Try West Bank Settlers in Israeli Military Court Just Like Palestinians

[Phoenall]

They were state sanctioned terrorists as shown by the fact the state pays them or their families a pension.

As I said NONE as they murder them rather than hold them in a cell. They know that they would be accused of kidnapping in the UN and that Israel would invade and destroy them to return the children

The murderers of the Fogels were not "state sanctioned" anything. Neither were the killers of the kidnapped boys. They were common murderers.

According to Wikipedia:

The attack was harshly condemned by the United Nations, the Quartet on the Middle East, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and many other governments, as well as the Palestinian Authority and a number of non-governmental organizations. Xinhua, the official press agency of the People's Republic of China, stated that the attack was praised by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades stated that "the heroic operation is a natural response to the (Israeli) occupation crimes against our people in West Bank and Gaza Strip."[11] An opinion poll indicated that 63% of Palestinians opposed and about one-third supported the attack. One of the perpetrators of the murders was described as a "hero" and a "legend" by members of his family, during a weekly program.[12]​

Given that the PA strongly condemned it, and they are the governing authority there for the Palestinians, I seriously doubt that the murderer's families recieved any sort of pension.

How long are you going to continue to spin, weave and deflect?

So, the Palestinians hold no children in detention, have - as a government authority - abused no Israeli children in detention. Nor is there evidence they have raped, tortured etc any Israeli children being held in prison.

The murdering scum were part of the ruling party making them state sanctioned murderers. They even admit that themselves. Of course the P.A. condemned it in the west, while giving the scum that did the murders a pension.

Prove they gave the Fogel murderers pensions.

Ted Bundy, was a member of the Republican Party who's murders spanned years when the Republicans were teh "ruling party". Does that mean Ted Bundy's murders were "state sanctioned"?

This is where you need to stop digging and admit that when it comes to Palestinian children arrested and incarcerated under military justice system, Israel is pretty effed up for a country that is supposed to be a leading democratic nation in that region. No one pretends that the Palestinians are.

These are children we're talking about.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

Where is the evidence that Israel does this from an unbiased and non partisan source. The word of lying Palestinians does not count

 

[Phoenall]

The 3 boys last year that started the war, the actions in Ramallah,

They were kidnapped by extremist criminals and shot. There is no evidence that they were raped. In return, extremist criminals in Israel kidnapped and burned alive a Palestinian youth.

the Fogel children,

The Fogel children were murdered by Palestinian criminals. They were not held or incarcerated by the Palestinian government. No evidence of rape.

the boys lured into a cave etc.

Don't know about that.

It is so common place that Saddam was buggered with an iron bar repeatedly on his way to the gallows, a Scots schoolboy was buggered repeatedly by a gang of muslims, then had his penis hacked of and thrust down his throat before being placed on a fire to burn to death. Why do you think so many Israeli's caught by the Palestinians are in closed coffins.

Lots of deflection here. Most notable - no evidence of rape, torture or defilement. The cases you provide (except the last one I don't know of) - are criminal acts by criminals.

So can you provide any examples of where Palestinian authorities have abused Israeli children in custody? We have plenty of evidence that this has occurred to Palestinian children.

Now you change the criteria as you stated the Palestinians and not the Palestinian government,

The cases are Israeli children captured by Palestinian militia and abused, tortured and defiled in the name of islam

No. This is what I said:

What Israeli children do the Palestinians hold in their prisons or in detention?

Only the Palestinian government authorities can arrest and/or detain people.

The specific cases you mentioned were individual terrorists/terrorist groups committing crimes. None of those crimes were "in the name of Islam" and you have provided no evidence of torture, defilement or rape.

So we are back to the original question which you have been dancing around: What Israeli children do the Palestinians hold in their prisons or in detention?

They were state sanctioned terrorists as shown by the fact the state pays them or their families a pension.

As I said NONE as they murder them rather than hold them in a cell. They know that they would be accused of kidnapping in the UN and that Israel would invade and destroy them to return the children

Pensions are prescribed by law for those who qualify.

They do not create their laws to conform to foreign name calling.

The P.A. gives convicted terrorists and their families a "pension", same with those that get killed in the act of terrorism.

What foreign name calling they have been declared terrorists by many nations including Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, France, Germany, UK, USA et al.

 

[Phoenall]

That broken by Palestinian riots, violence, stone throwing, arson and terrorism. If they cant live in peace with Israel then they deserve all they get.

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

Of course there is no law, treaty or convention that approves "child abuse."

The 2013 Report titled "Children in Israeli Military Detention" is a is a set of 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

First, let's not over sensationalize the scope and nature of the report, the recommendations or the allegations. At the core of the report is the 25 year old foundational document called The Convention on the Rights of the Child, --- of which Article 37, prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

(THE ALLEGATION)

Section F: Conclusions ​

"Ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized. This conclusion is based on the repeated allegations about such treatment over the past 10 years and the volume, consistency and persistence of these allegations. The review of cases documented through the monitoring and reporting mechanism on grave child rights violations, as well as interviews conducted by UNICEF with Israeli and Palestinian lawyers and Palestinian children, also support this conclusion.

The pattern of ill-treatment includes the arrests of children at their homes between midnight and 5:00 am by heavily armed soldiers; the practice of blindfolding children and tying their hands with plastic ties; physical and verbal abuse during transfer to an interrogation site, including the use of painful restraints; lack of access to water, food, toilet facilities and medical care; interrogation using physical violence and threats; coerced confessions; and lack of access to lawyers or family members during interrogation.

Treatment inconsistent with child rights continues during court appearances, including shackling of children; denial of bail and imposition of custodial sentences; and transfer of children outside occupied Palestinian territory to serve their sentences inside Israel. The incarceration isolates them from their families and interrupts their studies.

These practices are in violation of international law that protects all children against ill-treatment when in contact with law enforcement, military and judicial institutions.

The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer. Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities."​

(COMMENT)

All Human Rights (HR) champions, tend to over dramatize HR interest stories, and generally always advocate on the liberal side of the administration. Of the 19 different Human Rights organization that routinely file reports against Israel, but rarely against any Arab or Muslim State ( UN child rights committee publishes findings on States reviewed during its latest session: Eritrea, Mexico, Ghana, Honduras, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Lao PDR and Israel 10 June 2015), UNICEF is but one. Only about half of them are, by definition, Treaty-based bodies; in this case, Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). If you read the report, nowhere does it accuse the Israelis of child abuse in the classical sense. The report is actually an advocacy document on the development of police and judicial procedures and the course of action that should be taken. It openly admits that its position is in the best interest of the Children in Question and at Risk; and that Israel's position should be in the best interests of the child --- as a primary consideration. This is in contrast to the more far-reaching political and law enforcement and security considerations entailed as an element of tension between occupation law’s requirement and the child advocacy program for youthful offenders.

None of the 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, have anything to do with the lack of access to food and water, toilet facilities or medical care. And recommendation #1, while it mention the need for "(i) Israel acting in the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration; acting in a (ii) Non-discrimination; (iii) Use of detention only as a measure of last resort; and implying that Israel should consider (iv) Alternatives to detention; and finally, UNICEF had the audacity to act as a legislative body and suggest (v) Diversion --- meaning that the youthful offenders under detention --- "should be channelled away from judicial proceedings."

In section G - Recommendations,

1. Compliance with international norms and regulations
• Military Order 1676 (September 2011), Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities.

2. Notification
* The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer.

3. Timing of arrests and arrest warrants
• Not addressed in the CRC.

4. Methods and instruments of restraint
• Not addressed in the CRC.

5. Strip searches
• Not addressed in the CRC.

6. Access to a lawyer
• This is addressed in the "Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment" Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988;" and the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966.

7. Judicial review of the arrest and detention
• What "ISRAELI LAW" says is: "The officer may delay the arraignment for an additional 24 hours for the same reason, provided that he/she explains his/her decision in writing and obtains the approval of the relevant approving authority. A delay of over 72 hours also requires the approval of the Head of the Investigations Department of the Israel Security Agency (ISA), or his/her deputy. In any case, the maximum delay should not exceed 96 hours from the time of arrest." However, this does not apply to a Military Court.

8. Medical examinations
• I saw no allegation that access to adequate medical care at all times war routinely denied.

9. Questioning or interrogation
• This is a matter for the courts to decide. The UNiCEF Report is attempting to measure the standard under Israeli Law. Not necessarily under the Geneva Code.

10. Solitary confinement
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is not torture, if properly administered. This is essentially putting the child in "time-out" zones and/or being "sent to your room." Solitary confinement is a corrections policy that need to be overseen by reasonable people. This is not a UNICEF issue unless the allegation is physical mistreatment or torture.

11. Confessional evidence
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is a matter for the courts to decide, not the UNICEF. Although it seems reasonable.

12. Bail and plea bargains
• Not addressed in the CRC.

13. Location of detention and access to relatives
• Granted, given reasonableness.

14. Accountability
• The UNICEF or the UN Special Rapporteur (OPT), are not competent to conduct any sort of Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment even if the General Assembly Resolution on the Question of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (A/56/156) was binding and applicable. I find it unnecessary to question the integrity of the entirety of the Israeli system based on a small compilation of complaints in the decades in which the Palestinians have decided to institute a belligerent occupation.
​

All but three of the recommendations deal with the handling and administration of youthful offenders. It should be noted that the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) does not address domestic or occupation law enforcement issues of youthful offenders. Israel has an obligation to "restore and ensure – as far as possible – public order and safety while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

Article 43: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
​

It is important to understand that, as the hostility of the Arab Palestinian in the occupied territories continues to grow, and the leadership and parental guidance embrace confrontation, the problem of juvenile delinquency will also grow. And the more the adult population chooses to advance the cause of jihad and armed struggle --- so will increase the probability that the young adult and adolescent will immolate that stance. The risk of confrontation will grow and there will be even more adverse events in the handling of such youthful offenders that are growing into a mature Hostile Arab Palestinian.

(EPILOG)

This UNICEF Report (2013) is based on information that is more than 5 years old. Even if the reader is totally anti-Israeli, they cannot overlook the improvements the Israelis made without regard to the release of these report.

The Israeli military order most relevant to this report is Military Order 1651. This order came into effect on 2 May 2010 and incorporates a number of previous military orders relating to children, including Military Order 132 (Adjudication of Juvenile Delinquents) and Military Order 1644 (Establishing a Juvenile Military Court). Military Order 1651 also contains the main jurisdictional provisions and specifies the main offences with which Palestinians, including children, who are living in areas under full Israeli control are charged, which were previously contained in Military Order 378 (Security Directives).

In September 2009, in response to documentation of the prosecution of children as young as in adult military courts, Israel established a juvenile military court.15 It is understood that this is the first and only juvenile military court in operation in the world. In fact, it uses the same facilities and court staff as the adult military court.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

It seems to me Rocco, that however "improved" it might be, there is something wrong with trying children of one ethnic group in the Military Court system and children of a different ethnic group in the Israeli Civil Court system when they both live in the same area and commit the same crimes yet receive very different outcomes and treatment. It might be the only Juvenile Military Court - but it dodges the question - WHY are these children brought through the military court system? The fact that there are two very disparate systems of handling offenses regarding children in living in the same area does not seem conducive to justice. As the OP pointed out, they should all be under the Military Court system.

I did go and look up the 2015 report and and it seemed to provide a fair and complete assessment to date. I am glad to see many improvements, but not so glad about lack of some - in particular, regarding solitary confinement, lack of a truly independent oversight and accountability system, and regarding the audiovideo recording of interrogations and where the children are held (preventing parents access to their incarcerated children). In particular, all of the above for children arrested for stone throwing.

