24 dec 2016
A major American department store chain has been selling products imported from Bethlehem as products of Israel, despite Bethlehem being located in the occupied Palestinian territory, according to a report from a public radio station in Texas, US.
KETR reported last week that Bethlehem mayor Vera Baboun was “astonished” after she discovered that Neiman Marcus, which is based in the Texas city of Dallas, was selling nativity scenes that were crafted from olive wood in the occupied West Bank town, but labelled as products of Israel.
“This is illegal," Baboun told KETR. "It’s not Israel. Bethlehem is Palestine."
"It’s unacceptable ... From our side, from the olive wood store and from their side," she added. "God knows how much we are working in order to keep this a traditional and a national Bethlehemite product. And this is very important."
PLO official Xavier Abu Eid viewed the case as an attempt to "normalize" Israel's illegal annexation of Palestinian territory.
"To say that Bethlehem is part of Israel is not only an attempt to normalize the annexation of occupied territory. But it's also an attempt at fooling the consumers. The consumers have the right to know from where the product is coming. And this product in particular is coming from Bethlehem, Palestine," KETR quoted Abu Eid as saying.
A Neiman Marcus spokesperson did not directly respond to KETR’s request for comment, and only informed the radio station that their import division was "in charge of making sure all of our imported products, fashion, fur, home goods, etc. are properly labeled in accordance with all applicable laws."
However, Katrina Skinner, a spokeswoman for the US Customs and Border Protection, told KETR that origin labels bearing the name "Bethlehem, Israel" would not in fact be in compliance with federal regulations.
"With respect to the specific inquiry concerning the use of the marking 'Made in Bethlehem, Israel,' the language would be considered not legally marked in accordance with the policy stated in T.D. 97-16 because Bethlehem is within the West Bank," she said.
According to KETR's report, Neiman Marcus could face fines for not complying with the regulations, which increase “for egregious violations like undermining foreign sanctions, or for mislabeling products to indicate they were from areas subject to less taxes.”
US policy mandates that products made in in the occupied West Bank cannot bear the label “Made in Israel” -- guidelines established mainly to prevent Israeli settlers from using the label, as the US views Israel’s settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegitimate.
However, the guidelines also apply to products made in the West Bank by Palestinians.
Regulations distinguishing Israel from the Palestinian territories date back to the 1990s. The Clinton administration issued the rules in 1995 and 1997 requiring unique origin labels for imports manufactured in Israel, as opposed to those produced in the West Bank or Gaza Strip.
According to the Palestinian Postal Services, demand from online shoppers for Palestinian products -- specifically olive wood handicrafts -- have noticeably increased over 2016.
Meanwhile, Palestinian policy network Al-Shabaka reported earlier this year that the ongoing Israeli occupation of Palestine has stifled Palestinian economic growth while producing billions of dollars in Israeli revenue.
KETR reported last week that Bethlehem mayor Vera Baboun was “astonished” after she discovered that Neiman Marcus, which is based in the Texas city of Dallas, was selling nativity scenes that were crafted from olive wood in the occupied West Bank town, but labelled as products of Israel.
“This is illegal," Baboun told KETR. "It’s not Israel. Bethlehem is Palestine."
"It’s unacceptable ... From our side, from the olive wood store and from their side," she added. "God knows how much we are working in order to keep this a traditional and a national Bethlehemite product. And this is very important."
PLO official Xavier Abu Eid viewed the case as an attempt to "normalize" Israel's illegal annexation of Palestinian territory.
"To say that Bethlehem is part of Israel is not only an attempt to normalize the annexation of occupied territory. But it's also an attempt at fooling the consumers. The consumers have the right to know from where the product is coming. And this product in particular is coming from Bethlehem, Palestine," KETR quoted Abu Eid as saying.
A Neiman Marcus spokesperson did not directly respond to KETR’s request for comment, and only informed the radio station that their import division was "in charge of making sure all of our imported products, fashion, fur, home goods, etc. are properly labeled in accordance with all applicable laws."
However, Katrina Skinner, a spokeswoman for the US Customs and Border Protection, told KETR that origin labels bearing the name "Bethlehem, Israel" would not in fact be in compliance with federal regulations.
"With respect to the specific inquiry concerning the use of the marking 'Made in Bethlehem, Israel,' the language would be considered not legally marked in accordance with the policy stated in T.D. 97-16 because Bethlehem is within the West Bank," she said.
