Turkel Commission

The Turkel Commission, Part 2 — new recommendations to improve Israel's military investigations

International law professor Aeyal Gross has written in Haaretz that, in its Part 2 report which was presented to Israel’s Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu on Wednesday, “The Turkel committee made 18 recommendations in an effort to improve the mechanisms through which investigations of IDF conduct are carried out. In principle, the committee noted, existing procedure complies with the requirements of international law, although there are certain areas in which there is room for improvement, including actual change in policy”.

That was an understatement. But, it was just the beginning. Aeyal Gross added that “The recommendations are designed to improve investigation procedures in the future, the committee said, and should not be construed as suggesting that the manner in which investigations have been carried out up to now, including the IDF’s investigation of the flotilla incident, was flawed. On the positive side, among the newly released recommendations were those relating to the need to explicitly integrate into Israeli law the rules regarding war crimes and to pass a law that imposes responsibility on IDF commanders and their civilian superiors for violations committed by those who report to them. That responsibility arises when the commanders or their superiors do not take reasonable steps to prevent those violations or do not act to bring those who committed such acts to justice. Those two recommendations are consistent with what international law requires”. This is published here.

Continue reading The Turkel Commission, Part 2 — new recommendations to improve Israel's military investigations

Israeli lawyer Michael Sfard tells Turkel Commission that Israel must establish extra-military mechanism to investigate observance of international law

Israeli lawyer Michael Sfard (Yesh Din) told the Turkel Commission at a hearing in Jerusalem today that “conducting an investigation is not tantamount to punishment”.

The Turkel Commission is investigating the “maritime incident” of 31 May 2010, when Israeli Naval commandos intercepted Freedom Flotilla heading to the Gaza Strip and boarded the largest ship in the flotilla, the Mavi Marmara, killing eight men (one a 19-year-old Turkish-American high school student) in the process.

Sfard, who is among other things the legal adviser for Yesh Din, advised the Turkel Commission that Israel must establish an extra-military mechanism to verify if the IDF + its advisers follow international law.

It was the second time, in months of intermittant hearings, that Israeli human rights organizations have addressed the panel.

The Turkel Commission was expected to conclude its work in November 2010, but it only issued the first part of its report on 23 January, which can be read online here.

Arguments made in Sfard’s testimony to the Turkel Commission, according to an English-language summary, state that:
“Since the Al-Aqsa Intifada, a Military Police Criminal Investigation Division (MPCID) investigation is not opened in every case in which a Palestinian civilian is injured during military operations in the occupied territories, but rather is permitted to conduct a ‘command inquiry’ after which a decision will be made regarding whether to open an investigation.

Yesh Din’s Position is that:
1. A command inquiry, as the name suggests, is intended to draw operational lessons and is not a tool designed to collect evidence or to establish personal responsibility. Those who conduct the inquiry are not investigators but rather commanders and they do not possess appropriate training; what is said in the course of the inquiry is not admissible in court; the inquiry is confidential; and
for the most part accounts by those other than soldiers and officers are not heard.
2. The inquiry presents a significant and grave obstacle to the ability to conduct effective criminal investigations of shooting incidents in which Palestinian civilians have been injured. This is a violation of the obligation to investigate”.

Continue reading Israeli lawyer Michael Sfard tells Turkel Commission that Israel must establish extra-military mechanism to investigate observance of international law

Israel denies entry to Swedish MK who could have testified to Turkel Commission because he was on board the Mavi Marmara

Israeli authorities have denied entry today to a Swedish MK who was on board the Freedom Flotilla’s Mavi Marmara on 31 May, when Israeli Naval forces launched an interception and boarding attack that ended with 9 dead — all Turks, one of them a 19-year-old American high school student.

According to a report by Agence France Presse today, a Swedish member of Parliament of Turkish origin, Mehmet Kaplan, “was ordered to leave minutes after his plane landed in Israel because he had ‘failed to follow procedure’ and obtain an entry visa in Sweden, ministry spokeswoman Sabine Hadad told AFP. Dror Feiler, an Israeli artist based in Sweden who has relinquished his Israeli citizenship, was also expelled upon arrival at Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, Hadad said … Passengers detained in the raid on the flotilla were later released after signing a letter ‘in which they pledged to obtain authorisation to enter Israel from Israeli embassies in their respective countries’, Hadad said”. This news report is posted here.

Just last week, the Turkel Commission appointed by the Israeli government to look into the international law aspects of the “maritime incident” has just repeated its invitation for anyone on board the Mavi Marmara to testify: “The Commission wishes to remind the public of the notice from 21 October 2010, in which we called upon any eye witnesses with relevant information and/or documentation for the Commission’s mission, who are willing to testify. (This invitation is posted here) The Commission will be accepting such submissions no later than 15 November 2010″.

These two men could apparently both have testified about what happened on board the Mavi Marmara during the Flotilla fiasco.