From the 2015 UNICEF report:

September 2014: Military Order 1745 came into effect. This requires that interrogations be audiovisually
recorded and reaffirms that the interrogation always take place in a language that the child
understands. The order includes a clause stipulating that the provisions do not apply to a child
suspected of committing a security offense, such as throwing stones. The provisions of this Military
Order are the same as those applied in Israeli civilian courts.​

IF I am reading this correctly it sounds like those arrested for stone throwing are exempt from having their interrogation recorded and in a language the child understands. Why is this? Stone throwing probably accounts for the largest number of children arrested, particularly young children. Many of the complaints about the treatment of those children after arrest center around how they are abused during the interrogation process and the fact they are interrogated in a language they do not know, and often forced to sign confessions through intimidation or not understanding what they are signing. So why this exemption?


Solitary confinement - this is a very contentious issue and many people are beginning to come around to the view that it is indeed very very damaging, particularly to young minds. "Time out" is one thing, but solitary can be a completely different thing.

According to this article (from 2013): Rising Numbers of Palestinian Children Subjected to Solitary Confinement

In 21.4 percent of cases recorded by DCI-Palestine in 2013, children detained in the Israeli military detention system reported undergoing solitary confinement as part of the interrogation process. This represents an increase of two percent from 2012...

...DCI-Palestine’s research overwhelmingly suggests that the use of solitary confinement against Palestinian child detainees in the Israeli military detention system is employed almost solely for interrogation purposes. The apparent purpose is to obtain a confession or to gather intelligence on other individuals.

Globally, children and juvenile offenders are often held in isolation either as a disciplinary measure or to separate them from adult populations. The use of solitary confinement by Israeli authorities does not appear to be related to any disciplinary, protective, or medical rationale or justification.

...Children held in solitary confinement spent an average of 10 days in isolation. The longest period of confinement documented in a single case was 29 days in 2012, and 28 days in 2013.​

According to this UN report 21.4% of children arrested in 2013 were kept in solitary confinement for more than 2 days. The 2015 report seems to indicate little will change in regards to this as a tool of interrogation.

As far as solitary confinement being damaging more and more reports are coming out indicating it is exactly that. Frankly - we, the USA, need to get our own house in order on this. The statistics for the misuse of solitary confinement in the US justice system are horrific. I don't know how they compare to Israel because it is harder to get accurate information on Israel's detention policies due to so much labeled under "security".

NPR did an excellent series on the ongoing debate and reform of solitary confinement, noting in particular, that much of the civilized has abandoned it: Isolating Inmates: Solitary Confinement In The U.S.. A simple search brings up many provocative articles challanging solitary confinement as a prison tool.

Because a young person's brain is still developing, solitary confinement can do considerable damage and even in adults it can lead to psychosis and suicide.

 

[Coyote]

The murderers of the Fogels were not "state sanctioned" anything. Neither were the killers of the kidnapped boys. They were common murderers.

According to Wikipedia:

The attack was harshly condemned by the United Nations, the Quartet on the Middle East, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, and many other governments, as well as the Palestinian Authority and a number of non-governmental organizations. Xinhua, the official press agency of the People's Republic of China, stated that the attack was praised by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades stated that "the heroic operation is a natural response to the (Israeli) occupation crimes against our people in West Bank and Gaza Strip."[11] An opinion poll indicated that 63% of Palestinians opposed and about one-third supported the attack. One of the perpetrators of the murders was described as a "hero" and a "legend" by members of his family, during a weekly program.[12]​

Given that the PA strongly condemned it, and they are the governing authority there for the Palestinians, I seriously doubt that the murderer's families recieved any sort of pension.

How long are you going to continue to spin, weave and deflect?

So, the Palestinians hold no children in detention, have - as a government authority - abused no Israeli children in detention. Nor is there evidence they have raped, tortured etc any Israeli children being held in prison.

The murdering scum were part of the ruling party making them state sanctioned murderers. They even admit that themselves. Of course the P.A. condemned it in the west, while giving the scum that did the murders a pension.

Prove they gave the Fogel murderers pensions.

Ted Bundy, was a member of the Republican Party who's murders spanned years when the Republicans were teh "ruling party". Does that mean Ted Bundy's murders were "state sanctioned"?

This is where you need to stop digging and admit that when it comes to Palestinian children arrested and incarcerated under military justice system, Israel is pretty effed up for a country that is supposed to be a leading democratic nation in that region. No one pretends that the Palestinians are.

These are children we're talking about.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

Where is the evidence that Israel does this from an unbiased and non partisan source. The word of lying Palestinians does not count

You still can not answer a simple question?

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

 

[Phoenall]

Coyote, et al,

Of course there is no law, treaty or convention that approves "child abuse."

The 2013 Report titled "Children in Israeli Military Detention" is a is a set of 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

First, let's not over sensationalize the scope and nature of the report, the recommendations or the allegations. At the core of the report is the 25 year old foundational document called The Convention on the Rights of the Child, --- of which Article 37, prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

(THE ALLEGATION)

Section F: Conclusions ​

"Ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized. This conclusion is based on the repeated allegations about such treatment over the past 10 years and the volume, consistency and persistence of these allegations. The review of cases documented through the monitoring and reporting mechanism on grave child rights violations, as well as interviews conducted by UNICEF with Israeli and Palestinian lawyers and Palestinian children, also support this conclusion.

The pattern of ill-treatment includes the arrests of children at their homes between midnight and 5:00 am by heavily armed soldiers; the practice of blindfolding children and tying their hands with plastic ties; physical and verbal abuse during transfer to an interrogation site, including the use of painful restraints; lack of access to water, food, toilet facilities and medical care; interrogation using physical violence and threats; coerced confessions; and lack of access to lawyers or family members during interrogation.

Treatment inconsistent with child rights continues during court appearances, including shackling of children; denial of bail and imposition of custodial sentences; and transfer of children outside occupied Palestinian territory to serve their sentences inside Israel. The incarceration isolates them from their families and interrupts their studies.

These practices are in violation of international law that protects all children against ill-treatment when in contact with law enforcement, military and judicial institutions.

The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer. Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities."​

(COMMENT)

All Human Rights (HR) champions, tend to over dramatize HR interest stories, and generally always advocate on the liberal side of the administration. Of the 19 different Human Rights organization that routinely file reports against Israel, but rarely against any Arab or Muslim State ( UN child rights committee publishes findings on States reviewed during its latest session: Eritrea, Mexico, Ghana, Honduras, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Lao PDR and Israel 10 June 2015), UNICEF is but one. Only about half of them are, by definition, Treaty-based bodies; in this case, Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). If you read the report, nowhere does it accuse the Israelis of child abuse in the classical sense. The report is actually an advocacy document on the development of police and judicial procedures and the course of action that should be taken. It openly admits that its position is in the best interest of the Children in Question and at Risk; and that Israel's position should be in the best interests of the child --- as a primary consideration. This is in contrast to the more far-reaching political and law enforcement and security considerations entailed as an element of tension between occupation law’s requirement and the child advocacy program for youthful offenders.

None of the 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, have anything to do with the lack of access to food and water, toilet facilities or medical care. And recommendation #1, while it mention the need for "(i) Israel acting in the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration; acting in a (ii) Non-discrimination; (iii) Use of detention only as a measure of last resort; and implying that Israel should consider (iv) Alternatives to detention; and finally, UNICEF had the audacity to act as a legislative body and suggest (v) Diversion --- meaning that the youthful offenders under detention --- "should be channelled away from judicial proceedings."

In section G - Recommendations,

1. Compliance with international norms and regulations
• Military Order 1676 (September 2011), Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities.

2. Notification
* The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer.

3. Timing of arrests and arrest warrants
• Not addressed in the CRC.

4. Methods and instruments of restraint
• Not addressed in the CRC.

5. Strip searches
• Not addressed in the CRC.

6. Access to a lawyer
• This is addressed in the "Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment" Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988;" and the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966.

7. Judicial review of the arrest and detention
• What "ISRAELI LAW" says is: "The officer may delay the arraignment for an additional 24 hours for the same reason, provided that he/she explains his/her decision in writing and obtains the approval of the relevant approving authority. A delay of over 72 hours also requires the approval of the Head of the Investigations Department of the Israel Security Agency (ISA), or his/her deputy. In any case, the maximum delay should not exceed 96 hours from the time of arrest." However, this does not apply to a Military Court.

8. Medical examinations
• I saw no allegation that access to adequate medical care at all times war routinely denied.

9. Questioning or interrogation
• This is a matter for the courts to decide. The UNiCEF Report is attempting to measure the standard under Israeli Law. Not necessarily under the Geneva Code.

10. Solitary confinement
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is not torture, if properly administered. This is essentially putting the child in "time-out" zones and/or being "sent to your room." Solitary confinement is a corrections policy that need to be overseen by reasonable people. This is not a UNICEF issue unless the allegation is physical mistreatment or torture.

11. Confessional evidence
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is a matter for the courts to decide, not the UNICEF. Although it seems reasonable.

12. Bail and plea bargains
• Not addressed in the CRC.

13. Location of detention and access to relatives
• Granted, given reasonableness.

14. Accountability
• The UNICEF or the UN Special Rapporteur (OPT), are not competent to conduct any sort of Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment even if the General Assembly Resolution on the Question of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (A/56/156) was binding and applicable. I find it unnecessary to question the integrity of the entirety of the Israeli system based on a small compilation of complaints in the decades in which the Palestinians have decided to institute a belligerent occupation.
​

All but three of the recommendations deal with the handling and administration of youthful offenders. It should be noted that the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) does not address domestic or occupation law enforcement issues of youthful offenders. Israel has an obligation to "restore and ensure – as far as possible – public order and safety while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

Article 43: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
​

It is important to understand that, as the hostility of the Arab Palestinian in the occupied territories continues to grow, and the leadership and parental guidance embrace confrontation, the problem of juvenile delinquency will also grow. And the more the adult population chooses to advance the cause of jihad and armed struggle --- so will increase the probability that the young adult and adolescent will immolate that stance. The risk of confrontation will grow and there will be even more adverse events in the handling of such youthful offenders that are growing into a mature Hostile Arab Palestinian.

(EPILOG)

This UNICEF Report (2013) is based on information that is more than 5 years old. Even if the reader is totally anti-Israeli, they cannot overlook the improvements the Israelis made without regard to the release of these report.

The Israeli military order most relevant to this report is Military Order 1651. This order came into effect on 2 May 2010 and incorporates a number of previous military orders relating to children, including Military Order 132 (Adjudication of Juvenile Delinquents) and Military Order 1644 (Establishing a Juvenile Military Court). Military Order 1651 also contains the main jurisdictional provisions and specifies the main offences with which Palestinians, including children, who are living in areas under full Israeli control are charged, which were previously contained in Military Order 378 (Security Directives).

In September 2009, in response to documentation of the prosecution of children as young as in adult military courts, Israel established a juvenile military court.15 It is understood that this is the first and only juvenile military court in operation in the world. In fact, it uses the same facilities and court staff as the adult military court.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

It seems to me Rocco, that however "improved" it might be, there is something wrong with trying children of one ethnic group in the Military Court system and children of a different ethnic group in the Israeli Civil Court system when they both live in the same area and commit the same crimes yet receive very different outcomes and treatment. It might be the only Juvenile Military Court - but it dodges the question - WHY are these children brought through the military court system? The fact that there are two very disparate systems of handling offenses regarding children in living in the same area does not seem conducive to justice. As the OP pointed out, they should all be under the Military Court system.

I did go and look up the 2015 report and and it seemed to provide a fair and complete assessment to date. I am glad to see many improvements, but not so glad about lack of some - in particular, regarding solitary confinement, lack of a truly independent oversight and accountability system, and regarding the audiovideo recording of interrogations and where the children are held (preventing parents access to their incarcerated children). In particular, all of the above for children arrested for stone throwing.

From the 2015 UNICEF report:

September 2014: Military Order 1745 came into effect. This requires that interrogations be audiovisually
recorded and reaffirms that the interrogation always take place in a language that the child
understands. The order includes a clause stipulating that the provisions do not apply to a child
suspected of committing a security offense, such as throwing stones. The provisions of this Military
Order are the same as those applied in Israeli civilian courts.​

IF I am reading this correctly it sounds like those arrested for stone throwing are exempt from having their interrogation recorded and in a language the child understands. Why is this? Stone throwing probably accounts for the largest number of children arrested, particularly young children. Many of the complaints about the treatment of those children after arrest center around how they are abused during the interrogation process and the fact they are interrogated in a language they do not know, and often forced to sign confessions through intimidation or not understanding what they are signing. So why this exemption?


