Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 27 Jul 2010

Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel: Discussion.

Today the joint committee will hear from Ms Gerry O'Sullivan on her experiences in Hebron, where she served with the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel. I will deal with the usual housekeeping matters before we begin. Anybody who has a mobile phone that is likely to go off should destroy it, or ensure it remains silent. Apologies have been received from Deputies Breen, Creighton, Dooley, Seán Power and Treacy and Senators Donohoe and Hanafin.

Members will be aware that I have to read the privilege notice. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they are to give to the committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in relation to a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

I welcome Ms Gerry O'Sullivan and Mr. Joe O'Brien to the meeting. In the past couple of years the committee has engaged with the situation in Israel and Palestine. Members of the committee visited the area last year. The European Union's relationship with the Middle East is being considered as part of the committee's work programme. We are also looking at the Union's trade arrangements with the Euromed group of countries. The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel, an international organisation, is co-ordinated by the World Council of Churches. Sixteen countries are involved in the programme which is managed in the United Kingdom and Ireland by Quaker Peace and Social Witness.

Ms Gerry O'Sullivan lived and worked as a volunteer as part of the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel for three months from 1 January 2010. She was based in the high conflict area of Hebron which is in the southern part of the West Bank. She has made some material available to members and it has been circulated. I invite her to make a contribution of approximately ten minutes, to be followed by the responses of members and her closing remarks. Mr. O'Brien can contribute as he and Ms O'Sullivan see fit. They are very welcome.

Ms Gerry O’Sullivan

I thank the Chairman and the other members of the joint committee for inviting me to make a presentation. As the Chairman said, I spent three months in the Hebron area of the West Bank from 1 January last. I am joined by Mr. Joe O'Brien who was based in Bethlehem for three months in 2009. He and I have not met before but we have had e-mail contact. He has just recently been appointed as the advocacy co-ordinator for EAs, ecumenical accompaniers, who return from work with the EAPPI, the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel. With such a long title members will understand why I refer to it as the EAPPI.

In 1989 the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child defined a child as being a person under 18 years of age. I do not come from a legal background. However, the breaking of international law in the instances which I quote are so stark that it would not take a legally trained person to draw conclusions. The committee has received a document from me containing the articles I wrote while based in the West Bank and Hebron. I have also prepared a supplementary document which has been distributed to members. It contains all the facts and the statistics from which I will quote in my presentation which will save members from having to take notes. The supplementary information also contains two medical reports to which I will refer later and a sworn affidavit from a 15 year old called A to which I will refer later. My presentation will be a little longer than ten minutes. I hope the Chairman will be patient with me.

I am sure we can tolerate that. We have other business to deal with following this part of the meeting.

Ms Gerry O’Sullivan

I wondered which child I could leave out and then decided it would not be fair to leave out any of them from the presentation.

I fell in love in the West Bank which is surprising at my age. I fell in love with the wonderful children I met there. I want to tell members about the children and their lives under the Israeli occupation. When I met the children in the morning at 7 a.m. to accompany them on their school run they were sleepy, dreamy and quiet but by collection time at 1 p.m. they were much more lively. Everywhere we went they came to us in the street with little outstretched hands saying, "Hello, welcome to Hebron. Who are you? What is your name? Where do you come from?" They were wonderful.

I wish to take members from Leinster House on a quick journey to Hebron. I am sure members are familiar with the map I am showing. It was in The Phoenix magazine recently. It shows the fragmentation of Palestinian land since the end of the British mandate in 1946 through the wars that took place up until 2010 when one will see on the fourth graphic map a huge amount of fragmentation with the West Bank completely separated from Gaza. The occupation is in breach of international law.

I now show a photograph of the barrier wall in Bethlehem where Mr. O'Brien was based. It shows two of my colleagues, one from Norway and one from Scotland. The wall runs from the West Bank and on the Palestinian side it reflects what was the armistice line, known as the green line.

The map I am displaying now shows the level of settlement by Israeli settlers within the West Bank. The blue parts are the settlements and the pink parts are the rest of the land. That is against the Fourth Geneva Convention. Article 49 states an occupational power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territory that it occupies.

The next map shows the location of Hebron. It is in the south of the West Bank. It has a population of between 180,000 and 220,000. It is unique in that outside of east Jerusalem it is the only place where Jewish settlers are living right in the heart of the city. I am aware that some members have visited Hebron. A total of 500 to 600 settlers live in the city. They are protected by 1,500 Israeli soldiers. There are three soldiers to every settler. That fact causes great difficulties for children and the general populace of Hebron.

