1. Introduction
1. On 5 February 2016, Ms Annette
Groth (Germany, UEL) and 19 other Parliamentary Assembly members
tabled a motion for a resolution on “Detention of Palestinian minors
in Israeli prisons”.
According to the motion, “a sharp
increase in the number of Palestinian children in Israel prisons
has been noted by several human rights organisations”. The motion
refers to investigations by the non-governmental organisation (NGO) Human
Rights Watch, which “indicate that existing laws are insufficient
to safeguard the rights of Palestinian children in the custody of
the Israeli police and the IDF [Israel Defense Forces], and that
officials often adhere to legal requirements and procedures in a
manner that undermines the protections they aimed to guarantee”. The
motion calls for an investigation into “how Israel – and other countries
as well – could better safeguard the rights of children in custody
and thereby would be able to fully abide [by] the UN children’s
rights conventions”, proposing a possible co-operation between the
Israeli Government and the Council of Europe Committee on the Prevention
of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT).
2. This motion was referred to our committee for report on 22
April 2016, and I was appointed rapporteur on 2 June 2016. On 25
January 2017, I submitted an introductory memorandum to the committee,
which agreed
to declassify it
and authorised me to undertake a
fact-finding visit to Israel (subject to Bureau authorisation).
The Bureau authorised the fact-finding visit, but, unfortunately,
I received a letter from the Chairperson of the observer delegation
of Israel to the Parliamentary Assembly on 15 March 2017, informing me
that no co-operation would be provided in the preparation of the
report.
3. On 25 April 2017, the committee heard a video statement by
Ms June Kunugi, (then) Special Representative of the United Nations
Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), and held an exchange of views with
Mr Khaled Quzmar, General Director, “Defense for Children International
– Palestine (DCIP)”, and Ms Sarit Michaeli, International Advocacy
Officer, “B'Tselem – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in
the Occupied Territories”.
2. Aim and scope of the report
4. The Parliamentary Assembly
does not work in a vacuum. On the contrary, it builds on internationally recognised
human rights standards, developed by the Council of Europe, the
United Nations and its agencies, the Interparliamentary Union, as
well as other regional organisations and assemblies (as appropriate). Regarding
its own work on the treatment of children in conflict with the law,
the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers adopted Guidelines
on child-friendly justice in 2010,
and the Assembly adopted Resolution
2010 (2014) “Child-friendly juvenile justice: from rhetoric
to reality” four years ago.
5. As a parliamentary body, the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe does not work in a political vacuum, either, of
course. The Assembly comprises parliamentary delegations from both
the Israeli parliament (the Knesset), which holds observer status
with the Assembly, and the Palestinian parliament (the Palestinian
Legislative Council), which holds partner for democracy status.
The Assembly
is thus one of the rare fora which combines expertise on children’s
rights and the Middle East with wide parliamentary representation.
6. The Assembly adopted two resolutions in January 2018 which
have some bearing on this report: First, Resolution
2204 (2018) on protecting children affected by armed conflicts,
in which the Assembly called on States to educate children and young
people who have experienced traumatising armed conflicts on non-violent
approaches to ending aggression and conflict, in order to make them
resilient to the trans-generational transmission of violence and
allow them to grow up in a culture of constructive dialogue.
In this resolution, the
Assembly also called on States to support and rehabilitate children
actively involved in conflicts by “treating them as children and
not like adult offenders throughout all proceedings”.
Second,
Resolution
2202 (2018) “The Israeli-Palestinian peace process: the role of
the Council of Europe”, in which it reiterated its support for a
two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on
the 1967 borders, and called on all Palestinian forces to “cease
support for those imprisoned following convictions for terrorist
acts and their relatives”.
7. However, I would like to divorce the analysis of the issue
at hand as far as possible from its political context. In other
words, I do not intend to “take sides”, except for one side: the
side of children. The interests I will defend in this report are
the interests and rights of the children concerned, based on international
law and standards.
2.1. International
law and standards
8. The Conventions which are central
to the topic at hand are the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
the Child (UNCRC), the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), and the Fourth Geneva Convention.
All have been ratified by Israel.