Solitary confinement - this is a very contentious issue and many people are beginning to come around to the view that it is indeed very very damaging, particularly to young minds. "Time out" is one thing, but solitary can be a completely different thing.

According to this article (from 2013): Rising Numbers of Palestinian Children Subjected to Solitary Confinement

In 21.4 percent of cases recorded by DCI-Palestine in 2013, children detained in the Israeli military detention system reported undergoing solitary confinement as part of the interrogation process. This represents an increase of two percent from 2012...

...DCI-Palestine’s research overwhelmingly suggests that the use of solitary confinement against Palestinian child detainees in the Israeli military detention system is employed almost solely for interrogation purposes. The apparent purpose is to obtain a confession or to gather intelligence on other individuals.

Globally, children and juvenile offenders are often held in isolation either as a disciplinary measure or to separate them from adult populations. The use of solitary confinement by Israeli authorities does not appear to be related to any disciplinary, protective, or medical rationale or justification.

...Children held in solitary confinement spent an average of 10 days in isolation. The longest period of confinement documented in a single case was 29 days in 2012, and 28 days in 2013.​

According to this UN report 21.4% of children arrested in 2013 were kept in solitary confinement for more than 2 days. The 2015 report seems to indicate little will change in regards to this as a tool of interrogation.

As far as solitary confinement being damaging more and more reports are coming out indicating it is exactly that. Frankly - we, the USA, need to get our own house in order on this. The statistics for the misuse of solitary confinement in the US justice system are horrific. I don't know how they compare to Israel because it is harder to get accurate information on Israel's detention policies due to so much labeled under "security".

NPR did an excellent series on the ongoing debate and reform of solitary confinement, noting in particular, that much of the civilized has abandoned it: Isolating Inmates: Solitary Confinement In The U.S.. A simple search brings up many provocative articles challanging solitary confinement as a prison tool.

Because a young person's brain is still developing, solitary confinement can do considerable damage and even in adults it can lead to psychosis and suicide.

Once again your Jew hatred and anti Semitism clouds your thought process and has you believing that the west bank is in Israel so should be covered by Israeli law. It isn't it is occupied territory under military law that uses Jordanian legislation as the principle of law. This is covered by the Geneva conventions and explains why the IDF are the law keepers in the west bank and why they administer the law as they do. Under international law they are not allowed to use Jewish legislature or Israeli courts to try people of the occupied territory or to use any other legislature than that prescribed at the time of the occupation.
The Palestinians understand this and would not want the IDF to enforce their laws on the occupied people as they would be executed, maimed, stoned or beaten . Just look at what Jordan did to Palestinians in Jordan during the 1970's under Jordanian legislation and apply those laws on the west bank.

 

[Phoenall]

The murdering scum were part of the ruling party making them state sanctioned murderers. They even admit that themselves. Of course the P.A. condemned it in the west, while giving the scum that did the murders a pension.

Prove they gave the Fogel murderers pensions.

Ted Bundy, was a member of the Republican Party who's murders spanned years when the Republicans were teh "ruling party". Does that mean Ted Bundy's murders were "state sanctioned"?

This is where you need to stop digging and admit that when it comes to Palestinian children arrested and incarcerated under military justice system, Israel is pretty effed up for a country that is supposed to be a leading democratic nation in that region. No one pretends that the Palestinians are.

These are children we're talking about.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

Where is the evidence that Israel does this from an unbiased and non partisan source. The word of lying Palestinians does not count

You still can not answer a simple question?

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

And where is the evidence from an unbiased and non partisan source that says they do. Until you can prove conclusively that the IDF systematically abuse children in custody you cant demand answers to non existent questions ?

So until the abuse is proven I cant give you an answer to your question as it would not be the correct answer

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

Of course there is no law, treaty or convention that approves "child abuse."

The 2013 Report titled "Children in Israeli Military Detention" is a is a set of 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

First, let's not over sensationalize the scope and nature of the report, the recommendations or the allegations. At the core of the report is the 25 year old foundational document called The Convention on the Rights of the Child, --- of which Article 37, prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

(THE ALLEGATION)

Section F: Conclusions ​

"Ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized. This conclusion is based on the repeated allegations about such treatment over the past 10 years and the volume, consistency and persistence of these allegations. The review of cases documented through the monitoring and reporting mechanism on grave child rights violations, as well as interviews conducted by UNICEF with Israeli and Palestinian lawyers and Palestinian children, also support this conclusion.

The pattern of ill-treatment includes the arrests of children at their homes between midnight and 5:00 am by heavily armed soldiers; the practice of blindfolding children and tying their hands with plastic ties; physical and verbal abuse during transfer to an interrogation site, including the use of painful restraints; lack of access to water, food, toilet facilities and medical care; interrogation using physical violence and threats; coerced confessions; and lack of access to lawyers or family members during interrogation.

Treatment inconsistent with child rights continues during court appearances, including shackling of children; denial of bail and imposition of custodial sentences; and transfer of children outside occupied Palestinian territory to serve their sentences inside Israel. The incarceration isolates them from their families and interrupts their studies.

These practices are in violation of international law that protects all children against ill-treatment when in contact with law enforcement, military and judicial institutions.

The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer. Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities."​

(COMMENT)

All Human Rights (HR) champions, tend to over dramatize HR interest stories, and generally always advocate on the liberal side of the administration. Of the 19 different Human Rights organization that routinely file reports against Israel, but rarely against any Arab or Muslim State ( UN child rights committee publishes findings on States reviewed during its latest session: Eritrea, Mexico, Ghana, Honduras, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Lao PDR and Israel 10 June 2015), UNICEF is but one. Only about half of them are, by definition, Treaty-based bodies; in this case, Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). If you read the report, nowhere does it accuse the Israelis of child abuse in the classical sense. The report is actually an advocacy document on the development of police and judicial procedures and the course of action that should be taken. It openly admits that its position is in the best interest of the Children in Question and at Risk; and that Israel's position should be in the best interests of the child --- as a primary consideration. This is in contrast to the more far-reaching political and law enforcement and security considerations entailed as an element of tension between occupation law’s requirement and the child advocacy program for youthful offenders.

None of the 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, have anything to do with the lack of access to food and water, toilet facilities or medical care. And recommendation #1, while it mention the need for "(i) Israel acting in the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration; acting in a (ii) Non-discrimination; (iii) Use of detention only as a measure of last resort; and implying that Israel should consider (iv) Alternatives to detention; and finally, UNICEF had the audacity to act as a legislative body and suggest (v) Diversion --- meaning that the youthful offenders under detention --- "should be channelled away from judicial proceedings."

In section G - Recommendations,

1. Compliance with international norms and regulations
• Military Order 1676 (September 2011), Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities.

2. Notification
* The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer.

3. Timing of arrests and arrest warrants
• Not addressed in the CRC.

4. Methods and instruments of restraint
• Not addressed in the CRC.

5. Strip searches
• Not addressed in the CRC.

6. Access to a lawyer
• This is addressed in the "Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment" Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988;" and the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966.

7. Judicial review of the arrest and detention
• What "ISRAELI LAW" says is: "The officer may delay the arraignment for an additional 24 hours for the same reason, provided that he/she explains his/her decision in writing and obtains the approval of the relevant approving authority. A delay of over 72 hours also requires the approval of the Head of the Investigations Department of the Israel Security Agency (ISA), or his/her deputy. In any case, the maximum delay should not exceed 96 hours from the time of arrest." However, this does not apply to a Military Court.

8. Medical examinations
• I saw no allegation that access to adequate medical care at all times war routinely denied.

9. Questioning or interrogation
• This is a matter for the courts to decide. The UNiCEF Report is attempting to measure the standard under Israeli Law. Not necessarily under the Geneva Code.

10. Solitary confinement
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is not torture, if properly administered. This is essentially putting the child in "time-out" zones and/or being "sent to your room." Solitary confinement is a corrections policy that need to be overseen by reasonable people. This is not a UNICEF issue unless the allegation is physical mistreatment or torture.

11. Confessional evidence
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is a matter for the courts to decide, not the UNICEF. Although it seems reasonable.

12. Bail and plea bargains
• Not addressed in the CRC.

13. Location of detention and access to relatives
• Granted, given reasonableness.

14. Accountability
• The UNICEF or the UN Special Rapporteur (OPT), are not competent to conduct any sort of Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment even if the General Assembly Resolution on the Question of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (A/56/156) was binding and applicable. I find it unnecessary to question the integrity of the entirety of the Israeli system based on a small compilation of complaints in the decades in which the Palestinians have decided to institute a belligerent occupation.
​

All but three of the recommendations deal with the handling and administration of youthful offenders. It should be noted that the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) does not address domestic or occupation law enforcement issues of youthful offenders. Israel has an obligation to "restore and ensure – as far as possible – public order and safety while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

Article 43: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
​

It is important to understand that, as the hostility of the Arab Palestinian in the occupied territories continues to grow, and the leadership and parental guidance embrace confrontation, the problem of juvenile delinquency will also grow. And the more the adult population chooses to advance the cause of jihad and armed struggle --- so will increase the probability that the young adult and adolescent will immolate that stance. The risk of confrontation will grow and there will be even more adverse events in the handling of such youthful offenders that are growing into a mature Hostile Arab Palestinian.

(EPILOG)

This UNICEF Report (2013) is based on information that is more than 5 years old. Even if the reader is totally anti-Israeli, they cannot overlook the improvements the Israelis made without regard to the release of these report.

The Israeli military order most relevant to this report is Military Order 1651. This order came into effect on 2 May 2010 and incorporates a number of previous military orders relating to children, including Military Order 132 (Adjudication of Juvenile Delinquents) and Military Order 1644 (Establishing a Juvenile Military Court). Military Order 1651 also contains the main jurisdictional provisions and specifies the main offences with which Palestinians, including children, who are living in areas under full Israeli control are charged, which were previously contained in Military Order 378 (Security Directives).

In September 2009, in response to documentation of the prosecution of children as young as in adult military courts, Israel established a juvenile military court.15 It is understood that this is the first and only juvenile military court in operation in the world. In fact, it uses the same facilities and court staff as the adult military court.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

It seems to me Rocco, that however "improved" it might be, there is something wrong with trying children of one ethnic group in the Military Court system and children of a different ethnic group in the Israeli Civil Court system when they both live in the same area and commit the same crimes yet receive very different outcomes and treatment. It might be the only Juvenile Military Court - but it dodges the question - WHY are these children brought through the military court system? The fact that there are two very disparate systems of handling offenses regarding children in living in the same area does not seem conducive to justice. As the OP pointed out, they should all be under the Military Court system.

I did go and look up the 2015 report and and it seemed to provide a fair and complete assessment to date. I am glad to see many improvements, but not so glad about lack of some - in particular, regarding solitary confinement, lack of a truly independent oversight and accountability system, and regarding the audiovideo recording of interrogations and where the children are held (preventing parents access to their incarcerated children). In particular, all of the above for children arrested for stone throwing.

From the 2015 UNICEF report:

September 2014: Military Order 1745 came into effect. This requires that interrogations be audiovisually
recorded and reaffirms that the interrogation always take place in a language that the child
understands. The order includes a clause stipulating that the provisions do not apply to a child
suspected of committing a security offense, such as throwing stones. The provisions of this Military
Order are the same as those applied in Israeli civilian courts.​

IF I am reading this correctly it sounds like those arrested for stone throwing are exempt from having their interrogation recorded and in a language the child understands. Why is this? Stone throwing probably accounts for the largest number of children arrested, particularly young children. Many of the complaints about the treatment of those children after arrest center around how they are abused during the interrogation process and the fact they are interrogated in a language they do not know, and often forced to sign confessions through intimidation or not understanding what they are signing. So why this exemption?


