Israeli War Crimes Committed In Lebanon In 1978 And 1982

Israeli War Crimes Committed In Lebanon In 1978 And 1982

Encyclopedia of the Palestine Problem, Chapter Thirty, Part 3 of 4

UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTIONS CONDEMNING ISRAEL'S WAR OF AGGRESSION AGAINST LEBANON IN 1982 (continued from part 2)

Security Council resolution 521(1982)

Adopted by the Security Council at its 2396th meeting an 19 September 1982

The Security Council,

Appalled at the massacre of Palestinian civilians in Beirut, Having heard the report of the Secretary-General (S/15400),

Noting that the Government of Lebanon has agreed to the dispatch of United Nations observers to the sites of greatest human suffering and losses in and around that city,

1. Condemns the criminal massacre of Palestinian civilians in Beirut;

2. Reaffirms once again its resolutions 5 12 (1 982) and 5 13 (1982) which call for respect for the rights of the civilian population without any discrimination and repudiates all acts of violence against that population.

3. Authorizes the Secretary-General as an immediate step to increase the number of United Nations observers in and around Beirut from 10 to 50 and insists that there shall be no interference with the deployment of the observers and that they shall have full freedom of movement;

4. Requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Government of Lebanon, to ensure the rapid deployment of those observers in order that they may contribute in every way possible within their mandate, to the effort to ensure full protection for the civilian population;

5. Requests the Secretary-General as a matter of urgency to initiate appropriate consultations and in particular consultations with the Government of Lebanon on additional steps which the Council might take, including the possible deployment of United Nations forces, to assist that Government in ensuring full protection for the civilian population in and around Beirut and requests him to report to the Council within forty-eight hours;

6. Insists that all concerned must permit United Nations observers and forces established by the Security Council in Lebanon to be deployed and to discharge their mandates and in this connection solemnly calls attention to the obligation on all Member States under Article 25 of the Charter to accept andcarry out the decisions of the Council in accordance with the Charter;

7. Requests the Secretary-General to keep the Council informed on an urgent and continuing basis. (190)

General Assembly resolution ES-7/5
26 June 1982.

QUESTION OF PALESTINE

The General Assembly

Having considered the question of Palestine at its resumed seventh emergency special session,

Having heard the statement of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,

Alarmed by the worsening situation in the Middle East resulting from Israel's acts of aggression against the sovereignty of Lebanon and the Palestinian people in Lebanon,

Recalling Security Council resolutions 508(1982) of 5 June 1982, 509(1982) of 6 June 1982 and 5 l2(1982) of 19 June 1982,

Taking note of the reports of the Secretary-General relevant to this situation, particularly his report of 7 June 1982,

Taking note of the two positive replies to the Secretary- General by the Government of Lebanon and the Palestine Liberation Organization,

Noting with regret that the Security Council has, so far, failed to take effective and practical measures, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, to ensure implementation of its resolutions 508(1982) and 509(1982),

Referring to the humanitarian principles of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, andto the obligations arising from the regulations annexed to the Hague Conventions of 1907,

Deeply concerned at the sufferings of the Palestinian and Lebanese populations,

Reaffirming once again its conviction that the question of Palestine is the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict and that no comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the region will be achieved without the full exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable national rights,

Reaffirming further that a just and comprehensive settlement of the situation in the Middle East cannot be achieved without the participation on an equal footing of all the parties to the conflict, including the Palestine Liberation Organization as the representative of the Palestinian people,

1. Reaffirms the fundamental principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force;

2. Demands that all Member States and other parties observe strict respect for Lebanon's sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence within its internationally recognized boundaries;

3. Decides to support fully the provisions of Security Council resolutions 508(1982j and 509(1982) in which the Council, inter alia. demanded that:

(a) Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon;

(b) All parties to the conflict cease immediate1 y and simultaneously all military activities within Lebanon and across the Lebanese-Israeli border;

4. Condemns Israel for its non-compliance with resolutions 508(1982) and 509(1982);

5. Demands that Israel comply with all the above provisions no later than 0600 hours (Beirut time) on Sunday, 27 June 1982;

6. Calls upon the Security Council to authorize the Secretary-General to undertake necessary endeavours and practical steps to implement the provisions of resolutions 508(1982), 509(1982) and 5 12(1982);

7. Urges the Security Council, in the event of continued failure by Israel to comply with the demands contained in resolutions 508(1982) and 509(1982), to meet in order to consider practical ways and means in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;

8. Calls upon all States and international agencies and organizations to continue to provide the most extensive humanitarian aid possible to the victims of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon;

9. Requests the Secretary-General to delegate a high-level commission to investigate and assess the extent of loss of human life and material damage and to report, as soon as possible, on the result of this investigation to the General Assembly and the Security Council;

10. Decides to adjourn the seventh emergency special session temporarily and to authorize the President of the latest regular session of the United Nations to resume its meetings upon request from the Member States.

