the Israeli policy of settlements in the occupied territories was illegal.

 

The petition further noted that the NC4P assert the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, in particular their right to self-determination without external interference and the right to national sovereignty with independence.

 

Since the 1948’s occupation of Palestine by Israel forces, the people of Palestine have been exposed to an ongoing process of displacement, subjected to status of permanent refugees (the state of temporality, emergency and hopelessness), and subjected to ongoing oppression. The assault on Palestine civilians, the demolitions of homes, municipal infrastructure and hospitals represents the intent of Israeli authorities to permanently uproot Palestinians from Palestine.

 

Palestinians are scattered in seven localities, Israel, the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and the general diaspora.  The NC4P further noted that Palestinians in Israel are subjected to acute discrimination and racism in all their forms of life. Palestinians of the West Bank face oppression and humiliation from the illegal settlers, and are harassed by Israeli forces in pursuance of their policy to grab more land. Palestinians in Gaza Strip have been exposed to four wars in the last ten years. In the four wars, 2617 civilians have been killed (per 22 July 2014 reports).

 

In terms of the population size of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, if comparison was made to South Africa (47million) it would equate to 72,350 thousand people in South Africa, murdered by a foreign colonial power.

 

Palestinians in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon are prohibited by the Israelis to return to Palestine, this constitute 55 per cent of the population. The refugees in these countries have been massacred on numerous occasions, Sabra, Shantilla in Lebanon, Jerash in Jordan, and in Syria, the have remained for four months under siege in the Yamulk refugee camps.

 

Currently, the people of the Gaza Strip are facing a humanitarian disaster. Day after day the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) is disseminating terror among civilians, shelling the Gaza Strip indiscriminately, destroying municipal infrastructure, and demolishing houses, shelling schools and media centres. Israel has wilfully caused serious harm and injury to the people of Gaza in the 29 days of Israeli aggression:

 

NC4P presented the following statistics for the casualties of war that happened between the periods 8 July-5 August 2014:

 

• 1868 Palestinians killed
• 9567 Palestinians injured
• 485 000 people displaced
• 5510 demolished structures
• 4674 Partially demolished structures
• 30920 houses damaged
• 141 schools damaged
• 17 hospitals 7 PHC clinics were damaged
• 10 hospitals and 44 primary health clinics and 2 churches were closed
• 44 mosques cannot be used 140 partially damaged
• 10 Muslim cemeteries damaged
• 1 Christian cemetery damaged.

 

The statistics are evidence of the prohibitive and excessive use of force and the extensive destruction of property. This also constitute collective punishment meted out to the people of Gaza. This collective punishment of the people of Palestine – a longstanding practice of the Israeli government – is illegal, inhumane and absolutely unacceptable.

 

The Israeli offensive has deepened the severe humanitarian crisis and suffering of the people of Gaza, with no intention by them of contributing to a lasting peaceful solution. Since the siege on Gaza, the social and economic situation in the Gaza Strip is at its worst in 40 years.

 

Eighty (80) per cent of Gaza’s 1,8million people are literary put on a diet by Israel as they depend on International food aid and suffer with unemployment of 40 per cent or more. Spare parts for hospitals and water purification cannot be imported and hospitals cannot keep lifesaving equipment working.

 

The NC4P noted that the people of South Africa suffered oppression, racism and neo- colonialism and are committed to the achievement of freedom and justice in Palestine. That the values entrenched in the South African Constitution 1996 commits in its founding principles to the universal values of human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms.

 

The National Coalition for Palestine, on behalf of the thousands who signed the petition, pledge their solidarity with the people of Palestine and condemn the current genocide on the people of Gaza by the Apartheid Israeli regime, respectively yet firmly demand that Parliament debate the plight of the people of Palestine as a matter of national importance in the National Assembly and resolve to:

 