Solitary confinement - this is a very contentious issue and many people are beginning to come around to the view that it is indeed very very damaging, particularly to young minds. "Time out" is one thing, but solitary can be a completely different thing.

According to this article (from 2013): Rising Numbers of Palestinian Children Subjected to Solitary Confinement

In 21.4 percent of cases recorded by DCI-Palestine in 2013, children detained in the Israeli military detention system reported undergoing solitary confinement as part of the interrogation process. This represents an increase of two percent from 2012...

...DCI-Palestine’s research overwhelmingly suggests that the use of solitary confinement against Palestinian child detainees in the Israeli military detention system is employed almost solely for interrogation purposes. The apparent purpose is to obtain a confession or to gather intelligence on other individuals.

Globally, children and juvenile offenders are often held in isolation either as a disciplinary measure or to separate them from adult populations. The use of solitary confinement by Israeli authorities does not appear to be related to any disciplinary, protective, or medical rationale or justification.

...Children held in solitary confinement spent an average of 10 days in isolation. The longest period of confinement documented in a single case was 29 days in 2012, and 28 days in 2013.​

According to this UN report 21.4% of children arrested in 2013 were kept in solitary confinement for more than 2 days. The 2015 report seems to indicate little will change in regards to this as a tool of interrogation.

As far as solitary confinement being damaging more and more reports are coming out indicating it is exactly that. Frankly - we, the USA, need to get our own house in order on this. The statistics for the misuse of solitary confinement in the US justice system are horrific. I don't know how they compare to Israel because it is harder to get accurate information on Israel's detention policies due to so much labeled under "security".

NPR did an excellent series on the ongoing debate and reform of solitary confinement, noting in particular, that much of the civilized has abandoned it: Isolating Inmates: Solitary Confinement In The U.S.. A simple search brings up many provocative articles challanging solitary confinement as a prison tool.

Because a young person's brain is still developing, solitary confinement can do considerable damage and even in adults it can lead to psychosis and suicide.

Once again your Jew hatred and anti Semitism clouds your thought process and has you believing that the west bank is in Israel so should be covered by Israeli law. It isn't it is occupied territory under military law that uses Jordanian legislation as the principle of law. This is covered by the Geneva conventions and explains why the IDF are the law keepers in the west bank and why they administer the law as they do. Under international law they are not allowed to use Jewish legislature or Israeli courts to try people of the occupied territory or to use any other legislature than that prescribed at the time of the occupation.
The Palestinians understand this and would not want the IDF to enforce their laws on the occupied people as they would be executed, maimed, stoned or beaten . Just look at what Jordan did to Palestinians in Jordan during the 1970's under Jordanian legislation and apply those laws on the west bank.

Why do you label all opposition "Jew hatred" and "anti Semitism"? That seems to be your default comeback. If you read the OP, it pointed out that the settlers in the Occupied Territories could (and should) be tried under the military system. Another article I posted also pointed out that many of the crimes that end up in the military courts could have and should have been put through either the Israeli or Palestinian civil courts. I will have to look up that article again.

 

[Coyote]

Prove they gave the Fogel murderers pensions.

Ted Bundy, was a member of the Republican Party who's murders spanned years when the Republicans were teh "ruling party". Does that mean Ted Bundy's murders were "state sanctioned"?

This is where you need to stop digging and admit that when it comes to Palestinian children arrested and incarcerated under military justice system, Israel is pretty effed up for a country that is supposed to be a leading democratic nation in that region. No one pretends that the Palestinians are.

These are children we're talking about.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

Where is the evidence that Israel does this from an unbiased and non partisan source. The word of lying Palestinians does not count

You still can not answer a simple question?

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

And where is the evidence from an unbiased and non partisan source that says they do. Until you can prove conclusively that the IDF systematically abuse children in custody you cant demand answers to non existent questions ?

So until the abuse is proven I cant give you an answer to your question as it would not be the correct answer

Just admit it - you are unable to show where in the Geneva Conventions children can be abused so you scuttle around moving goal posts and trying to deflect by demanding more and more info.

 

[Phoenall]

Coyote, et al,

Of course there is no law, treaty or convention that approves "child abuse."

The 2013 Report titled "Children in Israeli Military Detention" is a is a set of 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

First, let's not over sensationalize the scope and nature of the report, the recommendations or the allegations. At the core of the report is the 25 year old foundational document called The Convention on the Rights of the Child, --- of which Article 37, prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

(THE ALLEGATION)

Section F: Conclusions ​

"Ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized. This conclusion is based on the repeated allegations about such treatment over the past 10 years and the volume, consistency and persistence of these allegations. The review of cases documented through the monitoring and reporting mechanism on grave child rights violations, as well as interviews conducted by UNICEF with Israeli and Palestinian lawyers and Palestinian children, also support this conclusion.

The pattern of ill-treatment includes the arrests of children at their homes between midnight and 5:00 am by heavily armed soldiers; the practice of blindfolding children and tying their hands with plastic ties; physical and verbal abuse during transfer to an interrogation site, including the use of painful restraints; lack of access to water, food, toilet facilities and medical care; interrogation using physical violence and threats; coerced confessions; and lack of access to lawyers or family members during interrogation.

Treatment inconsistent with child rights continues during court appearances, including shackling of children; denial of bail and imposition of custodial sentences; and transfer of children outside occupied Palestinian territory to serve their sentences inside Israel. The incarceration isolates them from their families and interrupts their studies.

These practices are in violation of international law that protects all children against ill-treatment when in contact with law enforcement, military and judicial institutions.

The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer. Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities."​

(COMMENT)

All Human Rights (HR) champions, tend to over dramatize HR interest stories, and generally always advocate on the liberal side of the administration. Of the 19 different Human Rights organization that routinely file reports against Israel, but rarely against any Arab or Muslim State ( UN child rights committee publishes findings on States reviewed during its latest session: Eritrea, Mexico, Ghana, Honduras, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Lao PDR and Israel 10 June 2015), UNICEF is but one. Only about half of them are, by definition, Treaty-based bodies; in this case, Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). If you read the report, nowhere does it accuse the Israelis of child abuse in the classical sense. The report is actually an advocacy document on the development of police and judicial procedures and the course of action that should be taken. It openly admits that its position is in the best interest of the Children in Question and at Risk; and that Israel's position should be in the best interests of the child --- as a primary consideration. This is in contrast to the more far-reaching political and law enforcement and security considerations entailed as an element of tension between occupation law’s requirement and the child advocacy program for youthful offenders.

None of the 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, have anything to do with the lack of access to food and water, toilet facilities or medical care. And recommendation #1, while it mention the need for "(i) Israel acting in the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration; acting in a (ii) Non-discrimination; (iii) Use of detention only as a measure of last resort; and implying that Israel should consider (iv) Alternatives to detention; and finally, UNICEF had the audacity to act as a legislative body and suggest (v) Diversion --- meaning that the youthful offenders under detention --- "should be channelled away from judicial proceedings."

In section G - Recommendations,

1. Compliance with international norms and regulations
• Military Order 1676 (September 2011), Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities.

2. Notification
* The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer.

3. Timing of arrests and arrest warrants
• Not addressed in the CRC.

4. Methods and instruments of restraint
• Not addressed in the CRC.

5. Strip searches
• Not addressed in the CRC.

6. Access to a lawyer
• This is addressed in the "Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment" Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988;" and the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966.

7. Judicial review of the arrest and detention
• What "ISRAELI LAW" says is: "The officer may delay the arraignment for an additional 24 hours for the same reason, provided that he/she explains his/her decision in writing and obtains the approval of the relevant approving authority. A delay of over 72 hours also requires the approval of the Head of the Investigations Department of the Israel Security Agency (ISA), or his/her deputy. In any case, the maximum delay should not exceed 96 hours from the time of arrest." However, this does not apply to a Military Court.

8. Medical examinations
• I saw no allegation that access to adequate medical care at all times war routinely denied.

9. Questioning or interrogation
• This is a matter for the courts to decide. The UNiCEF Report is attempting to measure the standard under Israeli Law. Not necessarily under the Geneva Code.

10. Solitary confinement
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is not torture, if properly administered. This is essentially putting the child in "time-out" zones and/or being "sent to your room." Solitary confinement is a corrections policy that need to be overseen by reasonable people. This is not a UNICEF issue unless the allegation is physical mistreatment or torture.

11. Confessional evidence
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is a matter for the courts to decide, not the UNICEF. Although it seems reasonable.

12. Bail and plea bargains
• Not addressed in the CRC.

13. Location of detention and access to relatives
• Granted, given reasonableness.

14. Accountability
• The UNICEF or the UN Special Rapporteur (OPT), are not competent to conduct any sort of Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment even if the General Assembly Resolution on the Question of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (A/56/156) was binding and applicable. I find it unnecessary to question the integrity of the entirety of the Israeli system based on a small compilation of complaints in the decades in which the Palestinians have decided to institute a belligerent occupation.
​

All but three of the recommendations deal with the handling and administration of youthful offenders. It should be noted that the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) does not address domestic or occupation law enforcement issues of youthful offenders. Israel has an obligation to "restore and ensure – as far as possible – public order and safety while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

Article 43: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
​

It is important to understand that, as the hostility of the Arab Palestinian in the occupied territories continues to grow, and the leadership and parental guidance embrace confrontation, the problem of juvenile delinquency will also grow. And the more the adult population chooses to advance the cause of jihad and armed struggle --- so will increase the probability that the young adult and adolescent will immolate that stance. The risk of confrontation will grow and there will be even more adverse events in the handling of such youthful offenders that are growing into a mature Hostile Arab Palestinian.

(EPILOG)

This UNICEF Report (2013) is based on information that is more than 5 years old. Even if the reader is totally anti-Israeli, they cannot overlook the improvements the Israelis made without regard to the release of these report.

The Israeli military order most relevant to this report is Military Order 1651. This order came into effect on 2 May 2010 and incorporates a number of previous military orders relating to children, including Military Order 132 (Adjudication of Juvenile Delinquents) and Military Order 1644 (Establishing a Juvenile Military Court). Military Order 1651 also contains the main jurisdictional provisions and specifies the main offences with which Palestinians, including children, who are living in areas under full Israeli control are charged, which were previously contained in Military Order 378 (Security Directives).

In September 2009, in response to documentation of the prosecution of children as young as in adult military courts, Israel established a juvenile military court.15 It is understood that this is the first and only juvenile military court in operation in the world. In fact, it uses the same facilities and court staff as the adult military court.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

It seems to me Rocco, that however "improved" it might be, there is something wrong with trying children of one ethnic group in the Military Court system and children of a different ethnic group in the Israeli Civil Court system when they both live in the same area and commit the same crimes yet receive very different outcomes and treatment. It might be the only Juvenile Military Court - but it dodges the question - WHY are these children brought through the military court system? The fact that there are two very disparate systems of handling offenses regarding children in living in the same area does not seem conducive to justice. As the OP pointed out, they should all be under the Military Court system.

I did go and look up the 2015 report and and it seemed to provide a fair and complete assessment to date. I am glad to see many improvements, but not so glad about lack of some - in particular, regarding solitary confinement, lack of a truly independent oversight and accountability system, and regarding the audiovideo recording of interrogations and where the children are held (preventing parents access to their incarcerated children). In particular, all of the above for children arrested for stone throwing.

From the 2015 UNICEF report:

September 2014: Military Order 1745 came into effect. This requires that interrogations be audiovisually
recorded and reaffirms that the interrogation always take place in a language that the child
understands. The order includes a clause stipulating that the provisions do not apply to a child
suspected of committing a security offense, such as throwing stones. The provisions of this Military
Order are the same as those applied in Israeli civilian courts.​

IF I am reading this correctly it sounds like those arrested for stone throwing are exempt from having their interrogation recorded and in a language the child understands. Why is this? Stone throwing probably accounts for the largest number of children arrested, particularly young children. Many of the complaints about the treatment of those children after arrest center around how they are abused during the interrogation process and the fact they are interrogated in a language they do not know, and often forced to sign confessions through intimidation or not understanding what they are signing. So why this exemption?


