Marwan Al-Barghouti: Settlements are endangering the future of the entire region

“Settling” constitutes a warcime according to international law and ICC statute. Even under US’ own military legislations’
Law resources below this article

The prominent member of Fatah’s Central Committee, Marwan al-Barghouti, has stated that Israel’s settlement activities are endangering the future of the entire region. Nevertheless, these colonising policies are not met with any real action by the international community to stop them; instead they are supported by some. Therefore, it should not surprise anyone when the Palestinians take action to protect their land, rights and future.In a letter written to the Russell Tribunal from prison and read by his wife, the lawyer Fadwa al-Barghouti, he also added the governments’ failure to make conclusive decisions is causing people from all over the world to show sympathy and solidarity with the Palestinian people; with the challenge they pose and their refusal of injustice, defeat and occupation. The Russell Tribunal is considered a means of promoting human rights and confirming international law, which leads to peace. Therefore, this court is a legitimate court that reflects and represents the will of people to live in a world governed by the principles of freedom and justice.

Al-Barghouti also stated, “I wish I were standing with everyone today, and your call on me, despite being detained in Israeli prison, is a challenge to the occupation, its law and its decisions. My words that reach you today reflect the insistence of the Palestinian people and their prisoners on making our voices heard despite our empty stomachs, and reflect your insistence on our voices being heard and refusing that they be silenced.”

Al-Barghouti said that 4,800 prisoners are still detained in the occupation’s prisons. Over 100 of them were imprisoned before the Oslo Accords, and some of them have spent 30 years behind bars; a fact that should have guaranteed their freedom as part of the peace agreements. When a number of prisoners went on hunger strike, their intention was to express their hunger for freedom and dignity. Some of their lives are in danger, as their only means of voicing their messages is their empty stomachs; their only weapon is their life. Guaranteeing their freedom is saving their lives.

He also added that the prisoner issue shows that this is not an ordinary conflict on the ground between two equal opponents; it is six decades of violating the most basic rights of justice, freedom and dignity for the Palestinian people. The decision to end these violations cannot be left up to the occupying power. It is everyone’s responsibility to defend these rights, and the initial global support we are receiving assures us that we will not be defeated.

Al-Barghouti also wrote in his letter, “I was kidnapped from the city of Ramallah by the Israeli Occupation Forces 11 years ago. Since that time, I have been detained in their prisons where I was subjected to 100 days of interrogation and torture, followed by 1,000 days of solitary confinement. I have spent 18 years of my life in their prisons and 7 years in forced exile. During this time, I was unable to celebrate birthdays, school and university graduations or my daughter’s wedding with my wife and children nor was I able to attend my mother and brother’s funerals. Unfortunately, a large number of Palestinians have known a similar fate.

He also said, “I was the first Palestinian parliamentarian kidnapped by Israel and put on trial. Therefore, I refused to defend myself before an Israeli court, in order for me not to create a precedent; also because these courts gain their legitimacy from the occupation, which itself is illegitimate, and because I refuse for the representatives of the Palestinian people to stand in the occupation’s courts. The occupation sentenced me to life because it wanted, through me, to sentence the entire Palestinian national struggle, the Palestinian Intifada, and Palestinian legitimacy”.

He ended by saying that Israel was not satisfied with this, and went on to arrest over half the Palestinian members of parliament in the West Bank in batches, i.e. a third of the National Council. This is historically unprecedented, whereas members of the Israeli Knesset are received all over the world, including those who were accomplices to this crime through their silence. He added that all of this has not and will not break his will and the will and desire of the Palestinian people for freedom, independence and return. “We are supported by your support and the support of all the free people in the world as well as your promotion of freedom, justice and dignity”, he said.

It is worth noting that the Russell Tribunal held its final session in Brussels following a number of sessions held in Barcelona, London, Cape Town and New York.

Marwan Barghouti was an honorary guest representing Palestine in this final session.

This court, set up based on the model of the famous Russell Tribunal on Vietnam, aims to examine the role and complicity of the international community in the continuation of violations against the Palestinian people. They are, according to the court’s “jury”, exposed to a system similar that of Apartheid in South Africa.

The “Russell Tribunal on Palestine,” a people’s tribunal formed in 2009 by former French diplomat and member of the resistance, the late Stephane Hessel, demanded during its session held last Sunday in Brussels that the International Criminal Court should head investigations into the crimes committed by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories. The tribunal also criticised the “accomplices” of the Israeli policy, starting with the condemnation of the United States, the main supporter of Israel, followed by the UN and the EU.

The jury included a number of prominent politicians, diplomats, academics and lawyers, including the human rights activist Angela Davis, a founding member of the band Pink Floyd, Roger Waters and Nobel Peace laureate, Mairead Maguire.


“States may not deport or transfer parts of their own civilian population into a territory they occupy.”


