Pilot Study on Forced Displacement as aResult of the Wall and its Associated Regime
Forced displacement is not a new phenomenon for the Palestinian
people, whose displacement is ongoing and in fact, an incremental
part of the conflict. The Wall and its associated regime are a
continuation of this policy as they alter the demographic
composition of the occupied Palestinian territories. The
international community has however failed to recognize,
prevent
and respond to forced displacement.
1. Internal Displacement and Internally Displaced Persons
There is no internationally recognized definition of internally
displaced persons (IDPs), but the UN Guiding Principles on Internal
Displacement (Deng Principles) provide a working definition.
(See article entitled “International Mechanism to Respond to
Situations of Internal Displacement, Applicability to the
Palestinian Case”). In short, IDPs are involuntarily displaced and
remain within their national border. Palestinians displaced as a
result of the 1967 War, the Wall and its regime, land confiscation,
house demolition, settler violence and other Israeli measures such
as revocation of residency rights in the oPt can qualify as
IDPs.
In July 2004, in its advisory opinion on the Legal Consequences of
the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories,
the International Court of Justice found that “…a significant
number of Palestinians have already been compelled by the
construction of the wall and its associated regime to depart from
certain areas, a process that will continue as more of the wall is
built, that construction, coupled with the establishment of the
Israeli settlements …is tending to alter the demographic
composition of the [OPT].”(2) The Deng
Principles clearly state that forced displacement is prohibited (a)
when it is based on
policies of apartheid, “ethnic cleansing” or similar practices
aimed at/or resulting in altering the ethnic, religious or racial
composition of the affected population.” (3) The Rome Statute of the International Criminal
Court defines population transfer as the “forced displacement of
the persons concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the
area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted
under international law.”(4) In
situations of armed conflict, the Statute includes among war crimes
“the transfer, directly or indirectly, by the Occupying Power of
parts of its own civilian population into the territory it
occupies, or the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the
population of the occupied territory within or outside this
territory.”(5) Forced displacement in
order to achieve population transfer and/or alter the ethnic,
religious or racial composition of the population affected is both
a crime against humanity and a war crime.
Highly restricted freedom of movement as a result of the Wall should be regarded as a major factor inducing the forced displacement of Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem.
2. Findings of the Pilot Study on Internal
Displacement as a Result of the Wall
and its
Associated Regime The BADIL-PCBS survey was undertaken in East
Jerusalem because of the importance of Jerusalem as the capital of
the Palestinian people and the severity of the Israeli policy of
“de- Palestinization” of the city.
a) The Wall and its Regime Generate Forced Displacement The survey
reveals that 17% of all Palestinians in Jerusalem who have changed
their previous place of residence since 2002 did so as a direct
result of the construction of the Wall. (6) Both refugees and non-refugees are affected by
the Wall, indicating both repeated displacement and first-time
displacement. Highly restricted freedom of movement as a result of
the Wall should be regarded as a major factor inducing the forced
displacement of Palestinians in occupied East Jerusalem.
b) The Wall and its Regime Affect the Fabric of Palestinian
Society
The survey reveals that 21% of all the Palestinian households in
Jerusalem are separated from one or more relatives from the
household, such as father, mother, daughter or son. A striking
finding of the survey is the impact of the Wall on the choice of
spouses: 69% of the households state that the Wall and its regime
constitute an obstacle to their choice of spouse.
The survey also confirms that the right to participate in cultural
life, community affairs and freedom of religion have all been
affected by the Wall and its regime. 56% of all Palestinian
households experience restrictions on their cultural, social
and leisure activities by the Wall.
Especially strongly affected is the ability of households located
on the East side of the Wall to visit holy sites (92%).
c) Increased Vulnerability to Displacement A growing number of
persons are vulnerable to displacement. The number of Palestinians
thinking to change their current place of residence rose from 52%
three months prior to the survey to 64% at the time the survey was
conducted.
States have an obligation to
provide protection to Palestinians
affected by the Wall, including preventing their displacement,
facilitating their return and reparation and ultimately, bring an
end
to the illegal situation.
d) Unsustainable Coping Mechanisms The most common coping
mechanisms are reduction of movement, the use of alternative
roads, change in place of health services and applying for permits.
Reduction of movement has particularly affected women and children;
indeed, 68% of children and 79% of women have reduced their
movement. The implications of these coping mechanisms are still
unclear, although likely unsustainable in the long-term and
detrimental to individual, familial/societal relationships and
general well-being.
e) Preventing Displacement Needs and requirements for staying in
the current place of residence derive special importance from the
fact that those who remain and try to cope with the new reality
created by the Wall appear to be predominantly from among the
poorer sectors of society. The high level of demand to provide more
services, infrastructure, social security and suitable jobs among
Palestinians is an important finding in this context.
3. International Responsibility
Unlike in the case of refugees, no single UN agency is mandated to
assist and protect internally displaced persons. Instead, a
“Collaborative Response” has been devised which allows for a
coordinated response to IDP situations by all relevant UN Agencies
(i.e. OHCHR, OCHA, WFP, WHO, UNICEF, etc.). (See “International
Mechanism to Situations of Internal Displacement, Applicability to
the Palestinian Case”).
The Deng Principles reiterate principles well-known in
international law, namely the duty of competent authorities, either
the national authorities or the international community, to
“...allow internally displaced persons to return
voluntarily”(7). The Principles
consider reparation as core to the rights of internally displaced
persons, and remind of “...the duty and responsibility to assist
returned and/or resettled internally displaced persons to recover,
to the extent possible, their property and possessions which they
left behind or were dispossessed of upon their
displacement.”(8) The duties of the
international community regarding the Wall and its regime were also
explicitly affirmed by the International Court of Justice.
The Court called upon states “... not to render aid or
assistance
in maintaining the situation created by such
construction.”(9) It finally requested
the General Assembly and the Security Council to “…consider what
further action is required to bring to an end the illegal
situation…”(10) Hence, States have an
obligation to provide protection to Palestinians affected by the
Wall, including preventing their displacement, facilitating their
return and reparation and ultimately, bring an end to the illegal
situation.
The pilot study highlights
the need to address one of the root causes of the conflict,
namely, Israel’s policy of forced population
transfer through occupation and colonization.
The pilot study highlights the need to address one of the root
causes of the conflict, namely, Israel’s policy of forced
population transfer through occupation and colonization. The study
also calls upon the international community to develop an effective
and genuine protection mechanism for Palestinians and address the
effects of the conflict on the rights of the Palestinian people,
particularly on their right to return and self-determination.
Source
(1) Excerpts taken from the BADIL/IDMC, Displaced by the
Wall, Pilot Study on Forced Displacement as a
Result of the Wall and its Associated Regime, Bethlehem: Badil
Resource Center and the Internal Displacement
Monitoring Center, September 2006. The full study is available at:
http://www.badil.org/Wall-Report.pdf
(2) [Emphasis added]
International Court of Justice (ICJ), The Legal Consequences of the
Construction of a Wall
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, 9 July
2004, para. 133.
(3) [Emphasis added]
Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (Deng Principles), (11
February 1998),
Principle 6.
(4) International
Criminal Court (ICC), Rome Statute of the International Criminal
Court, A/CONF.183/9 (17
July 1998, as corrected in 10 November 1998 and 12 July 1999),
Article 7 (2)(d).
(5) Ibid. Article
8(b).
(6) Based on the
overall Jerusalem Governorate population of 407,090 in mid-2006,
23,170 persons have thus
already been displaced as a result of the Wall and its regime.
According to OCHA, the number of Palestinians
with Jerusalem ID residing on the East side of the Wall is around
55,000 persons. See Office for the Coordination
of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Preliminary Analysis of the
Humanitarian Implications of the April 2006
Barrier Projections, update 5 (Jerusalem: OCHA, July 2006), p.
2.
(7) Deng Principles.
Principle 28.
(8) Ibid. Principle
29.
(9) ICJ, Legal
Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied
Palestinian Territory, supra 2, para 159.
(10)[Emphasis added] Ibid, para 163 (3)(E).