“Litigating Palestine: Holding Israel Accountable in the Courtroom”

===================================================

Read the magazine online at: http://www.badil.org/al-majdal/al-majdal.htm

Bethlehem, August 2009: The BADIL Resource Center for Palestinian
Residency and Refugee Rights announces the release of its Spring /
Summer 2009 issue of al-Majdal, Badil’s English-language quarterly magazine.

This issue of al-Majdal draws on the research and experience of the
participants in the Israel Review Conference
(http://israelreview.bdsmovement.net), and the topics on which they
focused to provide an overview of routes, challenges, and
recommendations for “Litigating Palestine.” They evaluate past attempts
at taking Israel and its abettors to court, assess the role of law in
attaining justice for victims, and – perhaps of particular interest to
non-lawyers – the role of civil society in supporting legal battles to
attain justice for Palestinians.

A recurring theme is the consistent interference of executive and
legislative branches of government to shield Israel and its agents from
prosecution. Susan Akram and Yasmine Gado’s article on civil tort claims
in U.S. courts shows how the U.S. government has consistently interfered to ensure that courts dismiss Palestinian cases on procedural and jurisdictional grounds. Bill Bowring looks into the situation in Europe
making it clear that Palestinians “do not have the possibility of
addressing complaints to” the European Court of Human Rights and the
European Court of Justice.

Contributions in this issue also explore possibilities for legal action
that can potentially overcome – or at least bypass – some of these
limitations, by targeting third parties. John Reynolds describes the
case targeting the U.K. government as a third party complicit in Israeli
violations. Deborah Guterman examines the case of Quebec courts against Canadian corporations involved in the construction of Israeli colonies in the West Bank. Karen Pennington and Joseph Schechla revisit US courts in an examination of whether recent precedents targeting Islamic charities may reopen the door to challenging the Jewish National Fund and other Zionist para-state organizations as charitable organizations in that country.

As this issue goes to print, news is circulating about the change in
Spanish universal jurisdiction laws as a direct attempt to protect
Israeli war crime suspects from prosecution. Meanwhile, there is an
ongoing legal challenge to Heidelberg Cement for its plunder of quarries
in the occupied West Bank, and a German-E.U. challenge to European
imports from Ma’ale Adumim’s Soda-Club. The U.K. has announced a partial

arms embargo on Israel, while U.K. courts have dismissed the case
challenging the U.K. government for its failure to fulfill its
obligations under international law with respect to Israel’s activities
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. These are some of the many
examples of the ways in which the courtroom has developed as a site of
struggle to attain justice for Palestinians. As such, it is important to
learn from the experiences of the past and coordinate action for the
future in order to increase chances for success.