Recorded voted in Assembly as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Israeli War Crimes Committed in Lebanon in 1978 and 1982 807 Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian SSR, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Fiji, Finland. France, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of Ghana. Greece, Guniea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway. Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania. Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka. Sudan, Suriname, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia.

Against: Israel, United States. (191)

General Assembly resolution ES-7/9
24 September 1982.

QUESTION OF PALESTINE

The General Assembly,

Having considered the question of Palestine at its resumed seventh emergency special session,

Having heard the statement of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people,

Recalling and reaffirming, in particular, its resolution 194(111) of 11 December 1948,

Appalled at the massacre of Palestinian civilians in Beirut,

Recalling Security Council resolutions 508(1982) of 5 June 1982, 509(1982) of 6 June 1982, 513(1982) of 4 July 1982,520(1982) of 17 September 1982 and 521(1982) of 19 September 1982,

Taking note of the reports of the Secretary-General relevant to the situation, particularly his report of 18 September 1982,

Noting with regret that the Security Council has so far not taken effective and practical measures, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, to ensure implementation of its resolutions 508(1982) and 509(1982),

Referring to the humanitarian principles of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and to the obligations arising from the regulations annexed to the Hague Conventions of 1907.

Deeply concerned at the suffering of the Palestinian and Lebanese civilian populations,

Noting the homelessness of the Palestinian people,

Reaffirming the imperative need to permit the Palestinian people to exercise their legitimate rights,

1. Condemns the criminal massacre of Palestinian and other civilians in Beirut on 17 September 1982;

2. Urges the Security Council to investigate, through the means available to it, the circumstances and extent of the massacre of Palestinian and other civilians in Beirut on 17 September 1982, and to make public the report on its findings as soon as possible;

3. Decides to support fully the provisions of Security Council resolutions 508(1982) and 509(1982), in which the Council, inter alia, demanded that:

(a) Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon;

(b) All parties to the conflict cease immediately and simultaneously all military activities within Lebanon andacross the Lebanese-Israeli border;

4. Demands that all Member States and other parties observe strict respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries;

5. Reaffirms the fundamental principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force;

6 . Resolves that, in conformity with its resolution 194(111) and subsequent relevant resolutions, the Palestinian refugees should be enabled to return to their homes and property from which they have been uprooted and displaced, and demands that Israel comply unconditionally and immediately with the present resolution;

7. Urges the Security Council, in the event of continued failure by Israel to comply with the demands contained in resolutions 508(1982) and 509(1982) and the present resolution, to meet in order to consider practical ways and means in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;

8. Calls upon all States and international agencies and organizations to continue to provide the most extensive humanitarian aid possible to the victims of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon;

9. Requests the Secretary-General to prepare a photographic exhibit of the massacre of 17 September 1982 and to display it in the United Nations visitors' Hall;

10. Decides to adjourn the seventh emergency special session temporarily and to authorize the President of the latest regular session of the General Assembly to resume its meetings upon request from Member States. Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian SSR, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros Congo. Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco. Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua. Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles. Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against: Israel, United States. (192)

General Assembly Resolution 37/134, 17 December 1982.

RESOLUTION 37/134. ASSISTANCE TO THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE

The General Assembly,

Recalling its resolution ES-715 of 26 June 1982,

Recalling also Security Council resolution 512(1982) of 19 June 1982,

Recalling further Economic and Social Council resolution 1982/48 of 27 July 1982,

Expressing its deep alarm at the Israeli. invasion of Lebanon, which claimed the lives of a very large number of civilian Palestinians,

Horrified by the Sabra and Shatila massacre,

Noting with deep concern the dire need of the Palestinian victims of the Israeli invasion for urgent humanitarian assistance,

Noting the need to provide economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people,

1 . Condemns Israel for its invasion of Lebanon, which inflicted severe damage on civilian Palestinians, including heavy loss of human life, intolerable suffering and massive material destruction;

2. Endorses Economic and Social Council resolution 1982/48;

3. Calls upon Governments and relevant United Nations bodies to provide humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian victims of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon;

4. Requests the relevant programmes, agencies, organs and organizations of the United Nations system to intensify their efforts, in cooperation with the Palestine Liberation Organization, to provide economic and social assistance to the Palestinian people;

5. Also requests that United Nations assistance to the Palestinians in the Arab host countries should be rendered in cooperation with the Palestine Liberation Organization and with the consent of the Arab host Government concerned;

6. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the General Assembly at its thirty-eighth session, through the Economic and Social Council, on the progress made in the implementation of the present resolution.

