Accounting for human rights

News that the United Kingdom chose to abstain on a crucial UN vote on the Goldstone report is deeply disappointing. Concluding that both Israeli and Palestinian forces committed war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity, during the conflict in Gaza and southern Israel earlier this year, the Goldstone report reflects the messy situation on the ground in an ongoing struggle which polarises international opinion like no other. Yet there can be no excusing the failure to support the principle attempt to bring all of those responsible for human rights violations to account.

The UN resolution was still adopted by a large majority, although the victory was undermined by the opposition of the United States and seven European Union states. Nevertheless the secretary-general is now mandated to transmit Judge Goldstone's report to the Security Council, which has powers to refer the situation in Gaza to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court if Israel and Hamas prove unable or unwilling to conduct independent investigations that meet international standards. It also calls on the UN Secretary-General to present a progress report to the General Assembly in three months' time.

The findings of the Goldstone report echo those of an Amnesty International team that investigated alleged violations in Gaza and southern Israel during and in the immediate aftermath of the conflict, in which hundreds of Palestinian civilians, including some 300 children, and three Israeli civilians were killed.

Amongst a range of violations of international law reported by Amnesty were:
- the willful destruction and appropriation of civilian property by Israeli forces (banned under the Fourth Geneva Convention)
- failure to distinguish between civilians and military objects, by both Israeli and Hamas fighters (a war crime, under Optional Protocol 1 of the Geneva Conventions)
- indiscriminate attacks liable to harm civilians, carried out by both Israel and Hamas firing on densely populated civilian areas and using weapons that cannot be accurately targeted towards military objectives also banned under Optional Protocol 1)
- the use of incendiary weapons against civilians, particularly the irrefutable evidence that Israeli forces used white phosphorus was used against the civilian population to devastating effect (banned under the Convention on the Prohibition or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons).

Since the conflict Amnesty International has continually deplored the failure on the part of both Israel and Hamas to take seriously efforts to hold all sides accountable for their actions during the conflict. Yet holding forces accountable for their actions represents the best hope of ensuring such abuses do not happen again. With the reluctance of local authorities to engage seriously in investigations we are left with the Goldstone report, and the United Nations route, as the only viable route towards accountability and, eventually, justice. So much more disappointing then that our government has also shown itself reluctant to take a stand for the rights of civilian populations, of whatever nationality, to protection and security.