Guardian,
Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem, Monday 11 July 2011
![]() |
| The West Bank: Israel's parliament, the Knesset, has voted and approved a boycott law. Photograph: Uriel Sinai/Getty Images |
The Israeli parliament has passed a law in effect banning citizens from calling for academic, consumer or cultural boycotts of Israel in a move denounced by its opponents as anti-democratic.
The
"'Law for Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through
Boycott" won a majority of 47 to 38, despite strong opposition and an
attempt to filibuster the six-hour debate. Prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu
did not take part in the vote.
Under the
terms of the new law, an individual or organisation proposing a boycott may be
sued for compensation by any individual or institution claiming that it could
be damaged by such a call. Evidence of actual damage is not be required.
The new law
aims to protect individuals and institutions in both Israel and the Palestinian
territory it has occupied illegally under international law since 1967. It in
effect bans calls for consumer boycotts of goods produced in West Bank
settlements, or of cultural or academic institutions in settlements. It also
prevents the government doing business with companies that comply with
boycotts.
A coalition
of Israeli human rights groups immediately issued a letter of protest over the
new law.
Hassan
Jabareen of Adalah, a legal centre for Israeli-Arab citizens, said:
"Defining boycott as a civil wrong suggests that all Israelis have a legal
responsibility to promote the economic advancement of the settlements in the
occupied Palestinian territories. This means that Israeli organisations
opposing the settlements as a matter of principle are in a trap: any settler
can now constantly harass them, challenging them to publicly declare their
position on the boycott of settlements and threatening them with heavy
compensation costs if they support it."
As debate
on the bill opened in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament's legal adviser
presented an opinion that parts of the proposed law were "borderline
illegal". "The broad definition of a boycott on the state of Israel
is a violation of the core tenet of freedom of political expression and
elements in the proposed bill are borderline illegal," Eyal Yinon said.
Among the
bill's opponents were dozens of Israeli intellectuals, including the celebrated
author Eyal Yinon, who issued a letter describing the proposed law as the
"worst of the anti-democratic bills in the Knesset. The bill will turn law
abiding citizens into criminals."
According
to the Association of Civil Rights in Israel, the bill constituted "a
direct violation of freedom of expression". Following the vote, executive
director, Hagai El-Ad, said: "The boycott law will lead to unprecedented
harm to freedom of expression in Israel and will bring justified criticism
against Israel from abroad. We will all have to pay the price for this
atrocious law."
Saeb
Erekat, the Palestinian chief negotiator, said the bill would punish those who
"refuse to recognise the illegal situation associated with Israel's
settlement enterprise in occupied Palestinian territory".
The bill's
sponsor, Ze'ev Elkin of the right wing Likud party, said Israel had been
dealing for years with boycotts by Arab states but the domestic boycott
movement was a "travesty". "If the state of Israel does not
protect itself, we will have no moral right to ask our allies for protection
from such boycotts."
Before the
vote, Elkin told the pro-settlement news website Arutz Sheva: "I hope the
[legislators] will understand that this is a battle between Zionism and the new
left."
The new law
follows moves to boycott a cultural centre and a university in the huge West
Bank settlement of Ariel, and the contractual agreement of some Israeli
companies not to use material originating in settlements in work on the new
Palestinian city of Rawabi. Campaigners also claim that consumer boycotts
against produce and goods originating in settlements are growing both in Israel
and abroad.
There has
been a raft of proposals over recent years denounced by opponents as
anti-democratic, including the withdrawal of financing for Israeli films deemed
to be critical of government policies and attempts to restrict the
international funding of campaigning groups.
The new law
is expected to be challenged in the courts, putting a spotlight on Israel's
44-year occupation.

No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.