109th plenary meeting, 17 December 1982 (193)

General Assembly resolution 37/123 D
16 December 1982.

The General Assembly,

Recalling its resolution 95(1) of 11 December 1946, in which it, inter alia affirmed that genocide is a crime under international law which the civilized world condemns, and for the commission of which principals and accomplices - whether private individuals, public officials or statesmen, and whether the crime is committed on religious, racial, political or any other grounds - are punishable,

Referring to the provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1948,

Recalling the relevant provisions of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,

Appalled at the large-scale massacre of Palestinian civilians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps situated at Beirut.

Recognizing the universal outrage and condemnation of that massacre,

Recalling its resolution ES-7/9 of 24 September 1982,

1 . Condemns in the strongest terms the large-scale massacre of Palestinian civilians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps;

2. Resolves that the massacre was an act of genocide.

Recorded vote in Assembly as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian SSR, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Cameroon, United Republic of Tanzania, Upper Volta, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia.

Against: None.

Abstaining: Australia, Barbados, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Dominican Republic, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States. (194)

AN INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS CONDEMNS ISRAEL FOR WAR CRIMES AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY COMMITTED IN LEBANON

A Commission of distinguished international jurists held sessions in London from August 28 to November 29,1982 to investigate the Israeli war of aggression in Lebanon. They heard many witnesses and representatives of organizations in Lebanon, Jerusalem, the West Bank, Amman, London, Oslo, Damascus and Cyprus. The Commission was composed of the following distinguished jurists: (195)

Chairman:

Sean MacBride, SC
President, International Peace Bureau, Geneva
Member of International Commission of Jurists
former Minister for External Affairs, Ireland
former Assistant Secretary-General, United Nations
former UN Commissioner for Namibia Nobel Peace Prize, 1974
Lenin International Prize for Peace,
1977 America Medal for Justice,
1978 Dag Hammarskjold Award, 1980

Commission:

Richard Falk Albert G. Milbank
Professor of International Law and Practice, Princeton University and
Vice-chairman of the International Commission

Kader Asmal
Senior Lecturer in Law and Dean of the Faculty of Arts (Humanities), Trinity College, Dublin

Brian Bercusson
Lecturer in Laws Queen Mary College, University of London

Geraud de la Pradelle
Professor of Private Law University of Paris

Stefan Wild
Professor of Semitic Languages and Islamic Studies, University of Bonn

The terms of reference of the Commission, as agreed at its constituting session in London on 28 August, 1982, are to answer, among others, the following questions, which seem to be the principal questions arising from the invasion of the Lebanon by Israel:

1. Has the Government of Israel committed acts of aggression contrary to international law?

2. Have the Israeli armed forces made use of weapons or methods of warfare forbidden by international law, including the laws of war?

3. Have Palestinian and Lebanese, or other, prisoners been subjected to treatment forbidden by international law, including inhuman or degrading treatment? Has there been a violation of international law arising out of the classification of or denial of status to Palestinian prisoners or detainees?

4. Has there been deliberate or indiscriminate orreckless bombardment of a civilian character, for example: hospitals, schools, or other non-military targets?

5. Has there been systematic bombardment or other destruction of towns, cities, villages or refugee camps? 6. Have the acts of the Israeli armed forces caused the dispersal, deportation, or ill-treatment of populations, in violation of international law?

7. Has the Government of Israel valid reasons under international law for its invasion of the Lebanon, for the manner in which it conducted hostilities, or for its actions as an occupying force?