However, Israel argues that it is not bound to apply them to the Palestinians
living under Israeli occupation, a position which is not in line
with the opinion of the International Court of Justice
and several United Nations human
rights treaty bodies. The Parliamentary Assembly is on record as
promoting the equal enjoyment of human rights, democracy and the
rule of law for all people, whether in territories under Israeli
or Palestinian control, Arabs and Jews, Israeli and Palestinian
citizens.
9. I believe that there is one provision in the UNCRC which we
should all be able to agree to apply, regardless of our position
on which conventions formally apply in which circumstances: Article
3 on the best interests of the child. Children are, first and foremost,
children, and should be treated as such, i.e. afforded special protection.
In accordance with Article 3 of the UNCRC, the best interests of
children must be of primary concern in making decisions that may
affect them: all adults should do what is best for children, and
this includes children who are in conflict with the law.
2.2. The
work of international organisations and of NGOs
10. There are a number of reports,
many of them quite recent and well-documented, from both UN agencies such
as UNICEF,
and NGOs such as
Human Rights Watch,
Defence for Children – Palestine
(DCIP),
B’Tselem
and Military Court Watch,
to name but a few, on the issue
of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention system
(and in administrative detention), as well as on the detention of
Palestinian children in East Jerusalem, for example by the NGOs
B’Tselem and Hamoked.
NGO Monitor has published a number of
reports
putting the findings of UNICEF
and the above-mentioned NGOs in question. The International Committee
of the Red Cross (ICRC) conducts regular visits to places of detention
for Palestinians in Israel. During the 430 visits to detention places
in 2017, the ICRC also spoke to over 200 minors individually. In addition,
also in 2017, the ICRC facilitated over 3 600 family visits to minor
detainees. The ICRC discusses its findings and recommendations with
the relevant authorities in a confidential and bilateral dialogue.
11. The most recent update by UNICEF (of February 2015), other
than the statement of UNICEF to our committee of April 2017,
includes a review of the 38 recommendations
UNICEF had addressed to the Israeli authorities in 2013, of which
it classified 4 “in progress”, 15 “partially addressed”, 14 “under
discussion”, 4 “closed” and one “rejected”.
The Israeli authorities have, however,
stressed that, “for various reasons, both factual and legal, the
Israeli authorities did not, and do not accept the findings of the
report by UNICEF in March 2013”.
The current Special Representative
of UNICEF in the area, Genevieve Boutin, is on record (29 December
2017) confirming that “a proportion of children in military detention
continue to face treatments that are not in line with the provisions
of International Law, including the CRC. We continue pursuing efforts
for a dialogue with relevant Israeli institutions as we believe
it is in our mutual interest and that of children to end such violations”.
12. The “No Way to Treat a Child” campaign,
a joint project of Defence for Children
International – Palestine and the American Friends Service Committee
in the United States, “seeks to challenge and end Israel's prolonged
military occupation of Palestinians by exposing widespread and systematic
ill-treatment of Palestinian children in the Israeli military detention
system”.
This
campaign is thought to have influenced the bill proposed by Representative
Betty McCollum of Minnesota on 13 November 2017, which seeks to
require the US Secretary of State to certify that United States
funds are not “supporting security forces that harm Palestinian
children”.
2.3. The
Parliamentary Assembly perspective
13. The perspective of the Parliamentary
Assembly is certainly influenced by the fact that it is one of the
two organs of the Council of Europe, tasked with upholding human
rights, democracy and the rule of law across the continent. Council
of Europe standards are, in fact, often higher than those of the
United Nations when it comes to the protection of both children’s
rights and detainees’ rights.
I will hold the Israeli
authorities to the standards as they apply to Israel by virtue of
its international obligations, though I will, of course, recommend that
Israel endeavour to reach Council of Europe standards whenever this
is in the best interest of children.
3. The
treatment of Palestinian minors in the Israeli justice system
14. It is the assessment of UNICEF
and the vast majority of NGOs that ill-treatment of Palestinian
minors in the Israeli military detention system is “widespread,
systematic and institutionalized throughout the process, from the
moment of arrest until the child’s prosecution and eventual conviction
and sentencing”.
The
Israeli military court system also fails to comply with basic standards
applicable to children as regards due process. In order to end any
possibility for ill-treatment, in my opinion changes are necessary
to the law, to practice and to attitudes.