Solitary confinement - this is a very contentious issue and many people are beginning to come around to the view that it is indeed very very damaging, particularly to young minds. "Time out" is one thing, but solitary can be a completely different thing.

According to this article (from 2013): Rising Numbers of Palestinian Children Subjected to Solitary Confinement

In 21.4 percent of cases recorded by DCI-Palestine in 2013, children detained in the Israeli military detention system reported undergoing solitary confinement as part of the interrogation process. This represents an increase of two percent from 2012...

...DCI-Palestine’s research overwhelmingly suggests that the use of solitary confinement against Palestinian child detainees in the Israeli military detention system is employed almost solely for interrogation purposes. The apparent purpose is to obtain a confession or to gather intelligence on other individuals.

Globally, children and juvenile offenders are often held in isolation either as a disciplinary measure or to separate them from adult populations. The use of solitary confinement by Israeli authorities does not appear to be related to any disciplinary, protective, or medical rationale or justification.

...Children held in solitary confinement spent an average of 10 days in isolation. The longest period of confinement documented in a single case was 29 days in 2012, and 28 days in 2013.​

According to this UN report 21.4% of children arrested in 2013 were kept in solitary confinement for more than 2 days. The 2015 report seems to indicate little will change in regards to this as a tool of interrogation.

As far as solitary confinement being damaging more and more reports are coming out indicating it is exactly that. Frankly - we, the USA, need to get our own house in order on this. The statistics for the misuse of solitary confinement in the US justice system are horrific. I don't know how they compare to Israel because it is harder to get accurate information on Israel's detention policies due to so much labeled under "security".

NPR did an excellent series on the ongoing debate and reform of solitary confinement, noting in particular, that much of the civilized has abandoned it: Isolating Inmates: Solitary Confinement In The U.S.. A simple search brings up many provocative articles challanging solitary confinement as a prison tool.

Because a young person's brain is still developing, solitary confinement can do considerable damage and even in adults it can lead to psychosis and suicide.

Once again your Jew hatred and anti Semitism clouds your thought process and has you believing that the west bank is in Israel so should be covered by Israeli law. It isn't it is occupied territory under military law that uses Jordanian legislation as the principle of law. This is covered by the Geneva conventions and explains why the IDF are the law keepers in the west bank and why they administer the law as they do. Under international law they are not allowed to use Jewish legislature or Israeli courts to try people of the occupied territory or to use any other legislature than that prescribed at the time of the occupation.
The Palestinians understand this and would not want the IDF to enforce their laws on the occupied people as they would be executed, maimed, stoned or beaten . Just look at what Jordan did to Palestinians in Jordan during the 1970's under Jordanian legislation and apply those laws on the west bank.

Why do you label all opposition "Jew hatred" and "anti Semitism"? That seems to be your default comeback. If you read the OP, it pointed out that the settlers in the Occupied Territories could (and should) be tried under the military system. Another article I posted also pointed out that many of the crimes that end up in the military courts could have and should have been put through either the Israeli or Palestinian civil courts. I will have to look up that article again.

Did you read it as it is nothing more than one persons opinion, and is not based of facts or reality just their opinion, and when you look the majority of the authors work is hatchet jobs on the Jews and Israel's regime

 

[Phoenall]

You prove that they were not members of hamas or fatah and were sanctioned by the state to murder Israeli's.
Ted bundy was not sanctioned by the Republicans was he as you are trying to twist the facts. All hamas members follow the hamas charter that includes the words we will not rest until every Jew has been killed or driven away and Israel is destroyed.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

Where is the evidence that Israel does this from an unbiased and non partisan source. The word of lying Palestinians does not count

You still can not answer a simple question?

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

And where is the evidence from an unbiased and non partisan source that says they do. Until you can prove conclusively that the IDF systematically abuse children in custody you cant demand answers to non existent questions ?

So until the abuse is proven I cant give you an answer to your question as it would not be the correct answer

Just admit it - you are unable to show where in the Geneva Conventions children can be abused so you scuttle around moving goal posts and trying to deflect by demanding more and more info.

Told you when you prove that Israel systematically abuses Palestinian children using a source other than Palestinian propagandists then I will give you the answer you crave. I am not unable to answer but I am loathe to answer because of the baggage my answer will cause.

 

[Coyote]

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

Where is the evidence that Israel does this from an unbiased and non partisan source. The word of lying Palestinians does not count

You still can not answer a simple question?

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

And where is the evidence from an unbiased and non partisan source that says they do. Until you can prove conclusively that the IDF systematically abuse children in custody you cant demand answers to non existent questions ?

So until the abuse is proven I cant give you an answer to your question as it would not be the correct answer

Just admit it - you are unable to show where in the Geneva Conventions children can be abused so you scuttle around moving goal posts and trying to deflect by demanding more and more info.

Told you when you prove that Israel systematically abuses Palestinian children using a source other than Palestinian propagandists then I will give you the answer you crave. I am not unable to answer but I am loathe to answer because of the baggage my answer will cause.

I provided multiple articles and a UNICEF report. You have provided nothing except a link to the Geneva Conventions and you are utterly unwilling to answer a simple question. Don't expect an answer to your questions.

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

Of course there is no law, treaty or convention that approves "child abuse."

The 2013 Report titled "Children in Israeli Military Detention" is a is a set of 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).

First, let's not over sensationalize the scope and nature of the report, the recommendations or the allegations. At the core of the report is the 25 year old foundational document called The Convention on the Rights of the Child, --- of which Article 37, prohibits torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

You have provided no evidence that the Fogel murder was state sanctioned and instead, keep demanding I prove things in order to deflect while you ignore questions.

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

(THE ALLEGATION)

Section F: Conclusions ​

"Ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized. This conclusion is based on the repeated allegations about such treatment over the past 10 years and the volume, consistency and persistence of these allegations. The review of cases documented through the monitoring and reporting mechanism on grave child rights violations, as well as interviews conducted by UNICEF with Israeli and Palestinian lawyers and Palestinian children, also support this conclusion.

The pattern of ill-treatment includes the arrests of children at their homes between midnight and 5:00 am by heavily armed soldiers; the practice of blindfolding children and tying their hands with plastic ties; physical and verbal abuse during transfer to an interrogation site, including the use of painful restraints; lack of access to water, food, toilet facilities and medical care; interrogation using physical violence and threats; coerced confessions; and lack of access to lawyers or family members during interrogation.

Treatment inconsistent with child rights continues during court appearances, including shackling of children; denial of bail and imposition of custodial sentences; and transfer of children outside occupied Palestinian territory to serve their sentences inside Israel. The incarceration isolates them from their families and interrupts their studies.

These practices are in violation of international law that protects all children against ill-treatment when in contact with law enforcement, military and judicial institutions.

The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer. Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities."​

(COMMENT)

All Human Rights (HR) champions, tend to over dramatize HR interest stories, and generally always advocate on the liberal side of the administration. Of the 19 different Human Rights organization that routinely file reports against Israel, but rarely against any Arab or Muslim State ( UN child rights committee publishes findings on States reviewed during its latest session: Eritrea, Mexico, Ghana, Honduras, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Lao PDR and Israel 10 June 2015), UNICEF is but one. Only about half of them are, by definition, Treaty-based bodies; in this case, Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). If you read the report, nowhere does it accuse the Israelis of child abuse in the classical sense. The report is actually an advocacy document on the development of police and judicial procedures and the course of action that should be taken. It openly admits that its position is in the best interest of the Children in Question and at Risk; and that Israel's position should be in the best interests of the child --- as a primary consideration. This is in contrast to the more far-reaching political and law enforcement and security considerations entailed as an element of tension between occupation law’s requirement and the child advocacy program for youthful offenders.

None of the 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, have anything to do with the lack of access to food and water, toilet facilities or medical care. And recommendation #1, while it mention the need for "(i) Israel acting in the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration; acting in a (ii) Non-discrimination; (iii) Use of detention only as a measure of last resort; and implying that Israel should consider (iv) Alternatives to detention; and finally, UNICEF had the audacity to act as a legislative body and suggest (v) Diversion --- meaning that the youthful offenders under detention --- "should be channelled away from judicial proceedings."

In section G - Recommendations,

1. Compliance with international norms and regulations
• Military Order 1676 (September 2011), Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities.

2. Notification
* The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer.

3. Timing of arrests and arrest warrants
• Not addressed in the CRC.

4. Methods and instruments of restraint
• Not addressed in the CRC.

5. Strip searches
• Not addressed in the CRC.

6. Access to a lawyer
• This is addressed in the "Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment" Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988;" and the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966.

7. Judicial review of the arrest and detention
• What "ISRAELI LAW" says is: "The officer may delay the arraignment for an additional 24 hours for the same reason, provided that he/she explains his/her decision in writing and obtains the approval of the relevant approving authority. A delay of over 72 hours also requires the approval of the Head of the Investigations Department of the Israel Security Agency (ISA), or his/her deputy. In any case, the maximum delay should not exceed 96 hours from the time of arrest." However, this does not apply to a Military Court.

8. Medical examinations
• I saw no allegation that access to adequate medical care at all times war routinely denied.

9. Questioning or interrogation
• This is a matter for the courts to decide. The UNiCEF Report is attempting to measure the standard under Israeli Law. Not necessarily under the Geneva Code.

10. Solitary confinement
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is not torture, if properly administered. This is essentially putting the child in "time-out" zones and/or being "sent to your room." Solitary confinement is a corrections policy that need to be overseen by reasonable people. This is not a UNICEF issue unless the allegation is physical mistreatment or torture.

11. Confessional evidence
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is a matter for the courts to decide, not the UNICEF. Although it seems reasonable.

12. Bail and plea bargains
• Not addressed in the CRC.

13. Location of detention and access to relatives
• Granted, given reasonableness.

14. Accountability
• The UNICEF or the UN Special Rapporteur (OPT), are not competent to conduct any sort of Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment even if the General Assembly Resolution on the Question of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (A/56/156) was binding and applicable. I find it unnecessary to question the integrity of the entirety of the Israeli system based on a small compilation of complaints in the decades in which the Palestinians have decided to institute a belligerent occupation.
​

All but three of the recommendations deal with the handling and administration of youthful offenders. It should be noted that the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) does not address domestic or occupation law enforcement issues of youthful offenders. Israel has an obligation to "restore and ensure – as far as possible – public order and safety while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

Article 43: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
​

It is important to understand that, as the hostility of the Arab Palestinian in the occupied territories continues to grow, and the leadership and parental guidance embrace confrontation, the problem of juvenile delinquency will also grow. And the more the adult population chooses to advance the cause of jihad and armed struggle --- so will increase the probability that the young adult and adolescent will immolate that stance. The risk of confrontation will grow and there will be even more adverse events in the handling of such youthful offenders that are growing into a mature Hostile Arab Palestinian.

(EPILOG)

This UNICEF Report (2013) is based on information that is more than 5 years old. Even if the reader is totally anti-Israeli, they cannot overlook the improvements the Israelis made without regard to the release of these report.

The Israeli military order most relevant to this report is Military Order 1651. This order came into effect on 2 May 2010 and incorporates a number of previous military orders relating to children, including Military Order 132 (Adjudication of Juvenile Delinquents) and Military Order 1644 (Establishing a Juvenile Military Court). Military Order 1651 also contains the main jurisdictional provisions and specifies the main offences with which Palestinians, including children, who are living in areas under full Israeli control are charged, which were previously contained in Military Order 378 (Security Directives).

In September 2009, in response to documentation of the prosecution of children as young as in adult military courts, Israel established a juvenile military court.15 It is understood that this is the first and only juvenile military court in operation in the world. In fact, it uses the same facilities and court staff as the adult military court.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

It seems to me Rocco, that however "improved" it might be, there is something wrong with trying children of one ethnic group in the Military Court system and children of a different ethnic group in the Israeli Civil Court system when they both live in the same area and commit the same crimes yet receive very different outcomes and treatment. It might be the only Juvenile Military Court - but it dodges the question - WHY are these children brought through the military court system? The fact that there are two very disparate systems of handling offenses regarding children in living in the same area does not seem conducive to justice. As the OP pointed out, they should all be under the Military Court system.

