'We will not be idiots'

New bill would wipe out most Palestinian claims for damages sustained during War on Terrror; Arab, Likud MKs trade charges

By Ilan Marciano פורסם: 16.06.05, 20:52

The Knesset Legal Committee began deliberations Thursday on a proposal, dubbed the Intifada Law, to excuse the government from damage claims made by Palestinians who suffered as a result of IDF actions during the al-Aqsa Intifada.

The proposed law is based on a similar law proposed in 2003 in reaction to a wave of claims submitted following Operation Defensive Shield. It is being carefully considered by legal experts throughout the academic world.

Israel claims that each party to an armed conflict must assume responsibility for damages and take care of its wounded. Israeli citizens wounded during the conflict have no avenue to claim damages from those responsible for their injuries; therefore, they have the right to expect the State to compensate them as victims of war.

The Palestinians, on the other hand, currently have the right to sue Israel for damages sustained during the fighting, creating a situation whereby Israel must pay damages to victims on both sides of the conflict.

'Israel must pay'

Left-wing activists and international law experts have criticized the "Intifada Law", saying the bill was intended to entrench the occupation without paying for the consequences.

"If a court ruled in favor of the district attorney, there would be no problem," said Arab Knesset Member Mohammad Barakeh. "But today, the occupator's cynicism has reached a new high. You won't find any legal expert of any standing who supports this law. If the law passes, we will make sure it is subject to harsh criticism around the world."

Barakeh also said his position was not political, but stemmed from concern for the Palestinians.

"A crime has been committed against the Palestinians. Israel must pay for that," he said.

Real problem, poor solution

Prof. Dafna Barak-Erez, an expert in administrative law at Tel Aviv University, acknowledged Israel has a problem with Palestinian damage claims, but said the government must re-define "warlike action" to include the actions taken as part of the war on terror.

"There is certainly a problem," she said, "but this is the wrong way to fix it. The right way would be to update the definition of 'warlike action,' she said.

Erez also said the attorney was trying to declare a blanket exemption for Israel, in order to exempt Israel from ever having to pay damages.

"In war there is no place for damage claims," she said. "At the same time, we are not totally at war. International law defines the situation as 'occupation;' therefore, we must apply an occupation approach to every issue related to human rights. It's a very complicated situation."

Just principle

Michael Eitan, head of the Knesset Legal Committee, defended the law, saying it serves a just principle.

"It is inconceivable that Israel could be called to pay damages for actions taken as part of the war on terror," he said.

Regarding innocent Palestinians who suffered damage or injury as a result of IDF action, Eitan said Israel would match payoffs provided by the Palestinian Authority to terror victims.

"We will not be idiots," he said. "We should pay billions of shekels to Israelis that have been hurt by terror attacks, and also pay Palestinians who have been hurt by the war on terror? Forget about it."

But Eitan also promised the law would be more liberal, humanitarian and considerate than any American or British law relating to military duties in Iraq or Afghanistan.

מצאתם טעות בכתבה? כתבו לנו