I would like committee members to meet Akram. He is 15 years old and Palestinian. On 24 February he was sent to the shop by his mother, Leila, with 15 shekels to buy bread. A few minutes later he was arrested. He is 15 years old and wearing a yellow hoodie in the photograph on screen, in between the soldiers. Leila is also shown in this photograph, as she came rushing out within a few minutes because she heard he had been arrested. She is pleading with the soldiers, explaining to them that she has just given him 15 shekels to buy bread and asking them please to release him. He was alleged to have thrown a stone at the military. During the period when he left his mother's shop and the time he was picked up by the military a few yards away, he was in view of members of the TIPH organisation, or the Temporary International Presence in Hebron. They told Leila that they saw Akram during that period and that he did not throw a stone.

Leila is still pleading in the next photo. She is told that if she does not go away, they will arrest her instead. She went to Kiryat Arba police station after her son was taken away. He was handcuffed and blindfolded, which is what happens to 97% of the children who are arrested. She went to the police station and rang on the bell, but she got no answer, even though she could see people inside. She was distressed the morning I met her. She still did not know where her son was. She was hoping he may have been released from wherever he had been taken and would turn up at home, but he did not. As he still had not turned up by 9 a.m. the next day, I took her through Hebron to visit various organisations to try to find out where he was. Eventually, we discovered he had been taken to Kiryat Arba police station.

Three days later I accompanied Leila to Ofer military court, where a military trial was taking place involving Akram. She said he was brought into the court room and that he was handcuffed and shackled at the feet. She tried to speak to him, but the Israeli soldiers held her back. One is not allowed to speak to one's children in court. It is now three days since she has seen her 13 year old child. On the way into the court, she was strip searched and had a metal detector put inside her panties. We had heard at that stage that Akram was in a tent at Ofer military prison, where prisoners are kept ten to a tent, and that he was with adults. During this period of arrest, his parents had to lodge money into the post office account to feed him, or else he would have had no food. At the beginning, the other Palestinian prisoners helped him.

I would like members to meet Mahmoud who is 13 years old, lives in the same city and was released at the same time as Akram. This photograph shows Akram outside his house after his release, but I will come to that story. His bail was set at the equivalent of €400. As his mother could not afford to pay the money, she needed to leave him behind in prison the day that I accompanied both Leila and Fatiah who is Mahmoud's mother. In the end, it was a friend of the International Solidarity Movement that provided the €400 for Mahmoud to be released because the Israelis refused to release him until his parents paid the fine. Mahmoud spent over two weeks in prison without speaking to his family.

Akram was imprisoned for two months. This is a picture of him in the middle of April following his release, with one of his nieces. He was able to tell his story at this stage. He and the other boys were taken to Kiryat Arba police station. They were handcuffed and blindfolded for six hours. They were individually interrogated many times. The police threatened Akram. If he admitted to throwing stones, they said he would be released but, if not, they would continue to beat him, which they did. They brought out a form which was an official confession and tried to make him sign it. He refused.

On the night of the arrest Akram and Mahmoud were taken to the military camp where they spent the night handcuffed on the floor of a military jeep. On the second day they were taken to a detention centre, kept in an outside prison cell and exposed to the same form of interrogation. On the third day they were taken to the first hearing in Ofer military prison. At this point the two boys had not slept, nor had they been offered any food. They got water once because Akram had pleaded for it.

After the court case, Akram was taken to Ramon prison in Israel. He spent the first three weeks in solitary confinement despite being aged 15 years. For two to three hours on the days the International Red Cross came to visit the detention centre, he was allowed out but, other than that, he was in solitary confinement. He said one high ranking officer had told him that this officer could kill any three prisoners he chose in the detention centre and nothing would happen. Akram finally confessed to having thrown a stone on 22 April, six trials later. He had gone for five trials and at each one of these he had refused to confess that he had thrown a stone and he maintained his innocence.

Akram is now home. For four years he cannot leave his home without being accompanied by an adult. In the coming four years, if he is arrested again, he can be detained in prison for eight months without a trial and this detention can be extended without a trial for another eight months.

The Irish representative in Ramallah, Mr. James Carroll, arranged to have an observer at the sixth trial of Akram's case. Defence for Children International, Hebron states it is very unusual for someone like Akram at 15 years of age to refuse to sign a confession. Over 80% of children sign confessions during the interrogation phase.