8. To what extent, if any, were the Israeli authorities or forces involved, directly or indirectly, in the massacres or other killings that were reported to have been carried out by Lebanese militia men in the refugee camps of Sabra and Chatila in the Beirut area between the dates of 16 and 18 September? (196)

CONCLUSIONS

The principal and essential judgementsof the Commission are concerned and connected with the eight questions which constituted the Terms of Reference of the Commission. In addition, evidence presented to the Commission has led it to formulate additional conclusions. The general conclusions are first related to the eight questions, with the additional conclusions following:

1. Has the Government of Israel committed acts of aggression contrary to international law?

The Commission considers that Israel has been guilty of aggression against the sovereignty of Lebanon and the rights of the Palestinian people. Such aggression has taken place contrary to the provisions of the Charter of the UN and other fundamental principles of international law. Such a violation of international law has been described by the principle legal body of the UN, the International Law Commission, as a crime under international law, since the wrongful act results from a breach of an international obligation 'essential for the protection of the fundamental interests of the international community as a whole.'

The Commission considers that Israel is also in breach of the international obligation to safeguard the right of selfdetermination of thePalestinian people and of the rules of law prohibiting the establishment or maintenance by force of colonial domination. The Commission is convinced that until Israel recognises the legitimate rights of the Palestinians, including the right of self-determination, there can be no lasting peace in the Middle East or an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict. These crimes of State give rise to criminal liability as far as the State of Israel is concerned. The Commission wishes to draw attention to the legal and political responsibility of other states, international bodies and public and private organisations which assist in the commission of various crimes, but especially the crime of aggression.

Israel has persistently violated the principles of thecharter of the United Nations and has systematically refused to agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council" in accordance with Article 25 of the Charter. Decisions of the Security Council are not limited to the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter where the Security Council determines that there is a "threat to the peace, breach of the peace or act of aggression." Such a determination by the Security Council has not been made because of the use or threat of the use of the veto by the United States. However, Israel is obliged to carry out the decisions of the Security Council which fall within the competence of the appropriate organ of the United Nations.

The refusal by Israel to withdraw from Lebanon, to lift the blockade of Beirut and to allow free movement to UN observers as requested by the United Nations, especially as these illegal activities were taking place in the territory of another sovereign state, Lebanon, are serious attacks on the integrity of the United Nations.

Israel, in addition, has systematically refused to settle its disputes peacefully, contrary to the international obligations undertaken under Article 2(3) of the Charter of the United Nations.

The Commission draws the attention of States to the important legal duty not to recognise in any way the consequence of Israel's illegal action in the Lebanon, especially as they may relate to the continued illegal occupation of Lebanese territory.

As the commission of an intentionally wrongful act entails a State's international responsibility, Israel is under obligation to make reparation for the consequences of its wrongful actions. The International Law Commission has described this proposition of law as "one of the principles most deeply rooted in the doctrine of international law." Reparation or compensation is an indispensable complement of a failure to respect rules of law. Israel therefore owes a duty of reparation to the State of Lebanon for the physical destruction, loss of lives and general damage caused. In addition it is obliged to compensate the Palestinian people for the direct and indirect consequences of the war of aggression.

2. Have the Israeli armed forces made use of weapons or methods of warfare forbidden by international law, including the laws of war?

The Commission concludes that the use made of fragmentation and incendiary weapons by the Israeli armed forces violated the international legal principles of proportionality and discrimination. Acts of violence were directed against refugee camps, hospitals, schools, cultural, religious and charitable institutions, commercial and industrial premises, Lebanese Government and PLO offices, diplomatic premises and urban areas generally, which were not justified by the principle of military necessity. The damage and destruction to civilian objects and the casualties among the civilian population were, in the Commission's view, the consequence of violations by the Israeli forces of the legal principles governing the conduct and method of war.

3. Have Palestinian and Lebanese, or other, prisoners been subjected to treatment forbidden by international law, including inhuman or degrading treatment? Has there been a violation of international law arising out of the classification or denial of status to Palestinian prisoners or detainees?

The Commission concludes that Israel violated international rules dealing with prisoners, both civilians and fighters, particularly by denying Palestinian and Lebanese fighters prisoner-of-war status, as provided under GenevaConvention II1 of 1949 and the Additional Protocol I of 1977, and by subjecting these prisoners to unlawful treatment which included degrading treatment and brutality, on occasion leading to death, during arrest and transportation. Forbidden interrogation of detainees, both of prisoners-of-war and civilians, was often conducted with violence and sometimes torture, contrary to the Geneva Conventions, Detainees were intentionally deprived of medical care in camps both in Israel and at Al Ansar in Lebanon and have been kept in degrading conditions, all of which are contrary to the Conventions and the Protocol.