• Condemn the attacks on and killing of innocent people and the destruction of the property including health facilities.
• Terminate all diplomatic relations with the state of Israel, in particular to recall the South African Ambassador to Israel and to ask Arthur Lenk, Israel’s Ambassador to Pretoria to return to where he comes from.
• Enact legislation to impose comprehensive economic sanctions against Israel.
• Through legislation and monitoring ensure that there is an immediate end to all South Africa’s military agreements or sales at a government to government level, and by the private sector.
• Oversee the investigations and prosecutions of those South Africans who have been charged for serving in the Israeli Defence Force in contravention of Foreign Military Assistance Act.
• Draft legislation to exclude South African corporations from doing business with the state, if they or the International corporations that they are part of are found to be complicit in contravening human rights, for example Cape Gate and G4S.
• Develop policy to create capacity for South African diamonds to be polished in South Africa, thereby ensuring that diamonds originating in South Africa are not polished in Israel and through the Kimberly process classify all Israeli cut diamonds as blood diamonds.
• Raise the contraventions of the international treaties by Israel at the International Parliamentary Union, Commonwealth Parliamentary Union and the Pan African Parliament and urge these Parliaments to make similar measures.
• Urge the executive to raise the matter of the contraventions of international treaties with the United Nations and ensure that all South Africans assisting the IDF are charged by the International Criminal Court.

 

The NC4P further recognises that the gap between the demands of civil society and the ruling party proclamations, and government actions and what it appears to be prepared to do on the other, is far too wide.

 

The NC4P noted that they expect an elected government to listen to the voice of the people; and expect a government whose members are deployed to their positions by a specific party to heed the voice of the party; not lobbies for a foreign government even where these lobbies masquerade as the representatives of a specific religions group.

 

 

1. Purpose of the hearing

 

The purpose of the hearing was to afford the National Coalition for Palestine (NC4P) the opportunity to make the first hand oral submission to the Committee, on the petition.

 

1. Committee Members and officials

 

The following Members attended the hearing on the petition.

 

• Hon MSA Masango (Co-Chair)
• Hon JL Fubbs (Co-Chair)
• Hon BA Radebe (ANC)
• Hon ZMD Mandela (ANC)
• Hon L Mpumlwana (ANC)
• Hon P Mantashe (ANC)
• Hon A Williams (ANC)
• Hon N Koornhof (ANC)
• Hon E Mackue (ANC)
• Hon S Mokgalapa (DA)
• Hon S Kalyan (DA)
• Hon D MacPherson (DA)
• Hon D Bergman (DA)
• Hon N Paulsen (EFF)
• Hon C Dudley (ACDP).

 

The Committee Members present at the hearing on the petition were supported by the following Committee officials:

 

• Ms L Mosala (Committee Content Advisor)
• Mr L Sigwela (Committee Secretary)
• Mr D Madlala (Committee Researcher)
• Ms N Mooi (Committee Assistant)
• Ms A Macanda (Executive Secretary)

 

1. The NC4P was represented by the following members:

 

• Rev Edwin Arrison, Chairperson of the NC4P
• Mr Muhamad Desai, National Committee member of the Young Communist League
• Ms R King, member of South Africa Jews for a Free Palestine
• Mr Abdul Khaliq Allie, First Deputy President of the Muslim Judicial Council
• Mr B Hanekom, member of the ANC Youth League.

 

1. Submissions by the National Coalition for Palestine (NC4P)

 

The Reverend Edwin Arrison, as the leader of the delegation before the Committee, said that on 9 August 2014 there had been a peaceful march attended by over 200 000 people, according to media reports, in which a petition on Palestine had been handed over to Parliament. He said a medical doctor in Palestine on that day reported that the march, which was broadcast live on television in a Palestinian hospital, had brought hope to a people in despair.

 

It was said that South Africa was seen by Palestinians as a place of hope, because it was a place where a political conflict had been peacefully resolved. He said the NC4P were not only in solidarity with Palestinian people, they were rather united with them. In the same vein, he quoted former President Nelson Mandela as saying “South Africa cannot be free until Palestine is free”. Reference was made to the fact that the UN National Day for Palestine is celebrated annually on the 29 November. It was the delegation’s desire that Parliament would make a declaration in support of Palestine on the 29th November 2016.

 

In addition, the Committees were informed of the importance of the year 2017, as it would be the centenary of the Balfour Declaration which led to the loss of Palestinian land to Israeli settlers. It was further reported that Pope Francis had declared two Palestinians as saints in the past two years and there were agreements signed between the Vatican and Palestine.

 

For the NC4P, there was always hope for change in a non-violent way using sanctions, disinvestment, boycotts and marches and a strong stand by the international community. Rev Arrison said he had no respect for the current peace process because it was a false peace where land was being grabbed by Israel. In the delegation’s view, there was a need for a just peace process.