3.1. Laws
15. First of all, it is important
to understand that different laws apply to different categories
of children:
Israeli
civilian law is applied to all children who live in Israel proper
(whether they are Israeli or Palestinian), to Israeli children living
in settlements, and to Palestinian children from East Jerusalem.
Israeli military law is applied to Palestinian children who live
in the occupied territories.
16. Israeli civilian law generally provides better safeguards
for due process and against ill-treatment than is provided under
military law.
However,
the age of criminal responsibility is set at the (relatively low)
age of 12 in both laws. The improved protection provided by Israeli
civilian law is also reported to have been eroded somewhat since
2015, when, for example, amendments to the Israeli Penal Code and
the Youth Law instituted minimum and maximum sentences for the most
typical offence Palestinian children are charged with (throwing stones),
much reducing judicial discretion.
17. Israeli military law, in particular, is not in line with a
number of specific guarantees and protections included in international
human rights law relevant to juvenile justice (such as the UNCRC).
It is not always entirely clear whether
it would be necessary to amend the military law to stop abusive
practices, but in some cases this would seem necessary.
18. A recent report by B’Tselem on the treatment of Palestinian
minors by Israel’s military courts
details the changes the State
has made in recent years to the military orders that deal with the
arrest of minors and their treatment in the military courts. According
to the report: “On the face of it, these changes were meant to improve
the protections afforded to minors in the military justice system.
… However, the changes Israel has made have had no more than a negligible
impact on minors’ rights. It would seem that they have far more
to do with improved appearances than with what happens in actual
practice. …”. Thus, for example, the launching of the military juvenile
courts in 2009 has had little effect in practice, since these courts
are only tasked with the actual trial and do not handle arrest and
release procedures either before or after an indictment is served,
and more than 90% of cases end in a plea bargain rather than a full
trial.
19. In any case, both Israeli civilian and military law do not
reach the level of Council of Europe standards in important aspects.
Thus, for example, according to the Guidelines on child-friendly
justice: “A child who has been taken into custody should not be
questioned in respect of criminal behaviour, or asked to make or
sign a statement concerning such involvement, except in the presence
of a lawyer or one of the child’s parents or, if no parent is available,
another person whom the child trusts.”
While
all Israeli and Palestinian children have the right to consult a
lawyer,
no
Israeli law bestows on the lawyer or the parents of the child the
right to be present during the interrogation.
3.2. Practice
20. As UNICEF put it in its statement
to the committee on 25 April 2017: “UNICEF is concerned by reports that
Palestinian children regularly incur due process and ill-treatment
violations when apprehended by Israeli security forces and while
being held in Israeli detention facilities. … Palestinian children
have been placed in administrative detention, i.e. without charges
and for a prolonged period of time, …” This statement is based on
affidavits (sworn testimonies) collected by UNICEF and its partners
from hundreds of children each year.
The
DCIP testified at the same hearing on 25 April 2017 that between
500 and 700 children aged 12 to 17, including girls, were detained
in Israeli prisons and prosecuted by military courts each year,
with “about 60% of them transferred from the occupied territory
to prisons inside Israel, which violated the fourth Geneva Convention”.
According to figures
provided by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) to the BBC, about 1 400 minors
have been prosecuted in special military youth courts over the past
three years.
21. The DCIP reported in March 2018 that, “according to data released
by Israeli Prison Service (IPS), 352 Palestinian children were detained
in Israeli prisons at the end of December 2017, a 73 percent increase by
IPS data from 2012 to 2015 where Israeli authorities held an average
of 204 Palestinian children in custody each month. In October 2015,
and the first time since 2011, Israel renewed the practice of administrative detention
against Palestinian children in the West Bank”.
According to the DCIP, 26 minors
have been placed under administrative detention since October 2015
(all male).
22. The main forms of ill-treatment and violations of the children’s
rights documented in the affidavits collected by UNICEF and its
partners are in violation of Israeli law itself (as well as international
human rights standards), with more than two thirds of children swearing
that they had endured some form of physical violence following arrest,
and/or had faced verbal abuse, humiliation and/or intimidation,
and had been arrested without their parents being notified of the
reasons.
