Israel has faced international condemnation this week over the alleged killing of 10 or more peace activists who were trying to deliver aid to Gaza by way of a flotilla of ships.But the beleaguered state is also facing criticism on a number of other issues. Albeit a bit further down the Israeli priority list, the International Bar Association (IBA) has recently spoken out in protest at the sustained professional and personal criticism directed, by Israeli politicians and others, at the eminent jurist – and Jew – Justice Richard Goldstone.
Goldstone, a South African, became a hate figure in Israel after writing a report, commissioned by the UN, on the conflict that raged in Gaza between 27 December 2008 and 18 January 2009. Israel refused to cooperate and denied Goldstone access to Gaza, although he eventually managed to get in via the border post with Egypt.
The report, released in September 2009, concluded that both Israel and Hamas had committed war crimes, and that both had deliberately targeted the other side's civilian population in attempts to achieve their goals. It recommended criminal investigation and possible prosecution of those found responsible.
So far, so balanced, you would think.
Except that accusing Israel of acting wrongly – even while accusing Hamas of the same – evoked invective rather than debate. Israeli president Shimon Peres called Goldstone ‘a small man, devoid of any sense of justice.’ Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School called him ‘a traitor to the Jewish people’.
Critics of the report even threatened to exact revenge by disrupting his grandson's bar mitzvah if Goldstone dared to attend the ceremony in his homeland of South Africa.
One rabbi explained the feelings of members of the South African Jewish community: ‘They believe he (Goldstone) put Israel in danger, and they wouldn't like him to be getting honour by being called to the altar as part of the bar mitzvah ceremony.’
Much bile has been directed at Goldstone, despite him having held such distinguished positions as co-chair of the Independent Commission on Kosovo, chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and justice of the Constitutional Court of South Africa.
IBA executive director Mark Ellis says: ‘It is ironic that Justice Goldstone is now facing criticism of bias, given that it was he who insisted on enlarging the UN mandate to include an enquiry into both parties to the conflict.
‘[Goldstone’s] report ultimately concluded that violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law appear to have been committed by both Israel and Hamas.
‘Instead of vilifying Justice Goldstone, his critics should applaud him for not shying away from seeking the truth in what is an extremely sensitive and politically complicated situation.’
Israel’s embassy in London, when asked for a comment on the IBA’s support for Richard Goldstone and his report, provided extracts from a speech made by Aharon Leshno Ya’ar, Israel’s ambassador to the UN Mission in Geneva, six months ago.
He said: ‘The authors of this fact-finding report had little concern for finding facts. The report was instigated as part of a political campaign, and it represents a political assault directed against Israel and against every state forced to confront terrorist threats. Its recommendations are fully in line with its one-sided agenda and seek to harness the Security Council, the General Assembly, the International Criminal Court, the Human Rights Council, and the entire international community in its political campaign…
‘Unlike the Hamas terrorists who rejoice with every civilian death, Israel regards every civilian casualty as a tragedy. Israel is committed to fully examining every allegation of wrongdoing. Not because of the report but despite it…
‘In the final analysis, the true test of such a report can only be whether in future armed conflicts it will have the effect of increasing or decreasing respect for the rule of law by the parties. Regrettably, this one-sided report, claiming to represent international law but in fact perverting it to serve a political agenda, can only weaken the standing of international law in future conflicts.’
But IBA president Fernando Pelaez-Pier adds: ‘The United Nations sought Justice Richard Goldstone to head the fact-finding delegation into the late 2008 and early 2009 incursions into Gaza because of his impeccable professional credentials and personal integrity.
‘It seems incredible that he is now being criticised on these very qualities by detractors of the delegation’s resulting report.’
