eCommerce

International protection.. How is it requested and from whom?

Every day, the Israeli authorities’ crimes and violations against Palestinians in general, and Jerusalemites in particular, continue. Continuous violations that are almost no longer stopped. With the continuation of these violations of international law and the rights of Palestinians, official and semi-official Palestinian figures appear on us almost daily, calling, through local media, or through social media, for international protection for Jerusalemites against Israeli violations, but this protection never comes. Why? ?

First of all, it is important to note that international protection is not requested through press conferences or meetings in the media or through “posts” in social media, nor is it requested by any of the other methods they use.

International legal scholars differed in defining the term international protection. It is noted that all the conventions and treaties that mentioned the term international protection did not attempt to define it and did not provide a definition for it, but rather mentioned a set of procedures by which states are bound, whether this obligation is legal or moral.

The concept of international protection

The idea or term of international protection is relatively recent. Its first appearance was aimed at protecting religious minorities in the European Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. Later, the international system sought to establish a specific system for the protection of political rights and minority rights within states so that these rights were no longer an internal matter subject to internal political developments to protect political rights within states, as limited Whoever made these rights an internal matter monopolized by states.

International legal scholars differed in defining the term international protection. It is noted that all the conventions and treaties that mentioned the term international protection did not attempt to define it and did not provide a definition for it, but rather mentioned a set of procedures by which states are bound, whether this obligation is legal or moral. With time, and after the concept of international law moved from the law of a group / group of states to a law that applies to the entire international community (according to the principle of universality), the concept of international protection has become a well-established reality on the ground.

Nowhere in the world is this more evident than in the circumstances surrounding the dispute over Palestinian ownership of the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of Jerusalem. After being expelled from their homes with the establishment of Israel in 1948 and prevented from reclaiming their original homes, they are on the verge of becoming refugees again on the pretext that the homes they have lived in for decades are legally owned by settlers, according to the Israeli justice system.

The Scientific Dictionary of Humanitarian Law defines international protection as “protection means the acknowledgment that individuals have rights, and that the authorities who exercise authority over them have obligations, and it means the defense of the legal existence of individuals, in addition to their physical existence. Therefore, the idea of ​​protection reflects all the physical measures that enable individuals at risk to The enjoyment of the rights and assistance provided for in international agreements, and in any case, relief organizations must enshrine these laws in a concrete manner.”

The importance of international protection

With the beginning of the second half of the twentieth century, the interest in international relations shifted from the framework of states and their obligations and rights to individuals and their rights. And concern for the rights of individuals began to expand little by little, starting with their right to life and the prevention of racial discrimination, to freedom of thought, belief and work.

In many cases – and as we clearly see from the Palestinian-Israeli case – talking about the rights of individuals mentioned in the provisions of laws and constitutions did not go beyond the formal slogans of the authorities on the ground. In general, the relationship between individuals and the authorities is not balanced, as individuals are the weak side in front of the authorities. Here, the need for international protection is evident in the face of the imbalance of power at the internal level. This balance of power – as we all know – is not only lacking in the case of Jerusalemites before the Israeli occupation authorities, but the authorities themselves use all their power to harm the Palestinians, by emphasizing the right of residence and decisions to demolish homes and evictions.

In 2005 the United Nations General Assembly adopted the principle of the responsibility to protect, which emphasized the responsibility of the broader international community to take “timely and decisive” measures to protect civilians at risk when it was determined that their state, which had the primary responsibility to protect its own citizens, had “manifestly failed” to perform. her duty. Appropriate and proportionate coercive measures, appropriately authorized by the United Nations, can then be taken as a last resort.

Nowhere in the world is this more evident than in the circumstances surrounding the dispute over Palestinian ownership of the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of Jerusalem. After being expelled from their homes with the establishment of Israel in 1948 and prevented from reclaiming their original homes, they are on the verge of becoming refugees again on the pretext that the homes they have lived in for decades are legally owned by settlers, according to the Israeli justice system.