I will tell the committee about another two or three children before moving on to some statistics. The committee members can see the photograph of brothers Hassan, aged 12 years, and Ameer, aged eight years, who were also arrested for allegedly throwing stones. There is a photograph of Ameer being taken to the military jeep. As can be seen, he is crying. The next photograph is of Hassan being taken to a military detention centre. He was imprisoned in Ofer military prison for two weeks at the age of 12 years. He was not indicted but was kept in jail until his last trial date, which was on a Sunday. He was forced to sign a document written in Hebrew and does not know what he signed as he does not speak or understand Hebrew. He was fined the equivalent of €800 in order for him to be released.

Since Hassan has left prison, he has had a sleeping disorder and has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. I have the copies of the medical reports with me. He has nightmares, feels guilty and is afraid all the time. He has difficulty concentrating. He has changed the way he engages with his family and others. He has a tremor in his right leg, has socially isolated himself and has dropped out of school.

I also got to know Ameer quite well. On the same day Ameer could not be arrested because he was deemed to be a minor as he is under 12 years. He was detained from approximately 3.30 p.m. until 11 p.m. that day. He says the soldiers bit him and shouted at him. For all of Ameer's detention time he was blindfolded and left sitting on a chair. He could hear the guard dog panting beside him for all of this period. He was jeered at by some settlers who also live in the Beit Ramona military camp. He had no food or water and was not allowed to go to the bathroom. He was so scared he wet himself. He spent seven and a half hours in this condition.

When I met Ameer on the day after his release he was ashen faced. I had not met him before, but even I could see he was like a piece of white paper. He was unable to speak and since he has had nightmares, where he wakes screaming in his sleep, and has lost control of his bladder. He is nervous, has a poor relationship with his family and is the opposite of his brother, Hassan, in that he avoids being alone at all times. He is very affected by the presence of dogs. The medical report I have provided to the committee indicates he is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.

I wish to speak now about certain discriminatory laws, as outlined in the supplementary document I have provided. There is a difference in the way Palestinian children, on the one hand, and Israeli and settler children, on the other, are treated. We should bear in mind when discussing this issue that the presence of settler children and of their families in the West Bank is contrary to international law. A Palestinian child comes under Israeli military law, while an Israeli or settler child comes under Israeli civil law. This means that Palestinians are considered to be minors from the age of 12 years to 16 years and an adult thereafter. However, Israeli and settler children are still considered minors at age 16 years and 17 years and do not attain adult status until the age of 18 years. Palestinian minors can be detained for eight days without a court appearance while Israeli and settler minors can only be detained for 12 hours before a court appearance is required. While the families of Palestinian child detainees are not allowed to visit them, Israeli or settler children in detention may be visited by their families. Palestinians are interrogated by the military or the police but an Israeli or settler child is interrogated by a child investigator who usually comes from a social work background. The families of Palestinian children are not allowed to be present during interrogation whereas an Israeli or settler child cannot be interrogated unless his or her parents are present.

There are serious concerns about what happens after arrest. Defence for Children International, DCI, has described how Palestinian children, once they are alone in a military jeep with Israeli soldiers, are invariably subjected to "cruel and humiliating treatment" at the hands of their captors. They are usually made to sit on the floor of the jeep at the soldiers' feet and are often kicked and beaten. Many are cursed at, threatened and subjected to a torrent of verbal abuse for the duration of the journey. That journey can last for anything from 20 minutes to two hours. DCI describes this type of abuse and humiliation as the norm, pointing out that it is systemic and well documented. DCI lawyers represent between 30% and 40% of children imprisoned in the West Bank.

In 2009, 97% of children who were arrested had their hands tied, and 92% were blindfolded. Some 81% confessed during interrogation, 69% were beaten or kicked, and 65% were arrested from their homes between midnight and 4 a.m. when they and their families had been asleep. Some 14% are placed in solitary confinement and 4% experience sexual assault, although DCI has indicated that it suspects the incidence of sexual assault is higher.