According to KETR's report, Neiman Marcus could face fines for not complying with the regulations, which increase “for egregious violations like undermining foreign sanctions, or for mislabeling products to indicate they were from areas subject to less taxes.”
US policy mandates that products made in in the occupied West Bank cannot bear the label “Made in Israel” -- guidelines established mainly to prevent Israeli settlers from using the label, as the US views Israel’s settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegitimate.
However, the guidelines also apply to products made in the West Bank by Palestinians.
Regulations distinguishing Israel from the Palestinian territories date back to the 1990s. The Clinton administration issued the rules in 1995 and 1997 requiring unique origin labels for imports manufactured in Israel, as opposed to those produced in the West Bank or Gaza Strip.
According to the Palestinian Postal Services, demand from online shoppers for Palestinian products -- specifically olive wood handicrafts -- have noticeably increased over 2016.
Meanwhile, Palestinian policy network Al-Shabaka reported earlier this year that the ongoing Israeli occupation of Palestine has stifled Palestinian economic growth while producing billions of dollars in Israeli revenue.
(Photo: Image of students celebrating after the University of Manchester’s Student Union Senate voted to pass a motion in support of BDS on the 11th of December, 2016 [@IsraelWC/Facebook])
The University of Manchester’s Student Union Senate voted, this past Thursday, to pass a motion in support of the international movement for boycott, sanctions and divestment from the state of Israel.
The motion won the backing of 60 per cent of the SU Senate, following an impassioned debate, according to the Middle East Monitor.
The motion was put forward by Huda Ammori, President of Recognise Refugee Rights Society, and was supported by Etisha Choudhury, President of Action Palestine, and the BDS Campaigns Committee.
The University of Manchester’s Student Union Senate voted, this past Thursday, to pass a motion in support of the international movement for boycott, sanctions and divestment from the state of Israel.
The motion won the backing of 60 per cent of the SU Senate, following an impassioned debate, according to the Middle East Monitor.
The motion was put forward by Huda Ammori, President of Recognise Refugee Rights Society, and was supported by Etisha Choudhury, President of Action Palestine, and the BDS Campaigns Committee.
23 dec 2016
“Breaking a shackle of Palestinian prisoners”. The United Nations Children’s Fund in Lebanon ends its contracts with occupation profiteer G4S.
The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Lebanon has ended its contract with the world’s largest security company, G4S, following a boycott campaign by activists in the country and across the world over the company’s role in Israel’s violations of Palestinian human rights.
Earlier this month, G4S announced that it is selling $110m worth of its investment in its Israel subsidiary. That would consist selling most of its Israeli business, after an effective campaign against the company waged by the Palestinian-led, global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian rights.
Nonetheless, G4S will remain directly complicit in Israel’s violations of human rights through co-running the Israeli Police Academy and its investment in the Shikun & Binui group which builds illegal settlements. G4S will continue to be a BDS target due to its persisting complicity.
The Lebanese Campaign to Boycott the Supporters of Israel and the Palestinian Camps Boycott campaign in Lebanon had organised several actions that called upon UNICEF to end their contracts with G4S over the past year from meetings and social media action to a creative demonstration outside the UNICEF offices in Beirut.
This is an important victory to the #UNDropG4S campaign, which was launched in 2015 by BDS activists globally, urging the UN to end its relationship with occupation profiteer G4S. Since then, four UN agencies in Jordan have heeded this call and, now, the domino effect is starting in Lebanon.
In reaction to the UNICEF decision, Afifa Karake, member of the Lebanese Campaign to Boycott the Supporters of Israel, said:
“This decision is a victory for the Palestinian prisoners who called upon people of conscience to boycott G4S. UN agencies all around the world ought to be consistent with their proclaimed values and principles. Our campaign will continue to target G4S contracts with the private and the public sector in Lebanon until the company completely exits the Israeli market.”
Mourad Ayyash, member of the Camps Boycott campaign, which mobilizes Palestinian refugee communities in Lebanon, added:
“Despite G4S’ sale of most of its illegal Israeli business, BDS activists in Lebanon and across the Arab World are sending a strong message to the company that our boycott campaign will continue until G4S ends its remaining Israeli business. G4S may soon have to choose between investing in the vast Arab market or in Israel’s crimes and human rights violations.”