It is not clear that they would have agreed to do so — a number of the activists who were on board apparently have a problem with the idea of accepting what they see as the commission’s flawed mandate.

The Palestine Information Center reported tonight that “Dror Feiler, the spokesman for the Swedish ship that was part of the Flotilla, told the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper on Friday that he would file a complaint on behalf of 11 Swedes against the Israeli leaders on 8th November with Tel Aviv police and the Israeli prosecutor. He explained that the complaint would be filed against Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu, his war minister Ehud Barak, and his Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi. The charges would include armed robbery, kidnap, detention, and assault and battery, Feiler elaborated”. This report can be read in full here.

YNet reported that Feiler was coming to get his saxophone back — it was confiscated, along with his telephone and cameras, and never returned: ” ‘Preventing my entry wouldn’t be logical, but I am aware that it’s hard to count on the logic of Israeli authorities, so there is certainly a fear that they won’t let me enter’, he says. ‘It would be strange. After all, I was born in Israel, my mother lives in Israel and I have friends and family there. It’s my right to enter and explain to anyone who wants to hear what the aim of the flotilla was and why I work overtime against the policies of the Israeli government’.” This is posted here.

Haaretz wrote that “The Turkish-born MP Mehmet Kaplan and artist Dror Feiler were detained at the Ben Gurion International Airport upon landing, on the grounds that they were barred for 10 years due to their participation in the May 2010 flotilla. Both were among the dozens of flotilla passengers taken in to custody following Israel’s deadly raid … Feiler, who currently lives in Sweden, also took part in the flotilla, though not on the Mavi Marmara ship where nine Turkish activists died in clashes with Israeli naval commandos. He has given up his Israeli citizenship but has been permitted to return to the country dozens of times since. This was the first time he was denied entry … ‘Anyone who took part in the flotilla will not be permitted into Israel’, said Sabine Hadad, spokesman for immigration authorities. ‘They know this. They should have contacted the embassy before arriving’.” This was published here.

So, even if they had applied for a visa from Sweden, it would have been denied anyway…? Even if they were going to testify to the Turkel commission?

The Elders enter Gaza via Rafah

The Elders have entered the Gaza Strip today via the Rafah crossing from Egypt, after holding talks in Cairo with Egyptian President Husni Mubarak.

CORRECTION: Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter is apparently not with the group in Gaza, but will instead join them later.

Former Irish President Mary Robinson — who subsequently served as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights — is in Gaza as Delegation leader of this group. In her time as High Commissioner, Mary Robinson being driven in a UN vehicle when it was fired upon while touring areas under Israeli control during the height of the second Palestinian intifada.

She noted in a statement today that “I was last here in 2008, just before the Gaza war. The situation has deteriorated to a shocking extent since then. This is not a humanitarian crisis – it is a political crisis and it can be solved politically. It is unconscionable and unacceptable that Israel and the international community have not lifted the blockade fully to allow Gazans to rebuild their lives and be part of the interconnected world that we take for granted. The easing of the blockade may mean more goods can be imported, but people are not free to come and go, reconstruction materials are still highly restricted, there is no real economy to speak of, and I have no doubt that things are not just stagnant – they are going backwards.”

Continue reading The Elders enter Gaza via Rafah

Israeli human rights groups testify to Turkel Commission on Flotilla fiasco

Three of Israel’s most distinguished and respected human rights groups testified before the Israeli-government-appointed Turkel Commission on Wednesday in a six-and-a-half hour marathon public session (with two 10-minute breaks).

One Israeli media report afterwards described the rather mainstream groups [(1) B’Tselem, (2) Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, and (3) GISHA] as “left-wing”, and B’Tselem’s Director Jessica Montell as a “radical leftist activist”, — which says a lot about the atmosphere in the country. See story here

The polarization increased geometrically after the massive Israeli military operation in Gaza, Operation Cast Lead [27 December 2008 to 18 January 2009] — during which Israel first announced its formal naval blockade of Gaza’s maritime space, on 3 January 2009, as the ground phase began.

And, the polarization was all too obvious in Wednesday’s hearing.

The Turkel Commission [website here – H/T to Jessica Montell] says it is an independent public inquiry looking into what they call the “maritime incident” of 31 May 2010 [or, the Flotilla fiasco] which occurred in the pre-dawn hours that day when Israeli naval missile boats and helicopter-borne Israeli commandos intercepted the Freedom Flotilla, and killed 9 men [8 Turkish, one American high-school student from a Turkish family] on board the larger Turkish passenger ship, the Mavi Marmara.

It is Israel’s main state-appointed body of inquiry on this matter, which was one of the main news stories in the world for several weeks. An outpouring of international criticism followed the brutality of the interception.

GPO photo

The Commission’s website notes that it “was asked to relate to an assessment of the security circumstances of placing the maritime closure on the Gaza Strip and the maritime closure’s compatibility with the rules of international law”.

Continue reading Israeli human rights groups testify to Turkel Commission on Flotilla fiasco

IDF Chief of Staff Ashkenazai also takes responsibility for Flotilla Fiasco

According to a report in Haaretz, the IDF Chief of Staff Gaby Ashkenazi testified Wednesday, at the Turkel Commission investigating the “maritime incident” which occurred when Israeli forces boarded the Mavi Marmara and five other ships sailing toward Gaza in a “Freedom Flotilla” on 31 May, that “the raid quickly became ‘chaotic’, and the soldiers had no choice but to ‘continue with the plan’ … From the moment the operation began, it was clear that the circumstances were unprecedented’, he said, adding that as commander he took full responsibility for the troops’ actions”.

Ashkenazi is the third high-ranking Israeli official to take responsibility for the Flotilla fiasco. Earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu and Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak also said the responsibility was theirs.

Haaretz also reported that “despite initial reports that military personnel would not testify before the Turkel committee, Ashkenazi has authorized Military Advocate General Brig. Gen. Avichai Mandelblit to testify before the panel. Ashkenazi also approved the questioning of General (Res.) Giora Eiland, who headed the IDF’s internal inquiry into the deadly raid”. This is reported in Haaretz here.

Continue reading IDF Chief of Staff Ashkenazai also takes responsibility for Flotilla Fiasco

More on Flotilla fiasco from Netanyahu and from Ehud Barak

Barak Ravid wrote in Haaretz about Prime Minister Netanyahu’s testimony before Israel’s non-IDF commission of inquiry into the Flotilla fiasco that Netanyahu yesterday called a “maritime incident” that: “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seemed visibly unprepared for his public testimony before the Turkel Committee yesterday – hesitating over key details, evading questions and finally [later] publishing three statements clarifying and even denying what he had said just hours earlier … [The committee is headed by former Supreme Court justice Jacob Turkel.] But while his [Netanyahu’s] opening address, in which he enumerated Hamas’ crimes and Israel’s attempts to persuade the Turkish government to stop the flotilla, went smoothly, the subsequent questions – on issues such as the government’s decision-making process, Israel’s intelligence on the flotilla and Netanyahu’s personal responsibility for the incident – showed no evidence of these preparations. He refused to answer six questions entirely, saying he would do so only at a closed hearing. And he said he didn’t know the answers to many other questions – such as how much humanitarian aid was entering Gaza before the raid. But the Turkel Committee’s spokesman, Ofer Leffler, said Netanyahu did answer all six questions in his subsequent closed-door testimony, and had promised to respond in writing to those to which he did not know the answers yesterday”.

Ravid wrote that when asked who decided on the raid, “Netanyahu replied that it was the Israel Defense Forces’ decision”…

Continue reading More on Flotilla fiasco from Netanyahu and from Ehud Barak

Uri Avnery: no reason to withdraw Supreme Court petition to disband Turkel commission

Uri Avnery has written in his weekly article that the Gush Shalom movement he heads sees “no reason to withdraw our Supreme Court petition to disband the Turkel commission [appointed to look into the Israeli handling of the Freedom Flotilla on 31 May] and to appoint an official State Commission of Inquiry”.

According to Avnery:
“[T]he commission has not been accorded any legal standing at all. Netanyahu just asked three nice people to find out if the government’s actions were consistent with international law, nothing more”.

UPDATE: The Israeli cabinet voted on Sunday that the commission, headed by former justice Jacob Tirkel, will be allowed to subpoena witnesses and receive sworn testimony, but Israeli soldiers will not be questioned as part of the inquiry. according to the Prime Minister’s office.

Avnery’s article continues: “All commentators agree that the commission was not set up to clarify the affair, but only to help President Barack Obama to obstruct the appointment of an international inquiry commission. All agreed that this is a ridiculous commission without teeth, that its composition is pathetic and the terms of reference marginal. It seems that Judge Turkel himself felt ashamed. After accepting the appointment on Netanyahu’s terms, this week he threatened to resign if his powers were not extended. Netanyahu gave in”.

“NETANYAHU’S DECISION to enlarge the powers of the commission, so that it will be able to summon witnesses, is far from what is needed. The commission will be unable to investigate how and by whom it was decided to impose the blockade on Gaza, how it was decided to attack the flotilla, how the operation was planned and how it was carried out”

“Now, it seems, it will be given the legal standing of a ‘Government Commission of Inquiry’, but definitely not of a ‘State Commission of Inquiry’.

“Turkel himself, a week before his appointment, had also called for the appointment of a State Commission of Inquiry”.

“[A] ‘State Commission of Inquiry’ would resemble a regular court … such a commission would have the power to summon witnesses, have them testify under oath (with the usual penalties for perjury), cross-examine them, subpoena documents, etc. Also, the commission would warn in advance any persons whose interests could be harmed by its findings and accord them the right to be represented by a lawyer” …