I wish to tell the committee about a boy aged 15 years who I will refer to as A. I have not met him but a report on his case was sent to me by DCI in Palestine some weeks ago. He was arrested on 26 May on a charge of stone throwing. He was taken from his home at 1.30 a.m. while his parents watched. Again, his hands were tied behind his back with plastic ties and he was blindfolded before being placed face downwards on the floor of the military vehicle. First, he was taken to the nearby Israeli settlement of Karmi Zur, taken inside and made to sit in a chair tied and blindfolded until approximately 9 a.m. the following day. He was not allowed to go to the bathroom, despite persistently asking to so do, until after 11 a.m. I will quote from the statement made by the child called A. He states "at around 10 a.m. or 10:30 a.m., I was taken to the interrogation room ... the plastic ties were replaced with handcuffs." He was told to sit on the floor while still blindfolded. The interrogator asked him, "don't you want to tell me who threw stones with you?" He replied, "I didn't throw any stones and I don't know who threw stones either." The interrogator called him a liar and kicked him hard in the back. The interrogator then left the room and returned five minutes later with what A believes were car battery jump leads. Child A then states:

He placed one end on my handcuffs and the other end on my penis and I felt great pain and started screaming. He [the interrogator] said "I want you to confess or otherwise I will plug in the cable and you will never have children".

According to the Defence for Children International report, "Initially, A refused to confess but the interrogator kicked him in the back several times and placed his foot on the handcuffs". He then confessed to throwing stones a few weeks ago, as well as two years ago. He stated, "I confessed because I did not want to be tortured all over again." On 1 June 2010, after two appearances in Ofer military court and one appeal, A was released on bail with the equivalent of €100 and two guarantees of €5,000 from his father and his uncle. A still has not been charged with an offence.

I refer to the ill-treatment techniques, again using data from DCI, which gets its information from the lawyers who work for it. Such techniques include commonly excessive use of blindfolds, handcuffs, slapping, kicking, sleep deprivation, solitary confinement, denial of food and water for extended periods, denial of access to toilets, showers or changing of clothing, exposure to extreme heat and cold, position abuse, yelling and exposure to loud noises, insults and cursing, arresting family members or alleging that family members have been arrested and, occasionally, sexual abuse. Members have just heard one such example. The common threats include being beaten or threatening to have family members harmed, being imprisoned for an indefinite period or having other family members imprisoned, having work or study permits revoked, being sexually abused, being attacked by dogs, being subject to some sort of physical abuse and the threat of having one's family home demolished.

According to DCI's statistics for 2008 which are contained in the document circulated to members, an average of 324 Palestinian children were detained each month in 2008. In most cases, the lawyer does not get to see the child until a few minutes before the court case. A total of 91% of children are kept in pretrial detention, 99.7% of children arrested are found to be guilty and 1.24% of cases have full evidentiary trial. I will provide some more statistics. In 2008, 26.7% of the children detained were detained for the charge of stone-throwing. The maximum penalty for children throwing a stone at a moving military vehicle is 20 years under military order 378 and the equivalent penalty for a stationary vehicle is ten years. There have been 600 complaints about the arrest and detention of children between 2000 and 2008. No complaint has been investigated to date.

Four out of five of the prisons for children are in Israel and most parents cannot get a permit to go into Israel. As such, the norm is if a child is imprisoned for two months, his or her parent will not have received a permit to visit during that period. Imprisoning children from an occupied country in the country of the occupier breaches Article 46 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

What does international law state regarding the arrest of children? According to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, ONCHR, the arrest and detention of children must only be used as a last resort and for an appropriate period and that the juvenile detainees must be separated from adults, allowed contact with their families and receive appropriate assistance, including access to education, recreation and rehabilitation. None of the following — Akram, aged 15 years, Mahmoud, aged 13 years, Emir, aged eight years, Hassan, aged 12 years or the child known as A, aged 15 years — received any of this.

International laws were breached in these cases. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child was ratified by the State of Israel in 1991. Articles 3, 37, 38 and 40 have been breached. Articles 3, 27, 31, 31, 37, 42, 66, 71, 72 and 76 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, ratified by the State of Israel in 1951, have been breached. In the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the State of Israel in 1992, Articles 7, 9 and 14 have been breached. Under the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, ratified by the State of Israel in 1991, Articles 1, 2, 4, 12, 13, 15 and 16 have been breached. These details come from my cursory examination and I have not cited an article unless the instance was so stark as to be undeniable. If lawyers were to examine these cases, they would probably find that many more articles had been breached.

The Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel, EAPPI, was the programme with which Mr. O'Brien and I worked on the West Bank. Our role was protection by presence, the monitoring of human rights, support for Palestinian and Israeli peace activists and advocacy. Part of our advocacy work is what I am doing at this meeting. The EAPPI was initiated by the World Council of Churches, WCC, at the request of churches in Jerusalem in 2003. The EAPPI's members come from 18 countries and Irish and UK EAs, including Mr. O'Brien and me, are supported and trained by the Quaker Peace and Social Witness, QPSW, in the United Kingdom. My colleagues in Hebron included Ms Sofie Hammarström, who is on the left and from Sweden, and Alex, who is on the right and from Switzerland. It was with these two women that I worked and lived 24-seven during my period in Hebron.

An end to the occupation, adherence to international law, implementation of the UN resolutions, an immediate end to the building of settlements and the lifting of restrictions on movement and access will bring justice. What are Palestinians asking of the committee? A question I asked many times was what question did they want me to bring back to Ireland. Atah Jaber stated: "What about our humanity? We want it from you internationals. We will never get it from the Israelis." Atah's house was demolished twice and occupied once by settlers and once by the military. This was his original family home. When I asked how long his family had been living in Baqa, he replied 600 years. This image shows the cave in which his family lived. A settlement is being built at the top of the quarry about his cave. In the image, he is showing the Irish ambassador to Israel, His Excellency Breifne O'Reilly, and Mr. Jim Carroll, the Irish representative to the Palestinian Authority, where his family had lived in the West Bank for 600 years.

This is Adel Karim who says we need those with a conscience to help us live and work safely because we want to live in peace and not to make war. He can be seen in the presentation with his wife, Zebedeh. Their house has been demolished once and they have now built a very small house with one window and one door because they are petrified it will happen again. The message from Leyla is that she wants members to do something about the children who have been arrested. She has promised the children and their parents that she will do everything she can to get the stories of the children out to the committee members who have power and influence. She wants to present the stories of the children to those in Dáil Éireann.

I call Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, who will be followed by Senator Terry Leyden, Deputy Brendan Howlin, Deputy Seán Barrett, Deputy Joanna Tuffy and Senator Mark Dearey. We must soon move on to the next item, a discussion on the Green Paper, before clearing up matters for the autumn.

Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP

I thank Ms O'Sullivan. The ending of the occupation must be part of the solution, which must be a two-state solution. It took us 30 years in Northern Ireland to get the Sunningdale Agreement for slow learners, as it was described. This is very upsetting, especially when one listens to the detail of stories about young children. In the European Parliament, the Dáil and the Seanad, we have been given to understand the Israeli Supreme Court is independent and acts independently, as we expect the Supreme Court in Ireland to act. What has been the delegates' experience of the Israeli Supreme Court and how many of these cases have been taken to court? Ms O'Sullivan referred to 600 complaints, with none of them having been investigated so far. Does the Israeli Supreme Court have competence in the area of military law? Is there any role for the Israeli Supreme Court?

I welcome Ms O'Sullivan and Mr. O'Brien. I wish to confirm the evidence given today. Some four years ago, Deputy Gilmore, now leader of the Labour Party, Deputy Gormley, now Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the late Tony Gregory, Senator John Paul Phelan, Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh and I went to Hebron. We experienced what the delegates described. Fortunately, we have international observers and if we did not, the plight of the Palestinians in city of Hebron would be much worse. We witnessed what went on. Areas around the mosque have been deprived of traders who had businesses there. They have been surrounded by occupying settlers. I call for the removal of the settlement in Hebron. It is an obvious solution. Some 500 settlers are protected by 1,500 troops in an area of the old city near the mosque. Part of the mosque was divided and turned into a synagogue. This caused enormous difficulty. The Israeli army went into firing positions against the Irish parliamentarians and we could have lost the leaders of two major parties on that day. It was a serious incident. We were guests of the PLO and we were accompanied by the members of the PLO. We were under suspicion while in the area surrounding the mosque.

I commend the work of the delegates. It is vital we have observers there to assist Palestinians and the Palestinian children referred to in the evidence. It is important this is brought to a worldwide audience and the media have played a very important role in this regard.

Item No. 1054 is a press release from the General Delegation of Palestine. The ruling on the wall is now six years old. The State and the United Nations have clearly stated it is illegal. The United Nations has clearly stated the division of Palestine and the West Bank by this concrete wall, which goes right around Bethlehem as Mr. O'Brien knows from his experience, is illegal. People who have not visited the area cannot realise how bad the situation is. There will be no finality to it unless we realise that settlers have caused enormous difficulty. An atrocity was carried out in a mosque by a settler who killed 29 Palestinians. That is very fresh in the memories of the people in the area. I hope the delegates will continue their work. I hope the committee also continues its work to ensure we keep in touch with the region.