 

Mr Muhamad Desai, said the motivation for the march and the petition was the savage attacks by Israel on Palestinians, especially children, which had mobilised people to say the killings were unacceptable. The NC4P was in Parliament to find solutions where Parliament could support this by addressing the violations of international human rights law. The petition was also calling for a fact finding mission to Palestine; that Parliament have a debate on Palestine on 29 November, the UN Palestine Day. It was further calling for boycotts, economic sanctions and divestment against Israel.

 

The call for boycotts was to put pressure on the Israeli government to arrive at a just solution. It called for an immediate end to military agreements between the government and Israel; it was asking Parliament to take a stand against illegal Israeli settlements. The building of settlements was seen as a violation of international law, a position to which the European Union (EU) and the United Nations had all agreed to. The petition also called for South Africans serving in the Israeli Defence Force without permission, to be prosecuted under South African legislation. It also called for South African companies to be excluded from doing business with the state if the companies were found to be complicit in the Israeli human rights violations.

 

It was further mentioned that South African church activists were being denied entry into Palestine and South Africa should investigate why this was so. It was further noted that the Israeli government had indicated that it would embark on a programme of targeted civil assassinations of people involved in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement in South Africa. Mr Desai however acknowledge that these were not part of the original petition.

 

Ms Rina King, said a Bedouin village had been threatened with demolition for the development of a Jewish settlement and that South African Jews could be involved in the demolition. She cautioned that if South Africa did not take a stance against the settlements it could be construed as South Africa’s consent.

 

Mr Abdul Khaliq Allie, noted that the Palestine issue was similar to the South African case where land and rights had been stolen and dignity had been violated. He said Gaza was in effect the largest open air prison and that what Palestinians experienced was worse than what black South Africans had experienced under Apartheid.

 

Mr Bram Hanekom said 200 000 people had taken a principled stance when they had marched on Parliament; and that it was time that political parties took a stance. He noted with concern that the City of Johannesburg was already working to reverse the twinning agreement between a Palestinian town of Ramallah and Johannesburg.

 

1. Observations and findings by the Committee

 

It was noted that there should be peace in the region but that the precursor to peace was justice. It was believed that the petition was important and that where one stands regarding the Palestinian question was an indicator of one’s morality. It was said any matters related to contravention of legislation on military service in a foreign country should be followed to the letter.

 

There was a view that it was correct to use sanctions. Clarity was sought if the NC4P knew of any South African soldiers in the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) and could the NC4P assist with providing a list of business people doing business with the Israeli state.

 

It was noted that all ANC formations and the Palestinians themselves should speak as one voice. The ANC had passed a resolution on the reconstruction of Palestine in support of the Palestinian struggle and said the ANC would support the sanctions campaign.

 

There was a view that the only people who could resolve the Palestinian issue were Palestinians and the Israelis themselves. It was said that the threats against the boycott movement activists should be condemned and the undermining of the BDS movement should not be allowed to happen. It was said that one should not forget the people killed and displaced as well as the illegal occupations.

 

It was proposed that the Committee accept the parts that Parliament could do and put pressure on the Executive to implement the other parts of the petition.

 

There was a view that the UN Palestine Day, on 29 November, be commemorated by Parliament. It was said the Palestinian issue was not a Muslim/Jewish issue; it was a gross human rights violation.

 

It was envisaged parliamentary debate could happen, however Parliament’s program was very full at the end of the year, however did not foresee any problems to it becoming an annual event.

 

It was noted that it was important for South Africa to remain neutral in the Palestine-Israeli conflict so that it is a trusted mediator. It was desired that South Africa should assist efforts to bring the parties in conflict to the negotiation table.

 

A question was asked on how would disinvestment from Israel benefit South Africa. There was a view that some Palestinians did not want sanctions.

 

It was noted that the attacks and loss of life against the people of Palestine, especially the children had to be condemned. A mechanism has to be created so that South Africans doing military service in the IDF could be brought forward and prosecuted.

 

It was noted that points 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 of the petition were the preserve of the Executive; and that point 1.8 could be brought forward by Parliament at the next Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA) conference.

 

It was noted that the two-state solution remained the official position of South Africa and the UN, but what was at issue was the settlements, especially in East Jerusalem. This was a matter for a different group to consider. The executive arm of government would not enforce sanctions on Israel because it was involved in the mediation process. South Africa did not want to withdraw the South African ambassador or expel the Israeli Ambassador because it would have no impact if only South Africa did it. The NC4P could meet with ministerial clusters for clarification on whether this was correct or not.