This means that in the normal situation, even when individuals are citizens of their own state but that state flagrantly violates their rights, the international community has a duty to intervene to protect these individuals. This protection applies to the case of Jerusalem, specifically when these individuals are nothing more than “residents” of the state.

How does international law protect human rights?

International human rights law sets out the obligations that states are bound to respect. By acceding to international treaties, states assume obligations and duties by ratifying international human rights treaties, and governments undertake to put in place domestic measures and legislation that comply with their treaty obligations and duties. Therefore, the domestic legal system provides the basic legal protection for human rights guaranteed under international law. When domestic legal procedures fail to address human rights violations, individual and collective complaint mechanisms and procedures are in place at the regional and international levels to help ensure that international human rights standards are respected, implemented and enforced at the local level.

Accordingly, the Charter of the United Nations set “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women, and of nations large and small, as one of the objectives of the world organization. Further conditions are included in the text of the Charter itself. Article 1 states (3) The United Nations shall be charged with promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.

The last UN institution to be mentioned in relation to the protection of human rights is the Security Council. Although it was not intended to act as a guarantor of these rights, the concept of the responsibility to protect emphasized the ability and authority of the Security Council to intervene in situations in which the population of a State had suffered, or were under such severe threat, from attacks on their dignity and rights. Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the Security Council is given far-reaching powers to take necessary corrective action. Unfortunately, the veto power of countries that hold a permanent seat on this council often prevents that body from taking such action.

International protection and the Palestinians

We should all know that international protection is not sought through the media nor is it sought en masse in the ways we see today. Unfortunately, what is happening is a “theatrical” request for international protection for the Jerusalemites in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood or elsewhere.

Some human rights treaties provide for complaints procedures. Natural persons may address expert bodies by individual correspondence. The States Parties may also be empowered to submit inter-state communications. Under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, individual communication has acquired an important role. The Commission on Human Rights has already become a global human rights court. Its jurisprudence, composed of non-binding opinions, is also referred to by regional human rights courts. However, interstate complaints procedure has so far been less successful. Generally speaking, governments refrain from taking formal action against one of their sovereign partners.

International protection is requested individually, so that the person concerned submits an application to the International Criminal Court (this is in the Palestinian case) asking the court to protect him and his family members and property and put himself under its full protection.

The role of the official authorities, and those who speak and demand protection in the media, comes first: directing the population to go in this direction, second: communicating with international lawyers, and coordinating between them and the population in order to appoint these lawyers to go to the court to request protection, and third: to work effectively to protect the population from any Israel’s retaliatory reaction to this move.

Unfortunately, on the ground, we only see calls through the local media for the International Criminal Court to intervene, as the latter and its Prosecutor are following these stations. These media trends avoid any actual contact with legal specialists, and consider that directing the population to seek protection through these experts is a matter of the population, and they alone decide whether to go or not.

The residents of Sheikh Jarrah, Wadi Yasoul and Batn al-Hawa, and thousands of other residents of Jerusalem, are groaning under the Israeli strikes, no one helps them, nor does field visits or press conferences help them. International protection is an important topic, but continuing to talk about it in the media without starting its implementation will cause the Jerusalemites to lose their faith in it, just as they lost their faith in international law due to its frequent mention in the media without any change on the ground.

Israel was the first country created by a United Nations resolution (Partition Resolution). Its refusal to abide by the terms of that resolution undermines its legitimacy. More importantly, the United Nations is directly responsible for the suffering and dispossession of the victims of this resolution. Second, even from an Israeli perspective, the application of the responsibility to protect to Palestine should be desirable. The rationale for the Jewish state was to provide refuge to a class of people who had suffered persecution and hostility. It would be paradoxical for the state, which is supposed to protect one group from oppression, to indulge itself in the oppression of others.



Reference-www.aljazeera.net

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.