I did go and look up the 2015 report and and it seemed to provide a fair and complete assessment to date. I am glad to see many improvements, but not so glad about lack of some - in particular, regarding solitary confinement, lack of a truly independent oversight and accountability system, and regarding the audiovideo recording of interrogations and where the children are held (preventing parents access to their incarcerated children). In particular, all of the above for children arrested for stone throwing.

From the 2015 UNICEF report:

September 2014: Military Order 1745 came into effect. This requires that interrogations be audiovisually
recorded and reaffirms that the interrogation always take place in a language that the child
understands. The order includes a clause stipulating that the provisions do not apply to a child
suspected of committing a security offense, such as throwing stones. The provisions of this Military
Order are the same as those applied in Israeli civilian courts.​

IF I am reading this correctly it sounds like those arrested for stone throwing are exempt from having their interrogation recorded and in a language the child understands. Why is this? Stone throwing probably accounts for the largest number of children arrested, particularly young children. Many of the complaints about the treatment of those children after arrest center around how they are abused during the interrogation process and the fact they are interrogated in a language they do not know, and often forced to sign confessions through intimidation or not understanding what they are signing. So why this exemption?


Solitary confinement - this is a very contentious issue and many people are beginning to come around to the view that it is indeed very very damaging, particularly to young minds. "Time out" is one thing, but solitary can be a completely different thing.

According to this article (from 2013): Rising Numbers of Palestinian Children Subjected to Solitary Confinement

In 21.4 percent of cases recorded by DCI-Palestine in 2013, children detained in the Israeli military detention system reported undergoing solitary confinement as part of the interrogation process. This represents an increase of two percent from 2012...

...DCI-Palestine’s research overwhelmingly suggests that the use of solitary confinement against Palestinian child detainees in the Israeli military detention system is employed almost solely for interrogation purposes. The apparent purpose is to obtain a confession or to gather intelligence on other individuals.

Globally, children and juvenile offenders are often held in isolation either as a disciplinary measure or to separate them from adult populations. The use of solitary confinement by Israeli authorities does not appear to be related to any disciplinary, protective, or medical rationale or justification.

...Children held in solitary confinement spent an average of 10 days in isolation. The longest period of confinement documented in a single case was 29 days in 2012, and 28 days in 2013.​

According to this UN report 21.4% of children arrested in 2013 were kept in solitary confinement for more than 2 days. The 2015 report seems to indicate little will change in regards to this as a tool of interrogation.

As far as solitary confinement being damaging more and more reports are coming out indicating it is exactly that. Frankly - we, the USA, need to get our own house in order on this. The statistics for the misuse of solitary confinement in the US justice system are horrific. I don't know how they compare to Israel because it is harder to get accurate information on Israel's detention policies due to so much labeled under "security".

NPR did an excellent series on the ongoing debate and reform of solitary confinement, noting in particular, that much of the civilized has abandoned it: Isolating Inmates: Solitary Confinement In The U.S.. A simple search brings up many provocative articles challanging solitary confinement as a prison tool.

Because a young person's brain is still developing, solitary confinement can do considerable damage and even in adults it can lead to psychosis and suicide.

Once again your Jew hatred and anti Semitism clouds your thought process and has you believing that the west bank is in Israel so should be covered by Israeli law. It isn't it is occupied territory under military law that uses Jordanian legislation as the principle of law. This is covered by the Geneva conventions and explains why the IDF are the law keepers in the west bank and why they administer the law as they do. Under international law they are not allowed to use Jewish legislature or Israeli courts to try people of the occupied territory or to use any other legislature than that prescribed at the time of the occupation.
The Palestinians understand this and would not want the IDF to enforce their laws on the occupied people as they would be executed, maimed, stoned or beaten . Just look at what Jordan did to Palestinians in Jordan during the 1970's under Jordanian legislation and apply those laws on the west bank.

Why do you label all opposition "Jew hatred" and "anti Semitism"? That seems to be your default comeback. If you read the OP, it pointed out that the settlers in the Occupied Territories could (and should) be tried under the military system. Another article I posted also pointed out that many of the crimes that end up in the military courts could have and should have been put through either the Israeli or Palestinian civil courts. I will have to look up that article again.

Did you read it as it is nothing more than one persons opinion, and is not based of facts or reality just their opinion, and when you look the majority of the authors work is hatchet jobs on the Jews and Israel's regime

It's premise is that settlers should be tried in the Military system along with Palestinians who live in that area and noted how it could be done without any legislative changes. If you claim it's wrong - exactly what is wrong? Why should they NOT be tried in the Military Justice system since they are living in the same occupied territory and committing the same crimes?

 

[Phoenall]

Where is the evidence that Israel does this from an unbiased and non partisan source. The word of lying Palestinians does not count

You still can not answer a simple question?

Where in the Geneva Conventions does it allow Israel to abuse children in it's custody?

And where is the evidence from an unbiased and non partisan source that says they do. Until you can prove conclusively that the IDF systematically abuse children in custody you cant demand answers to non existent questions ?

So until the abuse is proven I cant give you an answer to your question as it would not be the correct answer

Just admit it - you are unable to show where in the Geneva Conventions children can be abused so you scuttle around moving goal posts and trying to deflect by demanding more and more info.

Told you when you prove that Israel systematically abuses Palestinian children using a source other than Palestinian propagandists then I will give you the answer you crave. I am not unable to answer but I am loathe to answer because of the baggage my answer will cause.

I provided multiple articles and a UNICEF report. You have provided nothing except a link to the Geneva Conventions and you are utterly unwilling to answer a simple question. Don't expect an answer to your questions.

All based on Palestinian propaganda tales so not proof, they are known to be LIARS when it comes to Israel

 

[Phoenall]

(THE ALLEGATION)

Section F: Conclusions ​

"Ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system appears to be widespread, systematic and institutionalized. This conclusion is based on the repeated allegations about such treatment over the past 10 years and the volume, consistency and persistence of these allegations. The review of cases documented through the monitoring and reporting mechanism on grave child rights violations, as well as interviews conducted by UNICEF with Israeli and Palestinian lawyers and Palestinian children, also support this conclusion.

The pattern of ill-treatment includes the arrests of children at their homes between midnight and 5:00 am by heavily armed soldiers; the practice of blindfolding children and tying their hands with plastic ties; physical and verbal abuse during transfer to an interrogation site, including the use of painful restraints; lack of access to water, food, toilet facilities and medical care; interrogation using physical violence and threats; coerced confessions; and lack of access to lawyers or family members during interrogation.

Treatment inconsistent with child rights continues during court appearances, including shackling of children; denial of bail and imposition of custodial sentences; and transfer of children outside occupied Palestinian territory to serve their sentences inside Israel. The incarceration isolates them from their families and interrupts their studies.

These practices are in violation of international law that protects all children against ill-treatment when in contact with law enforcement, military and judicial institutions.

The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer. Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities."​

(COMMENT)

All Human Rights (HR) champions, tend to over dramatize HR interest stories, and generally always advocate on the liberal side of the administration. Of the 19 different Human Rights organization that routinely file reports against Israel, but rarely against any Arab or Muslim State ( UN child rights committee publishes findings on States reviewed during its latest session: Eritrea, Mexico, Ghana, Honduras, Ethiopia, Netherlands, Lao PDR and Israel 10 June 2015), UNICEF is but one. Only about half of them are, by definition, Treaty-based bodies; in this case, Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC). If you read the report, nowhere does it accuse the Israelis of child abuse in the classical sense. The report is actually an advocacy document on the development of police and judicial procedures and the course of action that should be taken. It openly admits that its position is in the best interest of the Children in Question and at Risk; and that Israel's position should be in the best interests of the child --- as a primary consideration. This is in contrast to the more far-reaching political and law enforcement and security considerations entailed as an element of tension between occupation law’s requirement and the child advocacy program for youthful offenders.

None of the 38 recommendations, under 14 headings, have anything to do with the lack of access to food and water, toilet facilities or medical care. And recommendation #1, while it mention the need for "(i) Israel acting in the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration; acting in a (ii) Non-discrimination; (iii) Use of detention only as a measure of last resort; and implying that Israel should consider (iv) Alternatives to detention; and finally, UNICEF had the audacity to act as a legislative body and suggest (v) Diversion --- meaning that the youthful offenders under detention --- "should be channelled away from judicial proceedings."

In section G - Recommendations,

1. Compliance with international norms and regulations
• Military Order 1676 (September 2011), Further measures should be introduced to ensure the protection of children under military detention and compliance of the system with international norms and regulations, as well as to dissipate false allegations of misconduct by the authorities.

2. Notification
* The April 2010 announcement by Israeli military officials of changes to the hand-tying procedure is a positive development. So too is military order 1676 (September 2011), which introduced requirements for the police (though not the army) to notify parents about the arrest of their children and to inform children that they have the right to consult a lawyer.

3. Timing of arrests and arrest warrants
• Not addressed in the CRC.

4. Methods and instruments of restraint
• Not addressed in the CRC.

5. Strip searches
• Not addressed in the CRC.

6. Access to a lawyer
• This is addressed in the "Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment" Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988;" and the "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights" General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966.

7. Judicial review of the arrest and detention
• What "ISRAELI LAW" says is: "The officer may delay the arraignment for an additional 24 hours for the same reason, provided that he/she explains his/her decision in writing and obtains the approval of the relevant approving authority. A delay of over 72 hours also requires the approval of the Head of the Investigations Department of the Israel Security Agency (ISA), or his/her deputy. In any case, the maximum delay should not exceed 96 hours from the time of arrest." However, this does not apply to a Military Court.

8. Medical examinations
• I saw no allegation that access to adequate medical care at all times war routinely denied.

9. Questioning or interrogation
• This is a matter for the courts to decide. The UNiCEF Report is attempting to measure the standard under Israeli Law. Not necessarily under the Geneva Code.

10. Solitary confinement
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is not torture, if properly administered. This is essentially putting the child in "time-out" zones and/or being "sent to your room." Solitary confinement is a corrections policy that need to be overseen by reasonable people. This is not a UNICEF issue unless the allegation is physical mistreatment or torture.

11. Confessional evidence
• Not addressed in the CRC. This is a matter for the courts to decide, not the UNICEF. Although it seems reasonable.

12. Bail and plea bargains
• Not addressed in the CRC.

13. Location of detention and access to relatives
• Granted, given reasonableness.

14. Accountability
• The UNICEF or the UN Special Rapporteur (OPT), are not competent to conduct any sort of Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment even if the General Assembly Resolution on the Question of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (A/56/156) was binding and applicable. I find it unnecessary to question the integrity of the entirety of the Israeli system based on a small compilation of complaints in the decades in which the Palestinians have decided to institute a belligerent occupation.
​

All but three of the recommendations deal with the handling and administration of youthful offenders. It should be noted that the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) does not address domestic or occupation law enforcement issues of youthful offenders. Israel has an obligation to "restore and ensure – as far as possible – public order and safety while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.

Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.

Article 43: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country.
​

It is important to understand that, as the hostility of the Arab Palestinian in the occupied territories continues to grow, and the leadership and parental guidance embrace confrontation, the problem of juvenile delinquency will also grow. And the more the adult population chooses to advance the cause of jihad and armed struggle --- so will increase the probability that the young adult and adolescent will immolate that stance. The risk of confrontation will grow and there will be even more adverse events in the handling of such youthful offenders that are growing into a mature Hostile Arab Palestinian.

(EPILOG)

This UNICEF Report (2013) is based on information that is more than 5 years old. Even if the reader is totally anti-Israeli, they cannot overlook the improvements the Israelis made without regard to the release of these report.