4. Has there been deliberate or indiscriminate or reckless bombardment of civilian targets, for example: hospitals, schools or other non-military objectives?

The Commission concludes that the bombardment by the Israeli forces displayed at best a disregard for civilian objects such as hospitals, schools and dwellings; that on many occasions, the Israeli forces were careless in their bombardment of any distinction between military and civilian targets; and that at least some of the damage and destruction wrought was a consequence of deliberate and intentional bombardment of objects which could only have been perceived as civilian in nature. There were, therefore, clear violations of the laws of war.

5. Has there been systematic bombardment or other destruction of towns, cities, villages or refugee camps?

The Commission's view is that the attacks and the bombardment by the Israeli forces of centres of population were, in many cases, disproportionate in their effects on civilian objects and population relative to any military advantage gained. The Commission concludes that there were violations of the principle of proportionality and acts of violence contrary to the lawsof war. The responsibility forthese violations lies upon those commanders of the Israeli forces and their political superiors who planned and decided upon attacks which could be expected to and did cause civilian casualties and damage and destruction to civilian objects excessive in relation to the military advantage, if any, anticipated.

6. Have the acts of the Israeli armed forces caused the dispersal, deportation, or ill-treatment of populations, in violation of international law?

The Commission concludes that one of the principal aims of the invasion of Lebanon was to ensure the dispersal of the Palestinian population which was pursued through the destruction of the refugee camps and the massacres at Sabra and Chatila. The terror bombing of civilian areas, especially in Beirut, was partly motivated by a desire to ensure the dispersal of the population. As for the ill-treatment of the population, the practice of the forcible assembly of the population on the beaches at Tyre and Sidon resulted in the deprivation of food, water and medical attention for days and exposures in the sun. Thousands of persons, especially males between 14 and 60 were systematically detained, many of whom were deported to Israel to be imprisoned. These pracIsraeli War Crimes Committed in Lebanon in 1978 and 1982 81 1 tices are in serious breach of the Geneva Conventions and Protocol I.

7. Has the Government of Israel valid reasons under intemational law for its invasion of Lebanon, for the manner in which it conducted hostilities, or for its actions as an occupying force?

The Commission considers that the invasion of Lebanon by Israel is one of the most serious breaches of the international legal order in recent years. It has been attended by violence, death and destruction of enormous proportions and the gruesome massacres of September that followed the invasion are the direct consequence of the invasion. The invasion has no validity in international law as Israel did not have any grounds to rely on the provision of the Charter of the United Nations concerning self-defence, while the means used to effect the invasion totally lacked proportionality. The cease-fire of July 1981 had been observed scrupulously. The objective of the war, therefore, was to achieve certain political and strategic aims at a high cost, which included breaches of some of the most fundamental rules of international law.

As for the Israeli justification for the conduct of hostilities, the principle of military necessity cannot excuse the massive destruction of buildings and the number of civilian casualties which resulted from Israeli operations. As for its actions as an occupying power, Israel's need for security does not justify its violation of the territorial sovereignty of Lebanon or its ill-treatment of the civilian population and protected persons such as prisoners-of-war.

8. To what extent, if any, were the Israeli authorities or forces involved, directly or indirectly, in the massacres or other killings that were reported to have been carried out by the Lebanese militiamen in the refugee camps of Sabra and Chatila in the Beirut area between the dates of 16 and 18 September?

The Commission concludes that the Israeli authorities bear a heavy legal responsibility, as the occupying power, for the massacres at Sabra and Chatila. From the evidence disclosed, Israel was involved in the planning and the preparation of the massacres and played a facilitative role in the actual killings.

The Commission draws attention to the fact that unlike crimes of State, such as the crime of aggression, where only the State is liable,crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity, as identified in paragraphs 1-8 above, invite individual responsibility, with an obligation on States to punish individuals or organisations in accordance with the rules of their internal law.

The Nuremberg Principles, which are now part of customary international law, identified 'leaders, organisations, instigators and accomplices, participating in the formulation or execution of acommon plan or conspiracy to commit' these crimes, as responsible for all acts performed by any person in execution of such a plan.

Under the Geneva Conventions of 1949, as supplemented by Protocol I of 1977, States party to the Conventions are obliged to prosecute individuals, regardless of nationality, for serious breaches of specific provisions of the Conventions. The Commission, having considered the evidence and the relevant rules of law, concludes, in relation to the questions posed in its terms of reference, that:

1. The Government of Israel has committed acts of aggression contrary to international law.

2. The Israeli armed forces have made use of weapons or methods of warfare forbidden by international law, including the laws of war.

