FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Mohammed Allan at the Door of the Israeli Supreme Court

After being on hunger strike for 65 days, the Palestinian political prisoner Muhammad Allan, who had been held in administrative detention without charge since November 2014, fell into a coma and apparently suffered brain damage due to a deficit in vitamin B1. The three Supreme Court judges who presided over the petition demanding his immediate release offered a resolution that wouldn’t shame the most racist colonial courts.

“On the face of it, the plaintiff no longer constitutes a risk due to his medical condition,” the judges averred, and asked the state to release Allan from custody. This was a perfect solution to the dilemma of Allan’s nonviolent protest. Indeed, if Allan were to end up dying in the hospital, he would not perish as a prisoner in Israeli custody, since the court had formally ordered his release. The judges also added, however, that only “if his health condition is irreversible should he be released immediately.” This means that if the damage to his brain can be successfully treated, then Allan could and likely would be re-detained.

“At this point,” the three Supreme Court judges ruled, “Allan will remain in intensive care at Barzilai hospital [in Israel]. His family members and relatives will be able to visit him as if he were not a prisoner, and they will be subjected to the routine medical instructions regulating all visitors in the hospital. If the plaintiff, after his condition has been stabilized, wishes to be transferred to another hospital, he can appeal to the [IDF] and if there is any problem or disagreement, then the doors of this court remain open.”

This latest ruling on the part of Israel’s highest court of justice begs the question of whether the doors of the Supreme Court should remain open in cases like these. In other words, does Israel’s Supreme Court really protect the human rights of the Palestinian plaintiffs who appeal to it?

The Supreme Court’s “protection” of Allan’s basic human rights must be understood in context of the historical role this institution has played in maintaining Israel’s colonial rule. Consider the first Intifada, during which a plethora of Palestinian and Israeli human rights NGOs first appeared on the political scene and began filing hundreds of petitions to Israel’s highest court against the many and egregious violations of Palestinian human rights. While these petitions seemed to be challenging government policies, the court almost inevitably acquitted Israel from any responsibility for the daily abuses it was carrying out.

Indeed, over the past three decades Israel’s High Court of Justice has enabled the government to continue carrying out home demolitions; it has authorized holding Palestinians in prison for years on end without trial (administrative detention); it has justified the expropriation of Palestinian land and the deportation of Palestinian leaders and political prisoners; and it has approved Israel’s policy of extra-judicial executions.

In the absence of an international body that can enforce human rights conventions, cause-lawyers have remained trapped in a human rights paradox: the colonized have had to resort to the colonizer’s court in order to seek protection. Put differently, these lawyers have found themselves requesting that the colonial court secure the human rights of the stateless Palestinians—the very people whose rights were being violated by the colonizing state.

Prominent Israeli human rights lawyer Michael Sfard captured this point when he claimed that the mobilization of human rights within the Israeli legal system has generated a surreal situation that enables the state to criticize itself while effectively producing its own legitimization:

Arguably, internal opposition may lead, eventually, to a symbiosis between resistance movements and the authorities. The authorities need internal opposition to better assess the feasibility and ease of implementing its policies. It needs human rights litigation as a policy “fine-tuner.” This insight is overwhelming: the opposition, when it uses only internal means of combat, becomes part of the practice to which it objects. Its resistance is nicely boxed and is given an official role as a phase in the policy structuring procedure.

Israel’s Supreme Court is structurally embedded in the colonial system and has consistently appropriated the human rights critique, but uses it in order to uphold the colonial state as both legitimate and lawful. This liberal spectacle—whereby human rights lawyers appear in court and judges arbitrate between plaintiffs and the government institutions that carry out violations—has helped the state to produce an image of morality while refining its colonial practices.

The Allan ruling is no exception to this long and dark history. The release of a prisoner who has incurred brain damage while in custody might look—and was depicted by several mainstream media—as an act of clemency and as evidence that the Israeli political system is concerned with blind justice. However, Israel’s highest court is, actually, helping the colonial state resolve the thorny issue of Palestinian hunger strikers. By exonerating the Israeli authorities from any responsibility for Allan’s potential death, while enabling the IDF to re-arrest him if his health improves, the court is sending an extremely chilling message to anyone who dares to use the hunger strike as a form of resistance. For the colonial regime, it is undoubtedly very good that the doors of the Israeli Supreme court remain open.

First published in Middle East Eye.

 

Nicola Perugini is Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow in Italian Studies and Middle East Studies at Brown University and the author of The Human Right to Dominate (with Neve Gordon, Oxford University Press 2015). You can follow him @PeruginiNic Neve Gordon is the author of Israel’s Occupation as well as The Human Right to Dominate (with Nicola Perugini, Oxford University Press 2015). You can follow him @nevegordon

September 19, 2018
Bruce E. Levine
When Bernie Sold Out His Hero, Anti-Authoritarians Paid
Lawrence Davidson
Political Fragmentation on the Homefront
George Ochenski
How’s That “Chinese Hoax” Treating You, Mr. President?
Cesar Chelala
The Afghan Morass
Chris Wright
Three Cheers for the Decline of the Middle Class
Howard Lisnoff
The Beat Goes On Against Protest in Saudi Arabia
Nomi Prins 
The Donald in Wonderland: Down the Financial Rabbit Hole With Trump
Jack Rasmus
On the 10th Anniversary of Lehman Brothers 2008: Can ‘IT’ Happen Again?
Richard Schuberth
Make Them Suffer Too
Geoff Beckman
Kavanaugh in Extremis
Jonathan Engel
Rather Than Mining in Irreplaceable Wilderness, Why Can’t We Mine Landfills?
Binoy Kampmark
Needled Strawberries: Food Terrorism Down Under
Michael McCaffrey
A Curious Case of Mysterious Attacks, Microwave Weapons and Media Manipulation
Elliot Sperber
Eating the Constitution
September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savior
Mairead Maguire
Demonization of Russia in a New Cold War Era
Dean Baker
The Bank Bailout of 2008 was Unnecessary
Wim Laven
Hurricane Trump, Season 2
Yves Engler
Smearing Dimitri Lascaris
Ron Jacobs
From ROTC to Revolution and Beyond
Clark T. Scott
The Cannibals of Horsepower
Binoy Kampmark
A Traditional Right: Jimmie Åkesson and the Sweden Democrats
Laura Flanders
History Markers
Weekend Edition
September 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Carl Boggs
Obama’s Imperial Presidency
Joshua Frank
From CO2 to Methane, Trump’s Hurricane of Destruction
Jeffrey St. Clair
Maria’s Missing Dead
Andrew Levine
A Bulwark Against the Idiocy of Conservatives Like Brett Kavanaugh
T.J. Coles
Neil deGrasse Tyson: A Celebrity Salesman for the Military-Industrial-Complex
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail