The UN fact-finding mission to Gaza, headed by Justice Richard Goldstone, has, as expected, received mixed reactions from all sides of the conflict since its release on September 15.

By Karl Dowling
 

Speaking to Radio Netherlands, Deputy Spokesman for the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs Andy David said, “We have a democracy and do not need lessons from others on how to conduct investigations. We don't need countries like Syria and Pakistan and Somalia to teach us how to conduct investigations into human rights abuse.” David also claimed that accusing Israel of knowingly and purposely targeting civilians was very disappointing, given Israel had showed restraint for the previous 8 years.
 

Echoing the sentiments of Justice Goldstone’s report Dr. Omar Abdel Razek, a former Hamas Minister of Finance and current member of the Palestinian Legislative Council told Radio Netherlands, that “Israelis in the past have investigated for a short time just for public propaganda and then decide there were no violations.” He continued, “We hope the UN follow up on the report and take Israel and its leaders to international court so that they don't repeat these aggressions.”

War Crimes
The report concluded that there is evidence that both the Israeli Defence Forces
(IDF) and Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity.
 

The overwhelming criticism aimed at the IDF was that they failed to distinguish, to the best of their ability, between military and civilian targets. Accusations about the destruction of schools, sewage plants, hospitals, and other public buildings were rampant throughout the military operation. The report stated that, Israeli forces “violated the principle of distinction between civilian and military objects” which amounted to “extensive destruction … of property, not justified by military necessity”.
 

Blockade
The mission also condemned the Israeli blockade of Gaza in place since the Israeli withdrawal in 2005. The blockade effectively gives Israel control of Gaza’s borders, airspace, and access to the sea, cutting off all supplies of goods and humanitarian aid. The mission holds Israel responsible under the Fourth Geneva Convention “to ensure the supply of foodstuff, medical and hospital items and others to meet the humanitarian needs of the population of the Gaza Strip without qualification.”
 

The report goes on to recommend the release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier captured by Palestinian forces over 3 years ago. However, the findings are also concerned that the insistence of Israeli officials to maintain the blockade until Shalit’s release amounts to “collective punishment of the
civilian population of the Gaza Strip”.
 

Accountability
The UN mission recommends that both Israeli and Hamas authorities investigate and prosecute accordingly. It also recommends that the UN Security Council require Israel to report on its investigations and prosecutions within 6 months. Should Israel fail to report the Security Council should refer the case to the International Criminal Court (ICC).
 

In a commentary following the report, Goldstone wrote that “both Israel and Hamas have dismal records of investigating their own forces”, and that it is up to Western Governments to seek justice as “they have pushed for accountability in places like Darfur, but now must do the same with Israel, an ally and democratic state.”
 

Legal Implications
Andrew Clapham is the Director of the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights. He spoke to Radio Netherlands Worldwide’s Hermione Gee about the possible legal ramifications that may result from the report.
 

Asked about the statute of the violations noted by the commission, Clapham said, “Most importantly they are crimes under international law, meaning they could be tried outside the territory in which they were committed”.
 

Asked about the significance of the Goldstone report compared with reports published by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch regarding the Gaza war, Clapham explained that human rights organizations base their findings mostly on victims testimony. While Goldstone’s document “is written in terms of whether or not it could constitute a crime in terms of a human rights violation.”
 

Close Relationship
Recent attempts by the US Administration to restart peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians following the Gaza assault, as well as the United States close relationship with Israel, have led many to speculate that a Security Council referral to the ICC would never be passed given the veto power of the US.
 

Asked whether this would be the end of the story, legally speaking, Clapham said, “The violations reported by Goldstone constitute war crimes and those are crimes of universal jurisdiction”, so irrespective of the Security Council possibly blocking an ICC referral any prosecutor around the world could use the report against “any one of the implicated individuals.”