3. Palestinian, Lebanese and prisoners of other nationalities have been subjected to treatment forbidden by international law, including inhuman and degrading treatment. In addition, there has been a violation of international law arising out of a denial of prisoner-of-war status to Palestinian prisoners or detainees.

4. There has been deliberate or indiscriminate or reckless bombardment of a civilian character, of hospitals, schools and other non-military targets.

5. There has been systematic bombardment and other destruction of towns, cities, villages and refugee camps. 6. The acts of the Israeli armed forces have caused the dispersal, deportation and ill-treatment of populations, in violation of intemational law.

7. The Government of Israel has no valid reasons under international law for its invasion of the Lebanon, for the manner in which it conducted hostilities or for its actions as an occupying force.

8. Israeli authorities or forces were involved, directly or indirectly in the massacres and other killings that have been reported to have been carried out by Lebanese militiamen in the refugee camps of Sabra and Chatila in the Beirut area between 16 and 18 September. (197)

ANOTHER INDEPENDENT INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ARRIVES AT THE SAME CONCLUSIONS

Another independent International Commission of Inquiry was set up by the initiative of John Plaits-Mills, Barrister at Law of London. His initiative was supported by the Government of the Republic of Cyprus. The Commission's objective was to collect, elucidate and evaluate facts and events regarding the Israeli crimes against the Lebanese and the Palestinian people.

It was composed of the following distinguished world figures and jurists: (198)

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

I. Presidential committee of the Commission

Mr. John Platts-Mills Barrister; Queens's Counsellor; (United Kingdom)

Mrs. Dorothy Crowfoot- Hodgkin Scientist; Nobel Prize Laureate (United Kingdom)

Mr. D. A. Desai Justice of the Supreme Court, (India)

Mr. Lars Carlzon Bishop of Stockholm, (Sweden)

Mr. Mikis Theodorakis Member of Parliament; Composer (Greece)

Mr. Boubcar Seck Member of Parliament; (Senegal)

Marshal Francisco da Costa Gomes Former President of the Republic of Portugal (Portugal)

Mrs. Pirkko Tyolajarvi Vice-Chairman of the Social Democratic Party, (Finland)

II. Secretary General of the Commission

Mr. John Platts-Mills Barrister; Queen's Counsellor; (United Kingdom)

III. Members of the Secretariat

Mrs. Paulette Pierson-Mathy Professor of International Law (Belgium)

Mr. Alexander Berkov Doctor of Constitutional Law; (USSR)

Dr. Gerhard Stuby Professor of Law (FRG)

IV. Members of the Commission Dr. John Takman Physician (Sweden)

Prof. Vladimir Kudriavtsev Director, Institute of State and Law of the Academy of Sciences (USSR)

Dr. Gerald Home Professor of Law (USA)

Mr. Jaya Pathirana Former Judge of the Supreme Court (Sri Lanka)

Mrs. Monique Chemillier-Gendreau Professor of International Law (France)

Mr. Evangelos Maheras President of the Lawyers Association (Greece)

Dr. Florence Hetzler Professor of Philosophy (USA)

Dr. Miguel d'Estefano Pisani Professor of International Law (Cuba)

Dr. Willi Sommerfeld Doctor of International Law (GDR)

Mr. Jules Borker Lawyer (France)

Mr. Slavtcho Transki Member of Parliament; One of the leaders of the resistance against Fascism during World War II; (Bulgaria)

Mr. Ervin Reti Expert on Middle East Affairs, (Hungary)

Mr. Ernie Ross (Observer) Member of Parliament; (United Kingdom)

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

On June 6, 1982, the regular Israeli troops invaded Lebanon and committed aggression against the Palestinian and Lebanese people. The goal of this invasion was to liquidate the ~alestineiiberation Organisation primarily by killing as many Palestinians as possible. The aggressors killed, wounded and maimed dozens of thousands of the Lebanese and Palestinians, predominantly women, children and old people; thousands upon thousands of people are missing, while close to a million people have been left homeless or have been forced to flee from their native cities and villages. It was in cold blood that the invaders destroyed fourteen Palestinian refugee camps, three major cities in Southern Lebanon, and 32 villages.