23. The most recent B’Tselem report on the issue paints a portrait
of the “standard practice” during the arrest, investigation and
prosecution of Palestinian minors as one of “systematic and systemic
ongoing abuse of their rights”: night-time arrests (more than 40%),
handcuffing and blindfolding after arrest (80%), various forms of
abuse during transit, waiting, and interrogations themselves, the
denial of their right to let them see or speak to a lawyer prior
to questioning (90%), coercive tactics to make minors sign confessions
in a language they do not understand, leading to military court
hearings which result – as a rule – in minors being held in prison
from the moment of their arrest until they complete their sentence,
and a conviction rate of more than 95% due to the preponderance
of plea bargains.
24. After the release of the original 2013 UNICEF report on the
matter, Israeli officials had promised to improve the situation,
according to newspaper reports:
“The Military Advocate General distributed
a memorandum among brigade and battalion commanders, reminding them
of the proper arrest rules. Among other things the memorandum stressed
that using physical violence was prohibited. The IDF reported to
the Association for Civil Rights in Israel in 2014 that the memorandum
says the commander of an arrest unit must make sure the detainee
is held in reasonable conditions, including a place protected from
intense heat or rain, provision of food and water and access to
toilets, with a prohibition on physical and verbal violence, as
well as other forms of abuse.” However, according to the October
2017 report published by Military Court Watch, no improvement was
made in practice regarding the physical abuse of minors.
25. Another problem is posed by the increased use of administrative
detention.
While
international humanitarian law permits administrative detention
in strictly limited circumstances in only the most exceptional cases
for “imperative reasons of security” when there is no other alternative,
NGOs such as the DCIP allege that Israel’s administrative detention
of Palestinian children appears to be used as a substitute for criminal prosecution
where there is insufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.
According to the United Nations Special
Rapporteur on Human Rights, François Crépeau, “[d]etention for administrative
purposes can never ever be in the best interest of a child. It harms
their physical and psychological well-being and has adverse effects
on their development”.
The same, of course, applies to
solitary confinement.
26. Particular problems are also posed by the practice of arresting
Palestinian children in night-time arrest operations, usually in
raids on their homes. These operations are evaluated at between
25% and 45% of cases, depending on the source and the time period
taken into consideration.
While I understand that
the reason for the night-time arrests and raids are linked with
security fears of the Israeli Defense Forces, which wish to avoid disturbances
of the peace, this is, in my opinion, one of the gravest and most
counter-productive violations of the rights of the children concerned:
It is clear that, even without any other violations, the chances
of getting a truthful confession from a terrified, overtired child
separated from his or her parents (with no lawyer in the interrogation
room) are slim. This means that, not only are rules such as denying
children the presence of a lawyer or one of their parents during
interrogations, and practices such as night-time arrests of children,
clearly not in the best interests of the child, but they are also
not in the best interests of the Israeli authorities, who seek to
find the culprits of crimes, not to terrify and wrongly accuse and
convict innocent children and their families.
27. Worryingly, in more than a third of cases, military court
judges based their convictions on confessions drafted in Hebrew,
a language that most Palestinian children do not understand.
These judges also seem
to exclude confessions obtained by coercion or ill-treatment only
rarely, contributing to the extremely high conviction rate (95%),
and
deny bail practically systematically
– in contrast to the civil courts,
which deny bail to Israeli children in only 18% of cases.
This, in turn,
leads to lawyers for Palestinian children agreeing to plea bargains
even if they believe them to be innocent, as the alternative would
be a prolonged period of remand that would likely exceed any sentence
imposed following a plea agreement.
3.3. Attitudes
28. The case of Ahed Tamimi (then
16) hit the headlines in December 2017. As the BBC explained, it
all started with an online video filmed on 15 December 2017, “in
which she [Ahed] confronts two Israeli soldiers outside her family
home in the occupied West Bank village of Nabi Saleh, demanding
they “get out”. She pushes them and one swats her away. Then she
slaps and kicks them with her older cousin, Nur. The Israeli soldiers
do not react and Ahed’s mother, Nariman, intervenes. The incident
was livestreamed on Nariman Tamimi’s Facebook account”.
According
to several NGO reports, the video was filmed after the girl had learned
that her 15-year-old cousin had been severely injured by a shot
to the face of a rubber-coated bullet fired by a soldier at a protest
in the village.
29. After the video went viral, Ahed Tamimi was arrested in a
night-time raid at 4 am on 19 December 2017. The Education Minister
Naftali Bennett told Army Radio the same morning that the young
women shown assaulting the soldiers should “finish their lives in
prison”.
Nariman Tamimi was detained
when she went to a police station to inquire about her daughter
later that day. Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman called for “severe”
punishment of Ahed and her family, “to serve as a deterrent,” and
banned 20 members of her family from visiting her in detention in
Israel, where she had been transferred.
30. While the military judge released Ahed Tamimi’s 20-year-old
cousin Nur from detention in early January on bail (she was charged
with aggravated assault), on 17 January 2018, the judge approved
the prosecution’s request to remand both Ahed and her mother in
custody. Ahed was indicted on 12 charges, including assaulting an
Israeli soldier, interfering with a soldier’s duties, and two past
instances of stone throwing, while her mother was charged with “incitement”
for livestreaming the altercation.
31. Both Ahed’s family and Ahed herself have been the subject
of intense debate on prior occasions, “leading to Israeli accusations
that her family deliberately provokes soldiers to stage anti-Israeli
propaganda”.
Aged
11, Ahed was filmed threatening to punch a soldier after her older
brother was arrested. Two years ago, she was filmed biting a soldier
trying to detain her younger brother – but before the December 2017
incident, she had never been detained or charged with any crimes.
32. Ahed’s trial opened on 13 February 2018 (she turned 17 in
Hasharon prison (Israel), in January). The trial at Ofer military
court was held in closed-door proceedings, as the judge ruled that
open proceedings would not be in the interest of Ahed, who was tried
as a minor (despite a request from Ahed’s lawyer for the media to be
able to observe). The judge adjourned the trial until 11 March upon
a request from prosecutors for more time to prepare.
33. On 21 March 2018, Ahed was sentenced to eight months’ imprisonment
and a 5 000 shekels fine (around US$1 400) with a three-year suspended
sentence after entering into a plea deal. Her mother was sentenced
to eight months in prison in addition to a fine of 6 000 shekels
(around US$1 780) and a three-year suspended sentenced for assisting
in assaulting a soldier, obstructing a soldier and incitement. Ahed’s
cousin, Nur Tamimi, was fined 2 000 shekels (around US$500).
34. Ahed Tamimi makes an unlikely poster child for “the cause”
on any of the two sides of the conflict, and the way this case provoked
extreme comments from both sides to the conflict only serves to
harden attitudes further. Ahed seems to be a child who is growing
up in conditions of conflict, engaging in behaviour which is certainly
not advisable and possibly criminal,
perhaps manipulated
by adults in her family, but she is definitely not a criminal who
deserves to spend the rest of her life in prison (as the Education
Minister Naftali Bennett had called for). Amnesty International
commented: “By sentencing Ahed to eight months in prison the Israeli authorities
have confirmed yet again that they have no regard for the rights
of Palestinian children, and have no intention to reverse their
discriminatory policies. … The Israeli authorities must stop responding
to relatively small acts of defiance with such disproportionately
harsh punishments.”
35. I believe we should go back to the basics: a child does not
forfeit his/her human rights no matter what he/she has done. There
is no excuse for ill-treatment of any child, Israeli or Palestinian.
Physical and psychological violence against Palestinian minors in
the Israeli justice system must stop. This will require a change
in law, practice and attitudes, as explained above.
4. The
way forward: conclusions and recommendations
36. There is ample documentation
of the view of NGOs and international bodies on the subject at hand,
but very little documentation of the point of view of the Israeli
authorities. I very much regret that the Israeli observer delegation
has refused to co-operate with me in the preparation of this report,
neither facilitating the requested fact-finding visit to Israel
to meet with the competent Israeli authorities, including my colleagues
in the Knesset, nor providing any information in April 2017 during
the exchange of views on the subject held in the committee, or since.
While the reports by the Israeli NGO, NGO Monitor,
can perhaps be considered representative
of the opinion of at least part of the Israeli population, if not
also of some of the authorities, this is a poor alternative to parliamentary
co-operation.
37. So what can be done? Israel has not been spared by the general
trend in many democracies in recent years towards populism and radical
movements; indeed, certain factors specific to Israel’s history
and situation (including the perceived need for security above all,
and the increasing strength of the settlers’ movement and the influence
of religious parties) have, if anything, exacerbated the trend.
The construction of new settlements and the pressure of these settlements
on the land situation represent an additional obstacle to the two-State solution.