State practice establishes this rule as a norm of customary international law applicable in international armed conflicts.
International armed conflicts

The prohibition on deporting or transferring parts of a State’s own civilian population into the territory it occupies is set forth in the Fourth Geneva Convention.[1]

It is a grave breach of Additional Protocol I.[2]

Under the Statute of the International Criminal Court, “the transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.[3]

Many military manuals prohibit the deportation or transfer by a party to the conflict of parts of its civilian population into the territory it occupies.[4]

This rule is included in the legislation of numerous States.[5]

Official statements and reported practice also support the prohibition on transferring one’s own civilian population into occupied territory.[6]

Attempts to alter the demographic composition of an occupied territory have been condemned by the UN Security Council.[7]

In 1992, it called for the cessation of attempts to change the ethnic composition of the population, anywhere in the former Yugoslavia.[8]

Similarly, the UN General Assembly and UN Commission on Human Rights have condemned settlement practices.[9]

According to the final report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Dimensions of Population Transfer, including the Implantation of Settlers and Settlements, “the implantation of settlers” is unlawful and engages State responsibility and the criminal responsibility of individuals.[10]

In 1981, the 24th International Conference of the Red Cross reaffirmed that “settlements in occupied territory are incompatible with article 27 and 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention”.[11]

In the Case of the Major War Criminals in 1946, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg found two of the accused guilty of attempting the “Germanization” of occupied territories.[12]


[1] Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 49, sixth paragraph (cited in Vol. II, Ch. 38, § 334).

[2] Additional Protocol I, Article 85(4)(a) (adopted by consensus) (ibid., § 335).

[3] ICC Statute, Article 8(2)(b)(viii) (ibid., § 336).

[4] See, e.g., the military manuals of Argentina (ibid., §§ 346–347), Australia (ibid., § 348), Canada (ibid., § 349), Croatia (ibid., § 350), Hungary (ibid., § 351), Italy (ibid., § 352), Netherlands (ibid., § 353), New Zealand (ibid., § 354), Spain (ibid., § 355), Sweden (ibid., § 357), Switzerland (ibid., § 357), United Kingdom (ibid., § 358) and United States (ibid., § 359).

[5] See, e.g., the legislation of Armenia (ibid., § 361), Australia (ibid., §§ 362–363), Azerbaijan (ibid., §§ 364–365), Bangladesh (ibid., § 366), Belarus (ibid., § 367), Belgium (ibid., § 368), Bosnia and Herzegovina (ibid., § 369), Canada (ibid., §§ 371–372), Congo (ibid., § 373), Cook Islands (ibid., § 374), Croatia (ibid., § 375), Cyprus (ibid., § 376), Czech Republic (ibid., § 377), Germany (ibid., § 379), Georgia (ibid., § 380), Ireland (ibid., § 381), Mali (ibid., § 384), Republic of Moldova (ibid., § 385), Netherlands (ibid., § 386), New Zealand (ibid., §§ 387–388), Niger (ibid., § 390), Norway (ibid., § 391), Slovakia (ibid., § 392), Slovenia (ibid., § 393), Spain (ibid., § 394), Tajikistan (ibid., § 395), United Kingdom (ibid., §§ 397–398), Yugoslavia (ibid., § 399) and Zimbabwe (ibid., § 400); see also the draft legislation of Argentina (ibid., § 360), Burundi (ibid., § 370), Jordan (ibid., § 382), Lebanon (ibid., § 383) and Trinidad and Tobago (ibid., § 396).

[6] See, e.g., the statements of Kuwait (ibid., § 405) and United States (ibid., §§ 406–407) and the reported practice of Egypt (ibid., § 402) and France (ibid., § 403).

[7] See, e.g., UN Security Council, Res. 446 , 452 and 476 (ibid., § 408), Res. 465 (ibid., § 409) and Res. 677 (ibid., § 410).

[8] UN Security Council, Res. 752 (ibid., § 411).

[9] See, e.g., UN General Assembly, Res. 36/147 C, 37/88 C, 38/79 D, 39/95 D and 40/161 D (ibid., § 412) and Res. 54/78 (ibid., § 405); UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 2001/7 (ibid., § 413).

[10] UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights, Final report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Dimensions of Population Transfer, including the Implantation of Settlers and Settlements (ibid., § 415).

[11] 24th International Conference of the Red Cross, Res. III (ibid., § 419).

[12] International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Case of the Major War Criminals, Judgement (ibid., § 421).

Still live in fairy-tale-land about Israel? Time to wake up: The Map of the “Greater Israel” even is hammered on the currency:All facts at Storify continuously updated. Read what Israeli ‘leaders’ have said and done even before (peace) talks and how their actions contradict the reality and ugly facts which they try to hide from you:

You can forget all details. Save yourself time. It is only about Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine

Israel. Not looking for Peace. Nor Talks. But this…

The facts. Mainly Israeli sources. Continuously updated

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: