25 September 2006
To:
Justice (retired) Dr. Eliyahu Winograd
Head of the Government Appointed Investigative Committee
Prime Minister’‘s Office
Jerusalem
Re: The committee’s investigation of alleged violations of international humanitarian law
As a result of the government’s decision on 17 September 2006 to appoint a government commission of inquiry to examine the level of preparedness and management of all aspects of the second Lebanon war by the political and military echelons, we are writing to you to request that that the committee include in its considerations the issues set forth below:
1. Both during and after the conflict in the north of the country, facts came to light which indicated the army’s alleged involvement and responsibility for severe breaches of international humanitarian law. The issue in question is the grave violation of the central principle that lies at the heart of humanitarian law, namely, the distinction between combatants and civilians.
2. The wide mandate that the committee has been granted makes it possible for its members to investigate suspected breaches of international law by the army, and to assess the level of responsibility of the political echelons for these breaches.
3. Israel’‘s national security authorities are subject to the provisions of humanitarian law that regulate the manner in which belligerent operations should be carried out. It is of utmost importance that the examination of the military’‘s decision-making process does not disregard one of the central aspects of this process, namely, the extent to which the decisions taken by the military, which dictate the modus operandi of the military operations, conform to these regulations. Examining the military’s decision-making process without considering the legality of this process, renders the investigation meaningless.
4. The committee’‘s letter of appointment also grants its members the authority to investigate the level of responsibility of the political echelons’‘ for allegedly illegal military operations. The political ranks bear ministerial responsibility for taking all the necessary preemptive steps to prevent grave breaches of humanitarian law. This obligation is an intrinsic element of the government’‘s obligation to uphold both Israeli and the international rule of law.
5. To reiterate, investigating the administration of the political echelons from a civil, military and political perspective, without examining the steps taken by the government to ensure that the conflict on the northern border corresponded with legal standards, both domestic and international, as required from all states that claim to be democratic, moral and subject to the rule of law, empties the inquiry of any meaning, and even contravenes the basic tenets of democracy, namely, the obligation to observe the rule of law even in times of war or crisis.
6. At the end of the first week of the conflict, when reports of hundreds of Lebanese civilian deaths and thousands of injured began to flow in, we turned to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense to voice our concerns of the ongoing and severe suffering to which the Lebanese civilian population was being subjected. In our appeal we emphasized the fact that “the high numbers of injured among the Lebanese civilian population, indicates that the planning and carrying out of the IDF operation did not include precautionary measures to prevent disproportionate injury to the civilian population, damage to its infrastructure, and adherence to the rule of distinction, as required by War law. In light of this severe impact on innocent civilians, a very real suspicion has arisen that war crimes are being perpetrated.”(For the full text please see the link situated on the upper section of the left sidebar)
7. The level of suffering imposed on the Lebanese civilian population, as a result of military operations that were allegedly in breach of the basic principles of humanitarian law, only intensified as the fighting continued.
8. In order to illustrate the claims concerning the army`s alleged breaches of international humanitarian law, we will hereby refer to two incidents that raise substantive doubts of their legality: the killing of innocent civilians in Kfar Qana, and the use of cluster bombs in the heart of residential areas.
9. On 30 July 2006, the Israeli Air Force bombed a three-storey residential building in the Hariva neighborhood in Kfar Qana in Southern Lebanon. As a result of this bombing attack, at least 28 innocent civilians were killed, among whom were children. The military personnel in charge of the operation had at their disposal, among others things, the following background information: the level of destruction of the area’‘s infrastructure, including bridges and roads, and the fact that the air force was targeting any vehicles carrying refugees fleeing to the north. This prevented many of the residents from leaving their homes and forced them to remain in their villages.
10. The bombing of residential buildings under these circumstances, as detailed in our appeal to the Prime Minister on 31 July 2006 (for the full text please see the link situated on the upper section of the left sidebar) represents an alleged violation of the principle of distinction, and the requirement to exercise caution, that are obligatory considerations for combative forces.
11. As the fighting in the north of the country stopped, the bomb-disposal unit of the U.N. Mine Action Coordination Center located thousand of unexploded cluster bombs that had been dropped in the center of residential areas. The use of cluster bombs in the heart of built-up areas represents a blatant violation of humanitarian law, both because this weaponry cannot be accurately aimed at concrete military targets, and because these explosive devices, in practice, turn the targeted territory into a minefield that endangers the civilian population. (For the full text please see the link situated on the upper section of the left sidebar).
12. It should be emphasized that these incidents are not the only military operations that are suspected of being illegal.
13. The gravity of the breaches of international humanitarian law and international criminal law, which was made apparent by the events set forth above, place a clear obligation on the committee to investigate the alleged breach of the basic provisions of humanitarian law.
14. The obligation to investigate ministerial responsibility for these severe breaches of humanitarian law is further reinforced by the calls by senior government ministers to carry out war crimes in Lebanon. Examples of which are, interviews given by Minister Eliyahu Yishai and the former Minister Haim Ramon, on the Army Radio station on 9 August 2006, when they called on the army to “flatten” whole villages in Lebanon. These statements directly contravene the basic tenets of humanitarian law and are liable to be interpreted as an expression of the State of Israel’‘s policy to commit war crimes.
15. In light of all the aforementioned, we request that you ensure that the committee’‘s mandate include an investigation of alleged grave violations of humanitarian law.
Respectfully,
Attorney Dan Yakir
ACRI’‘s Chief Legal Counsel
Attorney Sonia Boulos