The late Brian Lenihan was the first Minister for Foreign Affairs of any European country to recognise the two-state solution. He recognised the right of Palestinians to self-determination. It was a very courageous statement at the time and has now become policy. As the delegates know, Ireland has particularly strong standing in Palestine and the occupied areas. I thank the delegates for appearing before the committee. I am delighted the Chairman gave Ms O'Sullivan an opportunity to put forward her views and evidence in order that they can receive wider dissemination in the media.

I thank Ms O'Sullivan for telling us the harrowing tale of her experiences in the three months she spent in Hebron. The solutions she laid out are big ticket issues towards which many international forces are working. We will not effect them in the deliberations of this committee this afternon, although we need to keep them on our agenda. I have a question on the very worrying aspect of disparate law for Palestinians and Israelis. I know Ms O'Sullivan is not a lawyer but on what basis under the Israeli constitution, a progressive modern constitution, could there be different sets of laws for different people in the same jurisdiction? How does this sit with Israel's obligation in international law and international organisations to which Israel is a party? Is it possible for Ms. O'Sullivan to give us her views on this?

I join others in thanking Ms O'Sullivan for sharing her experiences. Her contribution is based on the rights of children and what astonishes me is the fact that Israel ratified a convention on the rights of the child in October 1991. While we will not solve the Israeli Palestine problem here this afternoon, as Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, stated, it is an ongoing process to which we all subscribe. If the Chairman is agreeable, I suggest the committee formally take up this blatant breach of human rights with regard to children. This is the most blatant and serious issue that has come to light today.

I accept what Ms O'Sullivan had to say on her personal experience and other stories told to her. I have no reason to disbelieve any of it. There are courts to decide all of these matters. However, where there is a blatant breach of a UN convention by a Government which is a signatory to that convention, the committee should formally take up the matter and inquire as to why the breach has not been pursued.

I thank Ms O'Sullivan for bringing this matter to our attention. This committee and other Oireachtas committees will continue to do our tuppence worth in trying to solve the overall problem. However, when it comes to the rights of the child, whether aged eight, 12, 16 or 15 years, these horrific stories should be investigated and those responsible brought to justice. This is what I would like to see coming out of today's meeting. If the committee can in any way progress this matter, we should formally do so.

I thank Ms O'Sullivan for the very disturbing series of stories she told of state-sponsored child abuse. It was upsetting to hear them. I support Deputy Barrett's contention that this committee should take up these cases and others formally. I have a great belief third parties in a convention have responsibilities to others that have also signed the convention — obviously not direct responsibility, but there is a principle in law of third party responsibility. Perhaps that is a tack we could take in considering how to address these issues under articles in conventions with Israel to which we are a co-signatory that have, according to Ms O'Sullivan, been broken. As she said, there may well be others.

I note that Amnesty International, in its annual audit of human rights, identified the default behavioural mode of Israeli military personnel and settlers to be one of impunity. I read that a couple of weeks ago in the context of how Irish citizens were treated in the MV Rachel Corrie incident. The stories told by Ms O’Sullivan today completely underscore the truth of Amnesty International’s assertion.

I thank Ms O'Sullivan for her presentation. I note she is from the Castlegregory area; I am just back from Castlegregory and very much enjoyed my time there.

There is one issue I wanted to raise with regard to Ms O'Sullivan's presentation. She asked what could be done to bring about justice. I felt the list was a bit one-sided. As Gay Mitchell, MEP, pointed out, the situation is one of conflict and there is a need for a peace process. Hardship has also been suffered by the Israelis over the period of the conflict. We need to keep that in mind.

Has Ms O'Sullivan raised the issues she described with any of the authorities in Israel and, if so, how have they responded? Has she been talking to any of the other groups on the ground that deal specifically with children's rights, such as UNICEF, about how to deal with these issues?

I thank Ms O'Sullivan for her interesting but horrific presentation. As I had never heard of the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme before, today is an opportunity for education for us.

Does the organisation work only in Palestine and Israel? Is there a reason it singled out these areas rather than other parts of the world? Is it a worldwide enterprise? Israel is a democracy, so we have at least some chance of being able to apply the normal force of law, which is not possible in many other parts of the world. If the organisation does not operate elsewhere, is that one of the reasons? I am horrified at the stories Ms O'Sullivan has told us, but I imagine such things go on in other parts of the world also and I would like to think there was some organisation, if not the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme, that could shed light on this.