The Israeli military order most relevant to this report is Military Order 1651. This order came into effect on 2 May 2010 and incorporates a number of previous military orders relating to children, including Military Order 132 (Adjudication of Juvenile Delinquents) and Military Order 1644 (Establishing a Juvenile Military Court). Military Order 1651 also contains the main jurisdictional provisions and specifies the main offences with which Palestinians, including children, who are living in areas under full Israeli control are charged, which were previously contained in Military Order 378 (Security Directives).

In September 2009, in response to documentation of the prosecution of children as young as in adult military courts, Israel established a juvenile military court.15 It is understood that this is the first and only juvenile military court in operation in the world. In fact, it uses the same facilities and court staff as the adult military court.
​

Most Respectfully,
R

It seems to me Rocco, that however "improved" it might be, there is something wrong with trying children of one ethnic group in the Military Court system and children of a different ethnic group in the Israeli Civil Court system when they both live in the same area and commit the same crimes yet receive very different outcomes and treatment. It might be the only Juvenile Military Court - but it dodges the question - WHY are these children brought through the military court system? The fact that there are two very disparate systems of handling offenses regarding children in living in the same area does not seem conducive to justice. As the OP pointed out, they should all be under the Military Court system.

I did go and look up the 2015 report and and it seemed to provide a fair and complete assessment to date. I am glad to see many improvements, but not so glad about lack of some - in particular, regarding solitary confinement, lack of a truly independent oversight and accountability system, and regarding the audiovideo recording of interrogations and where the children are held (preventing parents access to their incarcerated children). In particular, all of the above for children arrested for stone throwing.

From the 2015 UNICEF report:

September 2014: Military Order 1745 came into effect. This requires that interrogations be audiovisually
recorded and reaffirms that the interrogation always take place in a language that the child
understands. The order includes a clause stipulating that the provisions do not apply to a child
suspected of committing a security offense, such as throwing stones. The provisions of this Military
Order are the same as those applied in Israeli civilian courts.​

IF I am reading this correctly it sounds like those arrested for stone throwing are exempt from having their interrogation recorded and in a language the child understands. Why is this? Stone throwing probably accounts for the largest number of children arrested, particularly young children. Many of the complaints about the treatment of those children after arrest center around how they are abused during the interrogation process and the fact they are interrogated in a language they do not know, and often forced to sign confessions through intimidation or not understanding what they are signing. So why this exemption?


Solitary confinement - this is a very contentious issue and many people are beginning to come around to the view that it is indeed very very damaging, particularly to young minds. "Time out" is one thing, but solitary can be a completely different thing.

According to this article (from 2013): Rising Numbers of Palestinian Children Subjected to Solitary Confinement

In 21.4 percent of cases recorded by DCI-Palestine in 2013, children detained in the Israeli military detention system reported undergoing solitary confinement as part of the interrogation process. This represents an increase of two percent from 2012...

...DCI-Palestine’s research overwhelmingly suggests that the use of solitary confinement against Palestinian child detainees in the Israeli military detention system is employed almost solely for interrogation purposes. The apparent purpose is to obtain a confession or to gather intelligence on other individuals.

Globally, children and juvenile offenders are often held in isolation either as a disciplinary measure or to separate them from adult populations. The use of solitary confinement by Israeli authorities does not appear to be related to any disciplinary, protective, or medical rationale or justification.

...Children held in solitary confinement spent an average of 10 days in isolation. The longest period of confinement documented in a single case was 29 days in 2012, and 28 days in 2013.​

According to this UN report 21.4% of children arrested in 2013 were kept in solitary confinement for more than 2 days. The 2015 report seems to indicate little will change in regards to this as a tool of interrogation.

As far as solitary confinement being damaging more and more reports are coming out indicating it is exactly that. Frankly - we, the USA, need to get our own house in order on this. The statistics for the misuse of solitary confinement in the US justice system are horrific. I don't know how they compare to Israel because it is harder to get accurate information on Israel's detention policies due to so much labeled under "security".

NPR did an excellent series on the ongoing debate and reform of solitary confinement, noting in particular, that much of the civilized has abandoned it: Isolating Inmates: Solitary Confinement In The U.S.. A simple search brings up many provocative articles challanging solitary confinement as a prison tool.

Because a young person's brain is still developing, solitary confinement can do considerable damage and even in adults it can lead to psychosis and suicide.

Once again your Jew hatred and anti Semitism clouds your thought process and has you believing that the west bank is in Israel so should be covered by Israeli law. It isn't it is occupied territory under military law that uses Jordanian legislation as the principle of law. This is covered by the Geneva conventions and explains why the IDF are the law keepers in the west bank and why they administer the law as they do. Under international law they are not allowed to use Jewish legislature or Israeli courts to try people of the occupied territory or to use any other legislature than that prescribed at the time of the occupation.
The Palestinians understand this and would not want the IDF to enforce their laws on the occupied people as they would be executed, maimed, stoned or beaten . Just look at what Jordan did to Palestinians in Jordan during the 1970's under Jordanian legislation and apply those laws on the west bank.

Why do you label all opposition "Jew hatred" and "anti Semitism"? That seems to be your default comeback. If you read the OP, it pointed out that the settlers in the Occupied Territories could (and should) be tried under the military system. Another article I posted also pointed out that many of the crimes that end up in the military courts could have and should have been put through either the Israeli or Palestinian civil courts. I will have to look up that article again.

Did you read it as it is nothing more than one persons opinion, and is not based of facts or reality just their opinion, and when you look the majority of the authors work is hatchet jobs on the Jews and Israel's regime

It's premise is that settlers should be tried in the Military system along with Palestinians who live in that area and noted how it could be done without any legislative changes. If you claim it's wrong - exactly what is wrong? Why should they NOT be tried in the Military Justice system since they are living in the same occupied territory and committing the same crimes?

Because there is no Geneva convention covering nationals of the occupying power living on land owned by them in the occupied territory. If you cant grasp that the laws must be applied as they stand, and want them to be ignored in your favour so that you can gloat over Jews getting unfairly treated then you are no better than Hitlers Gestapo

 

[Coyote]

It seems to me Rocco, that however "improved" it might be, there is something wrong with trying children of one ethnic group in the Military Court system and children of a different ethnic group in the Israeli Civil Court system when they both live in the same area and commit the same crimes yet receive very different outcomes and treatment. It might be the only Juvenile Military Court - but it dodges the question - WHY are these children brought through the military court system? The fact that there are two very disparate systems of handling offenses regarding children in living in the same area does not seem conducive to justice. As the OP pointed out, they should all be under the Military Court system.

I did go and look up the 2015 report and and it seemed to provide a fair and complete assessment to date. I am glad to see many improvements, but not so glad about lack of some - in particular, regarding solitary confinement, lack of a truly independent oversight and accountability system, and regarding the audiovideo recording of interrogations and where the children are held (preventing parents access to their incarcerated children). In particular, all of the above for children arrested for stone throwing.

From the 2015 UNICEF report:

September 2014: Military Order 1745 came into effect. This requires that interrogations be audiovisually
recorded and reaffirms that the interrogation always take place in a language that the child
understands. The order includes a clause stipulating that the provisions do not apply to a child
suspected of committing a security offense, such as throwing stones. The provisions of this Military
Order are the same as those applied in Israeli civilian courts.​

IF I am reading this correctly it sounds like those arrested for stone throwing are exempt from having their interrogation recorded and in a language the child understands. Why is this? Stone throwing probably accounts for the largest number of children arrested, particularly young children. Many of the complaints about the treatment of those children after arrest center around how they are abused during the interrogation process and the fact they are interrogated in a language they do not know, and often forced to sign confessions through intimidation or not understanding what they are signing. So why this exemption?


Solitary confinement - this is a very contentious issue and many people are beginning to come around to the view that it is indeed very very damaging, particularly to young minds. "Time out" is one thing, but solitary can be a completely different thing.

According to this article (from 2013): Rising Numbers of Palestinian Children Subjected to Solitary Confinement

In 21.4 percent of cases recorded by DCI-Palestine in 2013, children detained in the Israeli military detention system reported undergoing solitary confinement as part of the interrogation process. This represents an increase of two percent from 2012...

...DCI-Palestine’s research overwhelmingly suggests that the use of solitary confinement against Palestinian child detainees in the Israeli military detention system is employed almost solely for interrogation purposes. The apparent purpose is to obtain a confession or to gather intelligence on other individuals.

Globally, children and juvenile offenders are often held in isolation either as a disciplinary measure or to separate them from adult populations. The use of solitary confinement by Israeli authorities does not appear to be related to any disciplinary, protective, or medical rationale or justification.

...Children held in solitary confinement spent an average of 10 days in isolation. The longest period of confinement documented in a single case was 29 days in 2012, and 28 days in 2013.​

According to this UN report 21.4% of children arrested in 2013 were kept in solitary confinement for more than 2 days. The 2015 report seems to indicate little will change in regards to this as a tool of interrogation.

As far as solitary confinement being damaging more and more reports are coming out indicating it is exactly that. Frankly - we, the USA, need to get our own house in order on this. The statistics for the misuse of solitary confinement in the US justice system are horrific. I don't know how they compare to Israel because it is harder to get accurate information on Israel's detention policies due to so much labeled under "security".

NPR did an excellent series on the ongoing debate and reform of solitary confinement, noting in particular, that much of the civilized has abandoned it: Isolating Inmates: Solitary Confinement In The U.S.. A simple search brings up many provocative articles challanging solitary confinement as a prison tool.

Because a young person's brain is still developing, solitary confinement can do considerable damage and even in adults it can lead to psychosis and suicide.

Once again your Jew hatred and anti Semitism clouds your thought process and has you believing that the west bank is in Israel so should be covered by Israeli law. It isn't it is occupied territory under military law that uses Jordanian legislation as the principle of law. This is covered by the Geneva conventions and explains why the IDF are the law keepers in the west bank and why they administer the law as they do. Under international law they are not allowed to use Jewish legislature or Israeli courts to try people of the occupied territory or to use any other legislature than that prescribed at the time of the occupation.
The Palestinians understand this and would not want the IDF to enforce their laws on the occupied people as they would be executed, maimed, stoned or beaten . Just look at what Jordan did to Palestinians in Jordan during the 1970's under Jordanian legislation and apply those laws on the west bank.

Why do you label all opposition "Jew hatred" and "anti Semitism"? That seems to be your default comeback. If you read the OP, it pointed out that the settlers in the Occupied Territories could (and should) be tried under the military system. Another article I posted also pointed out that many of the crimes that end up in the military courts could have and should have been put through either the Israeli or Palestinian civil courts. I will have to look up that article again.

Did you read it as it is nothing more than one persons opinion, and is not based of facts or reality just their opinion, and when you look the majority of the authors work is hatchet jobs on the Jews and Israel's regime

It's premise is that settlers should be tried in the Military system along with Palestinians who live in that area and noted how it could be done without any legislative changes. If you claim it's wrong - exactly what is wrong? Why should they NOT be tried in the Military Justice system since they are living in the same occupied territory and committing the same crimes?

Because there is no Geneva convention covering nationals of the occupying power living on land owned by them in the occupied territory. If you cant grasp that the laws must be applied as they stand, and want them to be ignored in your favour so that you can gloat over Jews getting unfairly treated then you are no better than Hitlers Gestapo

It's occupied territory. Not "owned by them". Even the Israeli high court calls it "occupied".

Of course now is the time to throw in the ignorant Hitler comparisons..oy ve!

As the OP pointed out, there is no legal reason why they should not be subject to the same legal structure as the Palestinians - the real reason they aren't is political, not legal. They'd have a shit fit if their citizens were treated the way they treat the Palestinian children.

 

[Phoenall]

Once again your Jew hatred and anti Semitism clouds your thought process and has you believing that the west bank is in Israel so should be covered by Israeli law. It isn't it is occupied territory under military law that uses Jordanian legislation as the principle of law. This is covered by the Geneva conventions and explains why the IDF are the law keepers in the west bank and why they administer the law as they do. Under international law they are not allowed to use Jewish legislature or Israeli courts to try people of the occupied territory or to use any other legislature than that prescribed at the time of the occupation.
The Palestinians understand this and would not want the IDF to enforce their laws on the occupied people as they would be executed, maimed, stoned or beaten . Just look at what Jordan did to Palestinians in Jordan during the 1970's under Jordanian legislation and apply those laws on the west bank.