On behalf of the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), the largest Palestinian coalition that leads the global BDS movement, Guman Mussa concluded:
“The BNC welcomes this victory and salutes boycott activists’ efforts in Lebanon. The increasing pace and strength of BDS campaigns in the Arab World reflect that our struggle against Israeli settler-colonialism unites with the broader Arab struggles for justice, dignity and freedom. The inspiring growth of BDS in the Arab world will significantly amplify the impact of the global boycott and divestment campaigns against multinationals that support Israel’s regime of oppression.”
via the Palestinian BDS National Committee.
The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Lebanon has ended its contract with the world’s largest security company, G4S, following a boycott campaign by activists in the country and across the world over the company’s role in Israel’s violations of Palestinian human rights.
Earlier this month, G4S announced that it is selling $110m worth of its investment in its Israel subsidiary. That would consist selling most of its Israeli business, after an effective campaign against the company waged by the Palestinian-led, global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian rights.
Nonetheless, G4S will remain directly complicit in Israel’s violations of human rights through co-running the Israeli Police Academy and its investment in the Shikun & Binui group which builds illegal settlements. G4S will continue to be a BDS target due to its persisting complicity.
The Lebanese Campaign to Boycott the Supporters of Israel and the Palestinian Camps Boycott campaign in Lebanon had organised several actions that called upon UNICEF to end their contracts with G4S over the past year from meetings and social media action to a creative demonstration outside the UNICEF offices in Beirut.
This is an important victory to the #UNDropG4S campaign, which was launched in 2015 by BDS activists globally, urging the UN to end its relationship with occupation profiteer G4S. Since then, four UN agencies in Jordan have heeded this call and, now, the domino effect is starting in Lebanon.
In reaction to the UNICEF decision, Afifa Karake, member of the Lebanese Campaign to Boycott the Supporters of Israel, said:
“This decision is a victory for the Palestinian prisoners who called upon people of conscience to boycott G4S. UN agencies all around the world ought to be consistent with their proclaimed values and principles. Our campaign will continue to target G4S contracts with the private and the public sector in Lebanon until the company completely exits the Israeli market.”
Mourad Ayyash, member of the Camps Boycott campaign, which mobilizes Palestinian refugee communities in Lebanon, added:
“Despite G4S’ sale of most of its illegal Israeli business, BDS activists in Lebanon and across the Arab World are sending a strong message to the company that our boycott campaign will continue until G4S ends its remaining Israeli business. G4S may soon have to choose between investing in the vast Arab market or in Israel’s crimes and human rights violations.”
On behalf of the Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), the largest Palestinian coalition that leads the global BDS movement, Guman Mussa concluded:
“The BNC welcomes this victory and salutes boycott activists’ efforts in Lebanon. The increasing pace and strength of BDS campaigns in the Arab World reflect that our struggle against Israeli settler-colonialism unites with the broader Arab struggles for justice, dignity and freedom. The inspiring growth of BDS in the Arab world will significantly amplify the impact of the global boycott and divestment campaigns against multinationals that support Israel’s regime of oppression.”
via the Palestinian BDS National Committee.
21 dec 2016
The Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) announced its intent to take the U.K. government to court to challenge restrictions on pension scheme divestment from companies involved in Israel’s human rights violations.
PSC announced in a press statement that it is seeking judicial review of the changes to the rules governing Local Government Pensions Schemes (LGPS) that will prevent ethical decision making with regard to human rights abuses and the arms trade.
PSC is concerned that these new measures: threaten the civic right to boycott and divest from companies involved in human rights abuses and the arms trade; limit fundamental rights of freedom of expression and freedom of conscience; amount to Westminster overreach into local government affairs; and undermine public sector employees and pension holders’ freedom to make collective decisions to invest and divest funds as they wish provided there is no financial detriment.
In October 2015, the British Government announced it would amend LGPS rules to make clear that it considered using pensions and procurement to pursue boycotts, divestments and sanctions against foreign nations and the UK defense industry are inappropriate.
According to PSC, this was announced specifically with the aim of curtailing divestment campaigns against UK defense and international or Israeli firms implicated in Israel’s violations of international law.
PSC believes that public sector employees and pension holders should have the right to make decisions about their finances and invest and divest funds as they wish, in accordance with the LGPS legal, ethical and fiduciary obligations..
PSC believes that this is governmental attempt to undermine the peaceful boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian freedom, justice and equality, which is modeled after the South African anti-apartheid boycott movement.
PSC is part of this global movement of people who have answered the 2005 Palestinian civil society call for a campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions measures until Israel adheres to international law.
Boycott and divestment campaigns are a traditional and effective form of non-violent protest used throughout history by human and civil rights defenders.
With this legal action, the PSC aims to uphold the civic right to boycott and the fundamental rights of freedom of expression and conscience.
To mark UN Human Rights Day on 10 December, over 200 legal scholars from the UK and other European countries signed an open letter declaring that it was a lawful exercise of freedom of expression to advocate for Palestinian human rights (as set out in international law) through BDS measures against Israel’s regime of occupation and oppression.
The Palestine Solidarity Campaign is the largest UK civil society organization dedicated to securing Palestinian human rights and denouncing Israel’s flouting of international law and its continued military occupation of Palestine.
PSC announced in a press statement that it is seeking judicial review of the changes to the rules governing Local Government Pensions Schemes (LGPS) that will prevent ethical decision making with regard to human rights abuses and the arms trade.
PSC is concerned that these new measures: threaten the civic right to boycott and divest from companies involved in human rights abuses and the arms trade; limit fundamental rights of freedom of expression and freedom of conscience; amount to Westminster overreach into local government affairs; and undermine public sector employees and pension holders’ freedom to make collective decisions to invest and divest funds as they wish provided there is no financial detriment.
In October 2015, the British Government announced it would amend LGPS rules to make clear that it considered using pensions and procurement to pursue boycotts, divestments and sanctions against foreign nations and the UK defense industry are inappropriate.
According to PSC, this was announced specifically with the aim of curtailing divestment campaigns against UK defense and international or Israeli firms implicated in Israel’s violations of international law.
PSC believes that public sector employees and pension holders should have the right to make decisions about their finances and invest and divest funds as they wish, in accordance with the LGPS legal, ethical and fiduciary obligations..
PSC believes that this is governmental attempt to undermine the peaceful boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement for Palestinian freedom, justice and equality, which is modeled after the South African anti-apartheid boycott movement.
PSC is part of this global movement of people who have answered the 2005 Palestinian civil society call for a campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions measures until Israel adheres to international law.
Boycott and divestment campaigns are a traditional and effective form of non-violent protest used throughout history by human and civil rights defenders.
With this legal action, the PSC aims to uphold the civic right to boycott and the fundamental rights of freedom of expression and conscience.
To mark UN Human Rights Day on 10 December, over 200 legal scholars from the UK and other European countries signed an open letter declaring that it was a lawful exercise of freedom of expression to advocate for Palestinian human rights (as set out in international law) through BDS measures against Israel’s regime of occupation and oppression.
The Palestine Solidarity Campaign is the largest UK civil society organization dedicated to securing Palestinian human rights and denouncing Israel’s flouting of international law and its continued military occupation of Palestine.
19 dec 2016
Jewish scholars and students have released statements urging the US House of Representatives and President Obama to reject the controversial “Antisemitism Awareness Act”.
In a recent initiative by US based organization Jewish Voice for Peace, Jewish scholars and students signed statements urging both the House of Representatives, as well as President Obama, to reject the act.
The scholars’ statement has already been signed by individuals from New York University, Penn State University, Brown University, Standford University, UCLA and more. It reads:
“As scholars of Jewish studies, we strongly object to “the Antisemitism Awareness Act” which is soon to be considered by the U.S. House of Representatives. This bill would officially categorize as antisemitic “demonization,” “de-legitimation” and “the use of double standard” regarding Israel. This intentionally vague definition is dangerously susceptible to manipulations, and threatens to further diminish freedom of speech and academic freedom on our campuses.
The overly broad language has the potential to define any criticism of Israeli policy as antisemitic. This could include frank discussions of the impact of Zionism, campus disagreements about the future of Israel/Palestine, and in fact, much of what falls under Jewish Studies in all facets, including courses.
This is fundamentally contrary to the educational processes of learning critical thinking and disparate points of view, and hurts our ability to prepare students to take on global challenges ahead of us.
By potentially targeting those offering criticism of the State of Israel, many of whom are Jews themselves, (and not the white supremacists emboldened by President-elect Trump), this bill fails to confront the real threats facing Jews in America. Instead, this bill poses a threat to human rights advocates, scholars, and students. It is no coincidence that many of these students are Muslim and/or people of color, and are facing similar targeting from a resurgent far-right.
American Jews do not need protection from passionate young activists organizing for justice. Rather, we need to join with justice-seeking people everywhere to fight white supremacy, racism and the genuine antisemitism that are reemerging in the very highest levels of government. Therefore, as scholars of Jewish studies, we call upon all those who are committed to fighting racism and safeguarding academic freedom to speak out against this misguided and dangerous bill.”
Following a similar appeal the statement signed by Jewish students explains:
“Dear Members of the House of Representatives and President Obama,
As Jewish students, we urge you to reject the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, and to protect free speech on campuses across America. We are Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Reconstructionist, and secular Jews; and we are deeply concerned about the rise of real anti-Semitism in white supremacist movements in this country, including the appointment of real anti-Semites like Stephen Bannon to powerful positions in the upcoming Trump administration. But this bill does little to protect us, as Jewish students, from these dangers. Rather, it serves to limit our freedom of expression around the vital issues of our time.
Regardless of our personal political views, we recognize that criticism of Israel and support for Palestinian rights, including support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, is not inherently anti-Semitic. The Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, however, conflates legitimate criticism of the policies of the Israeli government with anti-Semitism, using a problematic definition of anti-Semitism never intended for use on college campuses. Kenneth Stern, the author of the original EU definition upon which the State Department definition is based, has urged you to reject the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, and to not use this definition to restrict speech on college campuses. [http://jkrfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Letter-to-members-of…[PDF]
At a time when freedom of expression is under threat across the country, we need to be protecting and expanding speech, not restricting it. We urge you not to pass the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, and instead to take meaningful action to combat anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, anti-immigrant sentiment, and other forms of bigotry on the rise across the country.”
via Jewish Voice for Peace and the Palestinian BDS National Committee.
In a recent initiative by US based organization Jewish Voice for Peace, Jewish scholars and students signed statements urging both the House of Representatives, as well as President Obama, to reject the act.
The scholars’ statement has already been signed by individuals from New York University, Penn State University, Brown University, Standford University, UCLA and more. It reads:
“As scholars of Jewish studies, we strongly object to “the Antisemitism Awareness Act” which is soon to be considered by the U.S. House of Representatives. This bill would officially categorize as antisemitic “demonization,” “de-legitimation” and “the use of double standard” regarding Israel. This intentionally vague definition is dangerously susceptible to manipulations, and threatens to further diminish freedom of speech and academic freedom on our campuses.
The overly broad language has the potential to define any criticism of Israeli policy as antisemitic. This could include frank discussions of the impact of Zionism, campus disagreements about the future of Israel/Palestine, and in fact, much of what falls under Jewish Studies in all facets, including courses.
This is fundamentally contrary to the educational processes of learning critical thinking and disparate points of view, and hurts our ability to prepare students to take on global challenges ahead of us.
By potentially targeting those offering criticism of the State of Israel, many of whom are Jews themselves, (and not the white supremacists emboldened by President-elect Trump), this bill fails to confront the real threats facing Jews in America. Instead, this bill poses a threat to human rights advocates, scholars, and students. It is no coincidence that many of these students are Muslim and/or people of color, and are facing similar targeting from a resurgent far-right.
American Jews do not need protection from passionate young activists organizing for justice. Rather, we need to join with justice-seeking people everywhere to fight white supremacy, racism and the genuine antisemitism that are reemerging in the very highest levels of government. Therefore, as scholars of Jewish studies, we call upon all those who are committed to fighting racism and safeguarding academic freedom to speak out against this misguided and dangerous bill.”
Following a similar appeal the statement signed by Jewish students explains:
“Dear Members of the House of Representatives and President Obama,
As Jewish students, we urge you to reject the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, and to protect free speech on campuses across America. We are Reform, Conservative, Orthodox, Reconstructionist, and secular Jews; and we are deeply concerned about the rise of real anti-Semitism in white supremacist movements in this country, including the appointment of real anti-Semites like Stephen Bannon to powerful positions in the upcoming Trump administration. But this bill does little to protect us, as Jewish students, from these dangers. Rather, it serves to limit our freedom of expression around the vital issues of our time.
Regardless of our personal political views, we recognize that criticism of Israel and support for Palestinian rights, including support for the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, is not inherently anti-Semitic. The Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, however, conflates legitimate criticism of the policies of the Israeli government with anti-Semitism, using a problematic definition of anti-Semitism never intended for use on college campuses. Kenneth Stern, the author of the original EU definition upon which the State Department definition is based, has urged you to reject the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, and to not use this definition to restrict speech on college campuses. [http://jkrfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Letter-to-members-of…[PDF]
At a time when freedom of expression is under threat across the country, we need to be protecting and expanding speech, not restricting it. We urge you not to pass the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act, and instead to take meaningful action to combat anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, anti-immigrant sentiment, and other forms of bigotry on the rise across the country.”
via Jewish Voice for Peace and the Palestinian BDS National Committee.
11 dec 2016
Around 200 European lawyers and academics have said steps by Britain and other countries to discourage support for the pro-Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement may violate fundamental human rights.
According to The Independent newspaper, a recent open letter signed by legal experts from Britain and 14 other European states said the boycott of Israeli companies and goods manufactured in the Occupied Palestinian Territories was “a lawful exercise of freedom of expression.”
“France, the United Kingdom, Canada and certain state legislatures in the US, have adopted laws and taken executive action to suppress, outlaw and in some instances, criminalize the advocacy of BDS,” the letter stated.
“Such measures aim to punish individuals, companies and private and public institutions that adopt ethically and legally responsible business, investment and procurement decisions.”
The letter has also warned that the states that outlaw BDS are undermining freedoms and threatening the credibility of their respect for human rights by exempting a particular country.
Signatories to the letter include Sir Geoffrey Bindman QC, chair of the British Institute of Human Rights, Alain Pellet, Chevalier of the Légion d'Honneur in France, Guy Goodwin-Gill, a former legal adviser to the UN and Lauri Hannikainen, a member of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.
Last February, the British cabinet office issued diktat slamming procurement boycotts by public authorities as “inappropriate,” and threatened to take punitive measures against any authority in Britain boycotting Israel.
In a statement, the cabinet office claimed such boycotts “undermine good community relations, poisoning and polarizing debate, weakening integration and fueling anti-Semitism.”
“Any public body found to be in breach of the regulations could be subject to severe penalties,” it threatened.
Leicester City Council is among those public authorities which have boycotted products produced in Israeli settlements in the West Bank with a law passed in 2014.
But it was cleared of anti-Semitism alongside two other councils at the High Court of Justice in England last June after a Jewish charity lodged a complaint.
Anti-boycott measures were signed into the US Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) by Barack Obama last year, while BDS activists have been found guilty of inciting discrimination in France, and the Canadian parliament passed an anti-boycott motion in February.
Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are illegal under international law. The UN high commissioner for human rights recently reiterated serious concern over Israel’s settlement expansion plans.
At least 570,000 Jewish settlers live in around 130 illegal settlements and 100 outposts in the West Bank, according to UN statistics.
According to The Independent newspaper, a recent open letter signed by legal experts from Britain and 14 other European states said the boycott of Israeli companies and goods manufactured in the Occupied Palestinian Territories was “a lawful exercise of freedom of expression.”
“France, the United Kingdom, Canada and certain state legislatures in the US, have adopted laws and taken executive action to suppress, outlaw and in some instances, criminalize the advocacy of BDS,” the letter stated.
“Such measures aim to punish individuals, companies and private and public institutions that adopt ethically and legally responsible business, investment and procurement decisions.”
The letter has also warned that the states that outlaw BDS are undermining freedoms and threatening the credibility of their respect for human rights by exempting a particular country.
Signatories to the letter include Sir Geoffrey Bindman QC, chair of the British Institute of Human Rights, Alain Pellet, Chevalier of the Légion d'Honneur in France, Guy Goodwin-Gill, a former legal adviser to the UN and Lauri Hannikainen, a member of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance.
Last February, the British cabinet office issued diktat slamming procurement boycotts by public authorities as “inappropriate,” and threatened to take punitive measures against any authority in Britain boycotting Israel.
In a statement, the cabinet office claimed such boycotts “undermine good community relations, poisoning and polarizing debate, weakening integration and fueling anti-Semitism.”
“Any public body found to be in breach of the regulations could be subject to severe penalties,” it threatened.
Leicester City Council is among those public authorities which have boycotted products produced in Israeli settlements in the West Bank with a law passed in 2014.
But it was cleared of anti-Semitism alongside two other councils at the High Court of Justice in England last June after a Jewish charity lodged a complaint.
Anti-boycott measures were signed into the US Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) by Barack Obama last year, while BDS activists have been found guilty of inciting discrimination in France, and the Canadian parliament passed an anti-boycott motion in February.
Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are illegal under international law. The UN high commissioner for human rights recently reiterated serious concern over Israel’s settlement expansion plans.
At least 570,000 Jewish settlers live in around 130 illegal settlements and 100 outposts in the West Bank, according to UN statistics.