38. On the other side, the Palestinians have not been spared by
radicalisation trends either: acts of terrorism against Israel are
not, or not uniformly, rejected and condemned, indoctrination –
including of children – seems rife, and the reign of Hamas in Gaza,
and its 10-year blockade by both Israel and Egypt, has produced
a humanitarian catastrophe which in turn has exacerbated radicalisation.
The Palestinian reconciliation, announced so many times, has not
yet produced concrete results, thus undermining the prospects of relaunching
peace negotiations with any prospect of success. Both the Israeli
and Palestinian authorities use school textbooks with non-objective
material which selectively reinforces each community’s national
narrative. The feasibility of the two-State solution supported by
the international community (and the Assembly) is threatened by
these developments, and others.
39. It is in this context that I am writing this report, whose
main objective is to contribute, as much as possible, to a better
protection of children’s rights – the rights of Palestinian children
which are unfortunately not respected in the Israeli justice system.
These rights have the priority, as everywhere else in all member States
and States which are connected with the Council of Europe in one
way or another! Some of my committee colleagues have criticised
the fact that I have refused to explicitly link my report to the
underlying conflict. Of course I have my own opinions on the underlying
conflict, as do we all – but, apart from the fact that other Assembly
committees have addressed or are addressing this conflict, with
more emphasis on political or legal aspects – I am convinced that
in the climate of radicalisation, increasing extremist influences
and hardened attitudes on both sides of the conflict (which I have
described in the preceding paragraphs), only by divorcing the issue
from the underlying conflict as far as possible can we hope to have
any impact, even if this may seem artificial to some.
40. My aim in pursuing this report is to help stop the ill-treatment
of Palestinian minors in the Israeli justice system by bringing
the issue to parliamentary attention. Bringing law and practice
into conformity with the human rights standards modelling juvenile
justice at international and European level not only serves the
best interests of the child – a primary consideration – but is also
less costly and more likely to ensure public safety and help young
people to reach their potential. In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict, such a move would also remove an obstacle to the peace
process which is contributing to tarnishing the image of Israel
as a State which respects human rights and the rule of law, and
could help Israel meet its commitments and obligations under international
law.
41. Others have criticised my report as one-sided, pointing out
that Israeli children are also detained, and that Palestinian children
have been indoctrinated or instrumentalised as fighters for the
Palestinian cause. Allow me to point out several facts: First of
all, I have made the subject and scope of this report very clear,
in conformity with the reference of the Bureau as validated by the
Assembly – I am dealing with the treatment of Palestinian minors
in the Israeli justice system, not with the treatment of Palestinian
minors in the Palestinian justice system, nor with the treatment
of Israeli minors in the Israeli justice system, nor with any other
issues, connected or not. Second, a child does not forfeit his/her
human rights no matter what he/she has done. There is simply no
excuse for ill-treatment of a child, Israeli or Palestinian, at
the hands of the State. However, all reports on the issue, by international
organisations and international, Palestinian and Israeli NGOs,
point
to the same factual findings which demonstrate that it is the rights
of Palestinian children (not Israeli children) which are regularly
and systematically violated in the Israeli justice system (not in
the Palestinian justice system, though the treatment of Palestinian
minors in the Palestinian justice system is not above criticism
and may merit a separate report).
42. That said, some changes, such as raising the age of criminal
responsibility to 14 in both Israeli military and civilian law,
would benefit all children under Israel’s jurisdiction, be they
Israeli or Palestinian, and wherever they live. Other changes suggested
to both the Israeli and the Palestinian authorities, such as educating children
and young people in their communities on non-violent approaches
to ending aggression and conflict, would also benefit all children
living in the area, as well as help give new life to the peace process.
43. However, the main message of the Parliamentary Assembly in
this report should be to call on the Israeli authorities to work
with UNICEF, the International Committee of the Red Cross, civil
society and all relevant stakeholders with a view to changing laws,
practice and attitudes as necessary to fully protect the rights
of Palestinian children in the Israeli justice system. The Assembly
should stand ready to assist the Knesset and the Palestinian authorities
in this regard. If we can manage to effect an improvement in this
field, we can consider it a small step towards stopping the radicalisation
and hardened attitudes which feed the underlying conflict and the
cycle of violence.