Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 30 May 2017
59. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the efforts being made to address the denial of human rights to Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike; if diplomatic services in Tel Aviv and Ramallah have had discussions with the relevant authorities; and the engagement that there has been at European level regarding same. [25449/17]
View answerMy question relates to the Palestinian prisoners being denied basic human rights and forced to go onto hunger strike. The question is also about Ireland's role in bringing these concerns to the relevant authorities through our diplomatic services in Tel Aviv and Ramallah, and the engagement at EU level on this matter.
I refer the Deputy to my earlier reply to Question No. 49 and to the Topical Issues debate on 10 May, when I was able to address this matter in more detail.
I acknowledge the end of the hunger strike by Palestinian prisoners following an agreement reached at the weekend. It is understood a new arrangement for a second family visit per month, and possibly other understandings, were the basis for ending the strike.
As the hunger strike by more than 1,000 prisoners was entering its seventh week it was a matter of great concern, and I am relieved that it has been ended without death or tragedy.
We had spoken directly about the need to avoid a tragic outcome with the Israeli ambassador and in other contacts with the Israeli authorities. The EU missions in Palestine, including Ireland’s mission in Ramallah, issued a public statement concerning the hunger strikes, calling on Israel to respect fully the rights of prisoners. A further EU statement at higher level was being prepared when word came through of the ending of the hunger strike.
In expressing our concerns, I want to make clear we had to be conscious that many prisoners, including some of those on hunger strike, had been convicted of very serious and most violent offences, and that we could express similar or stronger concerns about prisoners in many other jurisdictions in the region, as well as in Israel.
We raised this matter in a rather low-key way for two reasons, namely, as I made quite clear earlier, we cannot support or encourage the use of hunger strikes as a means of exerting pressure and we are aware from our own history of the real risk of attitudes hardening on either side, leading to death and tragedy, and the danger of a hunger strike leading to increased tensions and clashes on the streets. We did not want to say anything that might increase the risk.
I will not comment any further on specific issues raised by the strikers. I have little detail on what has been agreed. However, I will state Ireland's essential position was that detained Palestinians should have the same protections and conditions that Israel affords its own citizens when detained.
I thank the Minister. I listened to his earlier reply. I also welcome the fact there has been resolution. The question has to be asked why do these men and women feel the need to go on hunger strike and take such a drastic decision, which could have had very serious repercussions on their health and lives if it had continued. When I saw what they achieved by going on hunger strike I asked myself whether that was all they were looking for. They were very basic rights, which other people would take for granted. Prisoners have human rights, and international human rights law guarantees them basic human rights, such as freedom from torture and freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. What they achieved was very simple, including landlines in prison, better health care, which one would assume would be taken for granted, and more regular family visits. There is a need to respect the rights of prisoners, regardless of where they are, and there are concerns about increasing use of solitary confinement.
I acknowledge and agree with what Deputy O'Sullivan has said about the role of international law. Under international law, it is fair to say Palestinian prisoners should be held in their own territory. After 50 years of occupation, there is not much of an excuse for failing to have adequate detention facilities in the occupied territory. I understand holding prisoners in Israel creates difficulty for family visitors, given how difficult and onerous it is for Palestinians to cross into Israel. For as long as prisoners are held in Israel, appropriate and expeditious arrangements should be made to facilitate family visits under reasonable conditions. I understand this has been part of the agreement reached with the prisoners to facilitate their ending of the hunger strike. However, there are no circumstances in which I would condone the use of hunger strikes to exert pressure or increase demands.