During the course of the joint visit of members of this committee and the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs to that region last year, we were addressed by NGOs and had a number of discussions with them, and it became obvious that there were blatant human rights abuses on all sides. The point, which has been made by members, is that there is no excuse whatever for the abuses that have taken place and obviously continue to take place. This committee has taken up the issue in the past, in line with the suggestions made by Deputy Barrett and others. In the course of a series of meetings on the conflict in the Middle East in which the committee is engaged and to which we are devoting considerable time, we hope to deal to a greater extent with the abuse of children and adults, whether prisoners or otherwise, because no prisoner, no matter what crime he or she is charged with, should be abused while in custody. The reason is that in such a case the abuser is the institution or the state which, in turn, brings ridicule on all associated institutions. The points were well made by the delegates and although we will not have time to go through the issues arising in much detail today we will take them up, as set out. I now hand over to the delegates for a final response. We must leave this matter within five minutes because the next part of our programme also deals with a serious issue.

Ms Gerry O’Sullivan

I am not qualified to respond on the question of the Supreme Court but I wonder if the issue of Palestinian children coming under military law as opposed to civil law is a factor. As Fadel Muhtaseb, the father of Hassan and Emir, asked me to find out what could be done, I sent the case to Amnesty. It went on a long run around the world but the final suggestion was to bring it back to Defence for Children International — Palestine, in Ramallah. I hope it is working on taking that case.

In response to Senator Leyden, 1994 was the year of the Baruch Goldstein massacre. The Israeli military response after the Jewish settler had killed 29 Palestinians was to clear the main street, Shuhada Street, of 1,800 shops, offices and homes. This is where the 500 to 600 settlers are now living under protection.

Deputy Howlin referred to the Supreme Court issue. I thank Deputy Barrett and Senator Dearey for offering to take up this case. I do not believe it can wait until the occupation ends but it is a case that needs to be acted upon immediately. According to the statistics for March 2010, 30 children were arrested which means that, on average, there is a very high chance that one more child will be arrested in Hebron between now and this time tomorrow. We cannot wait to act. Deputy Tuffy said this was a one-sided approach. The Israeli response is that this needs to be done to prevent children becoming terrorists. I did not have time to deal with the United Nations or all of that because I have been really busy since I came back but any time I tried to challenge soldiers either I was told not to ask questions or the soldiers or police in the area were told not to respond to my questions. I had a conversation with one soldier and we in EAPPI and two others from the Christian Peacemakers team succeeded in having two children released. The soldier did not believe the stories I was telling him. It was probably the shock that enabled him to make the release.

Senator Quinn asked about EAPPI. Currently it is based only in Palestine and Israel and he asked the reason. It was the Christian churches in Jerusalem which saw there was a need for some element of impartial observation — I will not call it a force — or group of people to be there. Currently the EAPPI is looking into having a presence in Colombia. It has been in the West Bank since 2003 or 2004.

Mr. Joe O’Brien

Since 2003.

Ms Gerry O’Sullivan

I shall hand over to Mr. O'Brien.

Mr. Joe O’Brien

Regarding the Supreme Court issue, I am note a lawyer either. In practice there are two parallel legal systems. There are attempts to get them to overlap but these tend not to be very successful. I, too, welcome Deputy Barrett's suggestion. With regard to Ms O'Sullivan's presentation, these are not isolated instances that happen but is, absolutely, regular policy overall. I spoke to children when I was there last year and took a number of accounts. It is standard practice. There are other Irish observers going out at the end of this year who will be very happy to give their testimonies to the committee also.

As to what we do on the ground when we hear these reports, we do not necessarily lobby the authorities there directly. Our reports are fed into the United Nations and the Red Cross and we let them take it from there in that location. Obviously, we bring reports here as also.

We will certainly take Mr. O'Brien's advice and follow up in the course of the hearings we have already undertaken in respect of issues in that region and other issues associated therewith. The deliberations of these meetings will become part of a report which will be produced by the committee at a later stage. At some stage in the future we may have recourse to the deputation again for further discussions. I thank both members of the deputation for coming before the committee today and fgoing to the trouble of preparing the report which will be of great use to the committee.

Sitting suspended at 3 p.m, resumed in private session at 3.05 p.m. and adjourned sine die.
Barr
Roinn