 

Parliament should support the South African Envoys to the Middle East in their work to extend a hand towards a lasting political solution between Palestine and Israel. Palestinians are experiencing injustices in the hands of Israeli soldiers on a daily basis, and children suffer the most.

 

1. Responses

 

Rev Arrison said that those that had been part of the anti-apartheid struggle felt a sense of déjà vu to some of the arguments that had been raised against the petition. The NC4P saw the Palestine issue in the context of a framework for justice, liberation and peace. It was not seen in terms of trade and lost business opportunities, or in terms of it being anti-Semitic. The NC4P interventions were to attain freedom and justice for all people, for the oppressed and the oppressor. There was a need to dig into South Africa’s history and give Palestinians hope through the South African experience.

 

He said the NC4P’s task was to allow space for everyone to give their perspective. On the question of the two-state solution, he said it was not a question of one, two or three states, it was about a solution derived by the Palestinians and Israelis.

 

He pointed out that it was not part of the NC4P’s language to be neutral. The NC4P’s language was justice and it would actively seek solutions to the endless suffering Palestinians were experiencing. The current peace process was a false peace. There was contact between NC4P with Palestinians on a daily basis. Israel was stopping christians on official church business from entering Palestine.

 

Mr Desai explained that the call for boycotts and sanctions was the official position of the Palestine Authority. In 2005 Palestine had called for a boycott and divestment. Progressive Israelis, equivalent to people like Beyers Naude in South Africa, were calling for a boycott and embassies were calling for a boycott. The NC4P was not asking for a political position to be taken; it was asking that there be agreement with international law.

 

On the Israelis offering African countries expertise, this was an attempt to bribe or buy them off through providing loans, agricultural assistance and water schemes. He congratulated the government on signing MOUs on water technology with Iran and Japan. He noted that this showed that government did not need to take assistance from oppressors.

 

He supported that Palestinians and Israelis work out their own solution but Israel had to be brought to the negotiating table through boycotts and sanctions just as in the case of South Africa during apartheid.

 

He further advised that any fact finding/investigative mission by Parliament had to include a visit to the Gaza Strip and it be under the auspices of the World Council of Churches (WCC), a neutral body. He further said there appeared to be consensus amongst the parliamentarians on the UN Day of solidarity with Palestine and that the South African government policy should have as its cornerstone the condemnation of illegal Israeli settlements in Palestine.

 

Ms King explained that to criticise Israel was not being anti-Semitic. Israel tended to conflate the two ideas. Israel was taking more and more land and outside pressure was required to control their activities. Jewish organisations and groups were meeting and were against Israeli policies.

 

Mr Hanekom, noted that it was encouraging that voices other than the Jewish Board of Deputes were being heard. He elaborated that the broad coalition was definitely anti-Zionist and not anti-Semitic. Prior to 1945, Israel was built on the basis of land stolen from the Palestinians and they were now putting up settlements in Palestinian territory in violation of the two-state solution. The House was urged to approach the Palestinian question on the basis that there was a perpetrator and a victim.

 

Rev Arrison said the NC4P would supply information on South Africans becoming members of the IDF and thanked the joint committees for their interest in the petition.

 

The National Coalition for Palestine was commended for having representation and a membership from various sectors of society. It was agreed that loss of life should be condemned in the strongest terms possible. The Executive would be advised on the issues that affect them for their appropriate responses. It was explained that trade with Israel is closely monitored. Government has since implemented a policy that Palestinian products should be labelled as such, not be claimed to be from Israel. Parliament could also advocate the issues on the issues of the Middle East crisis in the Parliamentary forums that it participates in. It was stressed that Palestinians should be consulted in all the activities carried out in their name or on their behalf.

 

 

1. Recommendations

 

Having considered the petition, the committee makes the following recommendations, that:

 

• National Assembly confirm that Palestinians deserve their right to a free Palestine, with borders as designated in 1967.
• National Assembly support the position of government on a two-state solution.
• National Assembly support the peace process in the Israel-Palestine conflict, both sides should be dedicated and not derail the negotiations.
• National Assembly call upon Israel to stop Israel settlements in Palestinian land, for the true realisation of the two-state solution.
• National Assembly note that the United Nations Security Council has adopted resolution 2334 (2016). Parliament is in support of this resolution in which the Security Council reaffirmed that Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognised borders.
• There should be a debate in the National Assembly in support of a lasting resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

 

Report to be considered.