The International Commission of Inquiry into the Israeli Crimes against the Lebanese and Palestinian Peoples met in Nicosia, Cyprus, on the 15th and 16 August, 1982. The Commission met at a time when events of an exceptional gravity which violate all rules of international law such as to upset the human conscience are taking place in Lebanon due to the war of aggression and extermination made by Israel against the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples.

The Commission is an independent body responsible for its own activities and decisions. Its members took part in the Commission as individuals, not as representatives of organisations or states. The functions of the Commission are to collect, hear and evaluate evidence of facts and events within the scope of the inquiry for which it is constituted and come to the conclusion on the evidence.

The Commission was much impressed with the quality, truth and integrity of the witnesses who gave evidence before it and of the authenticity and genuineness of the documents produced before it. In reaching its conclusions and findings, the Commission made it a point to be satisfied beyond doubt before doing so.

The Commission heard the evidence of a wide range of witnesses, many of whom had actually observed events in Lebanon. These included three members of the Commission itself, Paulette Pierson-Mathy (Belgium), Mikis Theodorakis (Greece) and Hans Goran Franck (Sweden), who were sent to Lebanon before the meeting, members of Scandinavian, Greek, Dutch, Canadian, Finnish and French medical teams, social workers and journalists who had worked in or visited West Beirut, and experts on military matters and on the lethal effects of the sophisticated weapons used by the Israelis in Lebanon and also witnesses from inside Israel.

The most detailed account of the effects of the invasion in South Lebanon came from the doctors and social helpers who had worked in Nabatiyeh, Sidon and the refugee camp of Ain El-Helweh.

These described the terrible conditions of the Palestinian and Lebanese peoples, who fled when their homes were largely destroyed only to be further bombed in the refuges they had taken.

The doctors also gave the effects of different kinds of bombs, particularly cluster bombs and phosphorous bombs, on men, women and children, and the total destruction of the livelihood of people already living near the edge of existence. Dr. Christos Giannou (Canada) and Mr. Oyvind Moller (Norway) also described their arrest, together with that of Dr. Steiner Berge (Norway) by the Israeli forces and their detention in Sidon and Megido. Though they were not themselves physically assaulted, they witnessed the inhuman treatment of prisoners - Palestinian, Lebanese and other nationalities - bound after blindfolded, forced to sit all day in the sun on tarmac surface, given very little food and water, frequently beaten. Several prisoners diedduring the four days they spent in detention in Sidon. Dr. Franklin Lamb (USA) gave evidence of the use of cluster bombs, phosphorous bombs made in USA, against civilian population.

From the Commission members who visited West Beirut and the doctors and journalists who entered the city in the last few weeks, came detailed evidences of the bombing of the city. The widespread indiscriminate character of the destruction was shown by many slides, examples of the different kinds of bombs used had been photographed or brought to us. Many slides were also shown of the terrible wounds inflicted by phosphorous bombs and cluster bombs; the doctors described the difficulties of treating the wounds. Burning phosphorous is hard to extinguish, it penetrates deeply and continues burning until the flesh is charred and destroyed.

It was clear that the large majority of wounded and dead were civilians; it was a feature of the destruction that there were more dead than wounded. Slides showed also the difficulties of living in a city arbitrarily deprived at intervals of food and water and electricity; long queues for water, children filling vessels at polluted pools.

From Israel itself came reports of growing development of opposition to the war; a majority of the people at present support it. News on television and in the press in Israel does not show the character of the war or the effect of the bombs as it is revealed in other countries. Only slowly is information being brought by returning soldiers.

There is a considerable number of international legal acts applicable to the crimes Israel has committed in Lebanon — the Saint Petersburg Declaration of 1868, the Hague Convention of 1907 on the rules of the land war, the Charter of the International Military Tribunal of 1945 in Nuremburg, the Convention on the prevention of the crime of genocide and on its punishment of 1948, the Geneva Convention of 1949 and the First Supplementary Protocol of 1977, the Definition of Aggression of 1974 and many other international legal acts. Israel violates the ban on resorting to force in international affairs proclaimed as far back as 1928 in the Briand-Kellogg Pact.

The State of Israel and its Zionist rulers are accused of the following criminal actions:

I - Crimes against Peace;

II - Crimes against Humanity;

III - War Crimes, and

IV - Actions aimed at denying the right of self determination to the Palestinian people.

Go to part 4

Go to part 2
Go to part 1

Back to our section on the Jewish war against Lebanon