Why do you label all opposition "Jew hatred" and "anti Semitism"? That seems to be your default comeback. If you read the OP, it pointed out that the settlers in the Occupied Territories could (and should) be tried under the military system. Another article I posted also pointed out that many of the crimes that end up in the military courts could have and should have been put through either the Israeli or Palestinian civil courts. I will have to look up that article again.

Did you read it as it is nothing more than one persons opinion, and is not based of facts or reality just their opinion, and when you look the majority of the authors work is hatchet jobs on the Jews and Israel's regime

It's premise is that settlers should be tried in the Military system along with Palestinians who live in that area and noted how it could be done without any legislative changes. If you claim it's wrong - exactly what is wrong? Why should they NOT be tried in the Military Justice system since they are living in the same occupied territory and committing the same crimes?

Because there is no Geneva convention covering nationals of the occupying power living on land owned by them in the occupied territory. If you cant grasp that the laws must be applied as they stand, and want them to be ignored in your favour so that you can gloat over Jews getting unfairly treated then you are no better than Hitlers Gestapo

It's occupied territory. Not "owned by them". Even the Israeli high court calls it "occupied".

Of course now is the time to throw in the ignorant Hitler comparisons..oy ve!

As the OP pointed out, there is no legal reason why they should not be subject to the same legal structure as the Palestinians - the real reason they aren't is political, not legal. They'd have a shit fit if their citizens were treated the way they treat the Palestinian children.

have you not kept up with the posts on here that show that Jews owned most of Jerusalem and the west bank. In 1949 the land was forcibly taken from the Jews and they were evicted from the west bank, Jordan then passed a law taking the Jewish land as arab and banning the Jews from ever getting it back, Then in 1967 the Israelis took back the land and occupied land annexed by Jordan. You know that RIGHT OF RETURN that you pro palli's keep banging on about well that is how it is executed.
Actually the law is very clear once you learn to read it properly. Because the Jews are Israeli citizens the military law does not apply to them as they are not seen as occupied people, so they come under Jewish civil and criminal law.

They do have a fit and it ends up as episodes like Operation cast lead et al. You would think the Palestinians would have learnt their lesson by now and stopped targeting Israeli children. Imagine the bloodbath if the Palestinians ever do explode HE under an Israeli school, not even you would dare to oppose the Israelis actions that day

 

[Coyote]

Why do you label all opposition "Jew hatred" and "anti Semitism"? That seems to be your default comeback. If you read the OP, it pointed out that the settlers in the Occupied Territories could (and should) be tried under the military system. Another article I posted also pointed out that many of the crimes that end up in the military courts could have and should have been put through either the Israeli or Palestinian civil courts. I will have to look up that article again.

Did you read it as it is nothing more than one persons opinion, and is not based of facts or reality just their opinion, and when you look the majority of the authors work is hatchet jobs on the Jews and Israel's regime

It's premise is that settlers should be tried in the Military system along with Palestinians who live in that area and noted how it could be done without any legislative changes. If you claim it's wrong - exactly what is wrong? Why should they NOT be tried in the Military Justice system since they are living in the same occupied territory and committing the same crimes?

Because there is no Geneva convention covering nationals of the occupying power living on land owned by them in the occupied territory. If you cant grasp that the laws must be applied as they stand, and want them to be ignored in your favour so that you can gloat over Jews getting unfairly treated then you are no better than Hitlers Gestapo

It's occupied territory. Not "owned by them". Even the Israeli high court calls it "occupied".

Of course now is the time to throw in the ignorant Hitler comparisons..oy ve!

As the OP pointed out, there is no legal reason why they should not be subject to the same legal structure as the Palestinians - the real reason they aren't is political, not legal. They'd have a shit fit if their citizens were treated the way they treat the Palestinian children.

have you not kept up with the posts on here that show that Jews owned most of Jerusalem and the west bank. In 1949 the land was forcibly taken from the Jews and they were evicted from the west bank, Jordan then passed a law taking the Jewish land as arab and banning the Jews from ever getting it back, Then in 1967 the Israelis took back the land and occupied land annexed by Jordan. You know that RIGHT OF RETURN that you pro palli's keep banging on about well that is how it is executed.
Actually the law is very clear once you learn to read it properly. Because the Jews are Israeli citizens the military law does not apply to them as they are not seen as occupied people, so they come under Jewish civil and criminal law.

They do have a fit and it ends up as episodes like Operation cast lead et al. You would think the Palestinians would have learnt their lesson by now and stopped targeting Israeli children. Imagine the bloodbath if the Palestinians ever do explode HE under an Israeli school, not even you would dare to oppose the Israelis actions that day

Occupied Territory is under occupation. Therefore the so called "settlers" should be under the same justice system as the palestinians. They may be "Israeli citizens" but they are not living in Israeli territory.

Of course the real reason they aren't under the same law is that if their children were treated the way Palestinian children are the political fall out would be tremendous. Clearly, you don't seem to have a problem this.


From the OP:
Nowhere in the Israeli security legislation for the territories is it stated that the laws apply only to Arab residents of the territories and not to Jews or to Israeli citizens. The policy, as is well known, is to arrest and try settlers in the civilian courts on the other side of the Green Line. This policy can be changed without any need for legislation.

 

[Phoenall]

Did you read it as it is nothing more than one persons opinion, and is not based of facts or reality just their opinion, and when you look the majority of the authors work is hatchet jobs on the Jews and Israel's regime

It's premise is that settlers should be tried in the Military system along with Palestinians who live in that area and noted how it could be done without any legislative changes. If you claim it's wrong - exactly what is wrong? Why should they NOT be tried in the Military Justice system since they are living in the same occupied territory and committing the same crimes?

Because there is no Geneva convention covering nationals of the occupying power living on land owned by them in the occupied territory. If you cant grasp that the laws must be applied as they stand, and want them to be ignored in your favour so that you can gloat over Jews getting unfairly treated then you are no better than Hitlers Gestapo

It's occupied territory. Not "owned by them". Even the Israeli high court calls it "occupied".

Of course now is the time to throw in the ignorant Hitler comparisons..oy ve!

As the OP pointed out, there is no legal reason why they should not be subject to the same legal structure as the Palestinians - the real reason they aren't is political, not legal. They'd have a shit fit if their citizens were treated the way they treat the Palestinian children.

have you not kept up with the posts on here that show that Jews owned most of Jerusalem and the west bank. In 1949 the land was forcibly taken from the Jews and they were evicted from the west bank, Jordan then passed a law taking the Jewish land as arab and banning the Jews from ever getting it back, Then in 1967 the Israelis took back the land and occupied land annexed by Jordan. You know that RIGHT OF RETURN that you pro palli's keep banging on about well that is how it is executed.
Actually the law is very clear once you learn to read it properly. Because the Jews are Israeli citizens the military law does not apply to them as they are not seen as occupied people, so they come under Jewish civil and criminal law.

They do have a fit and it ends up as episodes like Operation cast lead et al. You would think the Palestinians would have learnt their lesson by now and stopped targeting Israeli children. Imagine the bloodbath if the Palestinians ever do explode HE under an Israeli school, not even you would dare to oppose the Israelis actions that day

Occupied Territory is under occupation. Therefore the so called "settlers" should be under the same justice system as the palestinians. They may be "Israeli citizens" but they are not living in Israeli territory.

Of course the real reason they aren't under the same law is that if their children were treated the way Palestinian children are the political fall out would be tremendous. Clearly, you don't seem to have a problem this.


From the OP:
Nowhere in the Israeli security legislation for the territories is it stated that the laws apply only to Arab residents of the territories and not to Jews or to Israeli citizens. The policy, as is well known, is to arrest and try settlers in the civilian courts on the other side of the Green Line. This policy can be changed without any need for legislation.

NOPE read the Geneva conventions it is all in there. all 5 of them as well not just Geneva 4.

They are Israeli citizens living on Israeli national land so the Geneva convention for occupied persons does not apply to them.

No I don't and I see the same treatment of children in the UK all the time. They are arrested and taken to the cells, their parents are dragged out of the Pub or Club to deal with the little brats and then the parents kick seven cans of shit out of them for disturbing their drinking/drug taking. Who is to blame for the childrens actions ?

It is a false statement as the Geneva conventions spells them out. The occupying power MUST implement law and order in line with the customary laws in place of the nation that has its land under occupation. They also state the rules applying to occupation powers citizens living in occupied territories. So try reading them and stop trying to change the LAWS to suit your pro Palestinian POV.

 

[Coyote]

It's premise is that settlers should be tried in the Military system along with Palestinians who live in that area and noted how it could be done without any legislative changes. If you claim it's wrong - exactly what is wrong? Why should they NOT be tried in the Military Justice system since they are living in the same occupied territory and committing the same crimes?

Because there is no Geneva convention covering nationals of the occupying power living on land owned by them in the occupied territory. If you cant grasp that the laws must be applied as they stand, and want them to be ignored in your favour so that you can gloat over Jews getting unfairly treated then you are no better than Hitlers Gestapo

It's occupied territory. Not "owned by them". Even the Israeli high court calls it "occupied".

Of course now is the time to throw in the ignorant Hitler comparisons..oy ve!

As the OP pointed out, there is no legal reason why they should not be subject to the same legal structure as the Palestinians - the real reason they aren't is political, not legal. They'd have a shit fit if their citizens were treated the way they treat the Palestinian children.

have you not kept up with the posts on here that show that Jews owned most of Jerusalem and the west bank. In 1949 the land was forcibly taken from the Jews and they were evicted from the west bank, Jordan then passed a law taking the Jewish land as arab and banning the Jews from ever getting it back, Then in 1967 the Israelis took back the land and occupied land annexed by Jordan. You know that RIGHT OF RETURN that you pro palli's keep banging on about well that is how it is executed.
Actually the law is very clear once you learn to read it properly. Because the Jews are Israeli citizens the military law does not apply to them as they are not seen as occupied people, so they come under Jewish civil and criminal law.

They do have a fit and it ends up as episodes like Operation cast lead et al. You would think the Palestinians would have learnt their lesson by now and stopped targeting Israeli children. Imagine the bloodbath if the Palestinians ever do explode HE under an Israeli school, not even you would dare to oppose the Israelis actions that day

Occupied Territory is under occupation. Therefore the so called "settlers" should be under the same justice system as the palestinians. They may be "Israeli citizens" but they are not living in Israeli territory.

Of course the real reason they aren't under the same law is that if their children were treated the way Palestinian children are the political fall out would be tremendous. Clearly, you don't seem to have a problem this.


From the OP:
Nowhere in the Israeli security legislation for the territories is it stated that the laws apply only to Arab residents of the territories and not to Jews or to Israeli citizens. The policy, as is well known, is to arrest and try settlers in the civilian courts on the other side of the Green Line. This policy can be changed without any need for legislation.

NOPE read the Geneva conventions it is all in there. all 5 of them as well not just Geneva 4.

They are Israeli citizens living on Israeli national land so the Geneva convention for occupied persons does not apply to them.

No I don't and I see the same treatment of children in the UK all the time. They are arrested and taken to the cells, their parents are dragged out of the Pub or Club to deal with the little brats and then the parents kick seven cans of shit out of them for disturbing their drinking/drug taking. Who is to blame for the childrens actions ?

It is a false statement as the Geneva conventions spells them out. The occupying power MUST implement law and order in line with the customary laws in place of the nation that has its land under occupation. They also state the rules applying to occupation powers citizens living in occupied territories. So try reading them and stop trying to change the LAWS to suit your pro Palestinian POV.

Then show me exactly where in the Geneva conventions it says what you claim. I am not about to read through the entire thing. I've managed to provide exact sources and quotes, don't understand why you can't.

The Israeli high court does not consider it Israeli national land: Status of territories captured by Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia