IMRA sent two notes with questions to Amnesty International:

First message:

Dear R Campbel of Amnesty International, Further to our telephone conversation, the following is our question:

The following line appears in your report “Israel/Occupied Territories: Amnesty International condemns state assassinations” of 21.2.2001:

“International humanitarian law prohibits the targeting of civilians. A Fatah member of the Palestinian Legislative Council told Amnesty International delegates that settlements, being built in Occupied Territories, were considered by Fatah as military targets. Amnesty International stressed that the houses and those living in settlements who were not carrying arms could not be considered as military targets.”

Does this mean, in the view of Amnesty International, that settlers who carry weapons for protection when they drive on the roads in the territories can be considered a military target?

By the same token, if a family of settlers keeps a weapon in their home does Amnesty International consider their home a military target?

Best regards,

Dr. Aaron Lerner – IMRA
Tel 972-9-7604719
Fax 972-3-5480092
imra@netvision.net.il
www.imra.org.il

Second message:

Dear Rachel Campbel,

I look forward to receiving the reply.

Three additional questions:

1. According to page 29 of your report “Armed Palestinians who directly participate in hostilities for example by shooting at Israeli soldiers or civilians – lose their protected status for the duration of the attack.. Because they are not combatants, the fact that they participate in an armed attack at an earlier point cannot justify targeting them for death later on.”

By Amnesty International standards which of the following groups qualifies as “civilian”?

  • Members of the Palestinian Authority security services
  • Members of (Yasser Arafat’s) Fatah militias
  • Members of Hamas and other militias not formally associated with the PA or the PA leadership

2. The same page of the report states that “there are no Palestinian objects in the Occupied Territories that meet the criteria of military objectives. Certain objects may be attacked while they are being used for firing upon Israeli forces. But they revert to their status as civilian objects as soon as they are no longer being used for launching attacks.”

By Amnesty International standards, are the Palestinian Authority armed security forces and their facilities to be considered “civilian?”?

By Amnesty International Standards, how how much time must pass for an object to gain the status of “no longer being used for launching attacks”? An hour? A day? A week?

Best regards,

Dr. Aaron Lerner – IMRA

Reply from Amnesty International
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2001 7:02 p.m.
—– Forwarded by Rachel Campbell/I.S. / Amnesty International on 03/04/01 17:58 —–
To: Liz Hodgkin/I.S. / Amnesty International@Intsec 03/04/01 17:44
Subject: answers for Aaron Lerner(Document link: Rachel Campbell)

Dear Dr Lerner,

Thank you very much for your e-mails with your questions concerning our report. Here are some answers to your questions. Please note that our standards in the questions you raise are based on the UN Basic Principles for the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials which state that “intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.”

1) Relating to the status of settlers.

We consider that settlers, like Palestinians, even when bearing arms, are not legitimate targets and that they should not be targeted with lethal fire unless they are placing other lives in imminent danger.

2) Re “Civilians”.

All the groups you mention (ie members of PA security services, members of Fatah militias, members of Hamas etc) can be considered civilians. There is no Palestinian state and there are no Palestinian armed forces, so the members of these groups remain civilians under international humanitarian law. However, we do consider that they have obligations under fundamental principles of international humanitarian and human rights law and we have repeatedly called on them to adhere to these standards (and not to target civilians, etc). We consider that, as with settlers above, they should only be targeted with lethal fire if they are putting other lives in imminent danger.

Re the time frame to gain status of “no longer being used for launching attacks”: We don’t have a particular time frame. You could look at the ICRC commentary of Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions for guidance which is what Amnesty would do.

I hope you find these answers helpful.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR