Report on the Convening of a Meeting of Experts Organised By the Swiss Government which Violates the Spirit and Letter of the UN Resolutions

October 18, 1998

Report on the Convening of a Meeting of Experts Organised By the Swiss Government which Violates the Spirit and Letter of the UN Resolutions

18 October 1998

The Swiss government has decided that the period between 27^th and 29^th October 1998 will be the time for the convening of a meeting of experts that will be attended by representatives from the PLO and the Israeli government, as well as other participants invited by the Swiss government. The aim of the meeting is to examine the problems regarding the IV^th Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in times of war, both in general and in particular relation to Occupied Territories. The purpose of the meeting will be analogous to that of the 1^st periodical meeting on international humanitarian law that took place in Geneva from 19^th to 23^rd January 1998. In the spirit of periodical meetings, the objective is to maintain and strengthen dialogue between the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Convention on general problems regarding the application of international humanitarian law. This objective is based on the practice established in the 1^st periodical meeting. The nature of the proposed meeting should be an exchange of views that could be structured along the following lines:

Identification of problems and their causes

Possible solutions

Possible follow-ups

According to UN resolutions ES 10/2, ES 10/3, ES 10/4, ES 10/5, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) has asked the High Contracting Parties to the IV^th Geneva Convention to convene a conference. The aim of such a conference is to investigate the measures to be taken to implement the Convention in the OPT and to fulfil the obligations of Article 1 which emphasizes that it should be respected under all circumstances. To achieve that, the UNGA authorized the Swiss government to act as the Depositary of the convention, which involves taking the necessary action to prepare for the conference, including the possibility of convening a meeting of experts. The PLO should of course, be invited to the meetings and contributory preparations. In spite of the clear identification of the Swiss role, the Swiss government is intentionally seeking to undermine the value and violate the spirit and letter of the resolutions. One example of this is the Swiss invitation to both the Israeli government and the Palestinian National Authority for a quadrilateral meeting to be attended also by Switzerland and the ICRC. The meeting took place in Geneva between 9^th and 11^th June 1998, in spite of PCHR’s demand not to convene such a meeting due to the potential dangers that could arise. One area of concern is that the High Contracting Parties concerned regarding the applicability of the Convention have nothing to do with such a meeting, given that the question of implementing International Humanitarian Law (especially the IV^th Geneva Convention) will be a Palestinian – Israeli issue, which was not at all the aim of the UN resolutions.

Moreover, the Swiss government in mid July 1988, in a very precarious development, concluded a proposal for a mechanism to the application of the IV^thGeneva Convention in the OPT. This is in violation of Switzerland’s authorized role which should solely be to prepare for the convening of the conference of the High Contracting Parties. Its role should not be to determine the track and the essence of the negotiations from the beginning,

especially the proposal to preserve the poor human rights situation in the OPT and the continued violation of the provisions of the convention. In effect, such behaviour is also a serious breach of the role of the depository whose involvement should be restricted to inviting the parties to the meeting. The depositary should not provide any proposals since it is not the owner of the Convention. We therefore believe that the Swiss Government’s intentions are unsatisfactory.

As a result of the potential danger of the Swiss arrangements and their consequences on the legal status of the OPT, as well as the applicability of the IV^th Geneva Convention in those territories, PCHR has invited a number of international and local experts specializing in international law (especially humanitarian law) to investigate and assess these developments, their consequences and to provide legal advice in that regard. Previously, different figures from the executive and legislative bodies as well as civil society organisations recommended that PCHR organize such a meeting. The experts who met in Gaza between 8^th and 9^th August 1998, have issued a number of recommendations, among those are:

“That any arrangements or initiatives in relation to the OPT must be fully in accordance with Geneva IV and must recognize that the application of the Convention is non-negotiable. Accordingly, meetings such as that held between Israel, the PLO, Switzerland (the depository for the Conventions) and the ICRC on 9-11 June 1998 (generally referred to as the ‘quadripartite meeting’ ), convened by the depository in response to UNGA Res. 10/4 of 13^th November 1997 cannot proceed on any basis other than the de jure application of Geneva IV to the OPT is given and is non-negotiable.”

“ That any mechanism put in place in response to the resolution must be fully in accordance with Geneva IV, must be based upon the de jure application of the Convention, and must not absolve, or appear to absolve, the High Contracting Parties of their responsibilities to ensure respect for the Convention, By reference to these criteria, the mechanism put forward by the Swiss Government must be considered defective.”

As for the Swiss invitation regarding the convening of the meeting of experts between 27^th and 29^th October 1998, PCHR is deeply concerned about the disregard for the letter and spirit of the aforementioned UN resolution in such a meeting, due to the following:

1. The Swiss government has identified that the aim of the meeting is to analyse the problems regarding the IV^th Geneva Conference both in general and in particular relation to the Occupied Territories, which makes the content of the meeting absolutely meaningless. Identifying the aim of the meeting in such a way means that any reference to the OPT or to the Israeli Occupation is a deviation from the purpose of the meeting, when in fact the meeting should be devoted to these issues. Indeed, this meeting would be no more or less relevant had it taken place ten years earlier or later. Again this is a breach of the letter and spirit of the relevant UN resolutions which were adopted as a result of a deterioration of the human rights situation in the OPT. The High Contracting Parties were thus asked to convene a meeting to apply the IVth Geneva Convention (according to Article 1).

The Swiss Government has identified the meeting as being analogous to that of the first periodical meeting of International Humanitarian Law and based on the spirit of periodical meetings, especially the 26^th International Conference of the Red Cross and

Red Crescent in 1995. Therefore, the aim of the meeting will be of a general character and will not relate to any specific situation. In addition, its purpose is to maintain and strengthen the dialogue between the High Contracting Parties regarding the application of International Humanitarian Law. This means that the meeting will not be allocated to discussion on the OPTs, it will merely be dialogue between parties on general issues, which is once again a violation of the role of the Swiss by the UN.

The Swiss Government has described the discussions of the meeting as being unofficial. Therefore no rules of procedure will be applied and there will be no bureau. Switzerland as the depository will chair the meeting. What is the purpose of an unofficial meeting? It is unclear whether or not it is the meeting that has been mentioned in the UN resolutions. If this is the case, then it should be defined and should be subject to the definite rules and procedures. There should be a bureau to organise discussions and to chair the meetings as with any other meetings. By ignoring the official proceof the meeting, both its role and the issues in question are devalued. Due to the potential danger of the Swiss arrangements, PCHR, while expressing its deep concern, is demanding the following:

One of the main criticisms of PCHR regarding the Palestinian participation, is the mixing of the role of the PLO and the PNA. The whole file has been entrusted to the Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation (MOPIC) , while it should in the hands of the PLO for legal and political reasons. This is the case despite the UN Resolutions that stress the role of the PLO in participating and contributing to the arrangements for the conference of the High Contracting Parties.

As a result of the potential danger of these meetings, PCHR demands that the PLO withdraws and does not attend the meeting in this form, as its results would prejudice the Palestinian interests and rights. Also, the rules of international law and the UN resolutions must not be derogated from in reference to a just settlement for the Palestinian question. Moreover, PCHR is demanding that the PLO and its different institutions (especially the Executive Committee and the Palestinian National Council) on the one hand and the PNA (with its Executive Authority and the Legislative Council, as well as political parties and factions) on the other hand, take a strict and upstanding position regarding these developments which could possibly prejudice the rules of international law and its legitimacy.

The Swiss Government should immediately cease its efforts regarding the application of the IVth Geneva Conference in the OPT, considering that it intentionally violated its mandate that had been authorized by the General Assembly. Therefore, if the Swiss Government cannot stand up to Israeli and American pressure. it should ask the UN to release it from its role as long as it is unable to comply with the spirit and letter of UN resolutions.

The High Contracting Parties should break the silence and review the arrangements made by the Swiss Government and take the initiative by immediately convening their conference without delay. The conference itself is not the aim, rather, it is the de jure application of the IVth Geneva Convention in the OPT and to put an end to the systematic violations of its provisions by the Israeli belligerent occupation. The High Contracting Parties are under legal obligation to apply the Convention and to ensure that the steps taken so far will lead to this. An example of what can be done has been set out in the experts’ recommendations in the meeting in Gaza between 8^th and 9^th August 1998 . The following was recommended:

“That in view of the recommendation to the High Contracting Parties in UNGA Res. 10/4 of 13 Nov. 1997 to take measures on a national or regional level, that the initiative of the European Union in implementing the territorial applicability clause in the Interim Agreement on Trade and Trade-Related Matters with Israel be supported and endorsed as a suitable model for adoption elsewhere. It should also be made clear that the provisions of the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreements requiring respect for human rights, include respect for the instruments of international humanitarian law .“

“That an immediate initiative be taken to convene a meeting of states, identified by their concern for breaches of Geneva IV in the OPT, so that they may resolve to ensure full Israeli compliance with the Convention in whatever practical matter they may deem appropriate and effective in accordance with international law.”

PCHR is highly concerned about ICRC’s participation in the quadrilateral meeting that took place in Geneva between the 9^th and 11^th of June 1998. This participation undermined its credibility, impartiality and its interest in applying de jure the IVth Geneva Convention of 1949. Although ICRC’s current withdrawal from these meetings is appreciated, at the same time we demand that ICRC publicly clarifies its position regarding this matter.