Lebanon-Israel deal betrays ‘victims of war crimes’, rights groups say
The Israel-Lebanon framework agreement “threatens to betray the victims of war crimes” in Lebanon, according to six prominent human rights and media freedom organisations.
In a joint statement released on Friday by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Lebanese Center for Human Rights (CLDH), Legal Agenda, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Union of Journalists in Lebanon, they warned that parts of the agreement “appear to be aimed at preventing victims of serious international crimes from seeking justice before international forums”.
The organisations pointed out that clauses 3 and 13 of the agreement, brokered by and signed in the United States on June 26, were particularly concerning as they would “prevent Lebanon and Israel from having recourse to international courts, including the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice”.
The six organisations warned that “Clause 3 further violates international law and the prohibition of forced displacement, conditioning the return of residents to specified zones along the border, currently occupied by Israel, to the ‘successful disarmament of non-state armed groups and dismantlement of their infrastructure”.
“Under international humanitarian law, people must be allowed to return once hostilities have ended or the reasons for their displacement cease to exist,” their joint statement said.
The organisations said that Clause 13 was particularly concerning as it prevents civilians from “actions in international political or legal fora [forums]”. This comes after “months of hostilities resulting in immense civilian harm, including as a result of war crimes, violations of international humanitarian law, and gross human rights abuses”.
Many in Lebanon have protested and criticised the government for signing the agreement with Israel.
Many critics of the framework deal, which does not force the Israeli army to withdraw from the areas it occupies, are people most impacted by the war, which has killed at least 4,300 people, injured over 12,000 and forced hundreds of thousands from their homes since early March.
The six organisations said the US-brokered agreement appears to “contradict the countries’ international legal obligations to pursue accountability for serious international crimes committed on their territories,” although it “does not appear to commit Israel to halt any initiatives in international forums against Hezbollah”.
“Victims of war crimes and other violations deserve justice,” said Agnes Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International. “Any agreement that fails to center their rights to justice, accountability and reparations will falter underneath the very impunity it builds.”
Ghida Frangieh, head of litigation at Legal Agenda, added: “Accountability and respect for international law are not bargaining chips. They are legal obligations. International law is clear: States cannot waive or negotiate away their obligation to investigate and prosecute the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. Nor can states extinguish individual rights to truth, justice and reparation”.
But Lebanon’s President said on Friday that the framework deal with Israel “does not legitimise the continued Israeli occupation of Lebanon”, but instead empowers the Lebanese army to extend its authority across the country’s territory.
Joseph Aoun made the remarks during a meeting with a delegation from the Association of Lebanese Universities, the Lebanese Order of Physicians and the Lebanese Maronite Order, according to a statement from the presidency.
“Our sovereign decision to separate our track from the Iranian-US track is a problem for some who have become accustomed to being under guardianship that controls us, decides for us and negotiates on our behalf,” Aoun said, adding that the Lebanese army will “fully assume its responsibilities in achieving security and stability in the south after the withdrawal of Israeli forces”.
Meanwhile, with a “ceasefire” in Lebanon agreed on June 21 as part of a deal between Iran and the US, and the Israel-Lebanon framework agreement signed five days later, many displaced Lebanese have been returning to their homes in southern Lebanon.
In a report on Thursday, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) said 646,107 IDPs (internally displaced persons) have begun returning to their communities, while about 500,000 others remain displaced, based on data collected with local authorities since June 22.
Lebanese authorities said they were working to remove informal encampments in and around capital Beirut and to reduce the number of official shelters.
However, many people in southern Lebanon said they have nowhere to return to, as dozens of towns and villages near the border have been destroyed by Israeli forces.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the military “will not leave” southern Lebanon as long as Hezbollah remains a “threat”. Hezbollah has rejected the deal with Israel as “null and void”, saying any attempt to link an Israeli withdrawal to its disarmament crossed “all red lines”.
Read the full story at Al Jazeera ↗
Six international human rights organisations issued a joint statement criticising provisions in the Israel-Lebanon framework agreement signed on 26 June. They argue that clauses 3 and 13 restrict both countries' ability to pursue cases in international courts, including the ICC and ICJ, potentially limiting accountability for alleged war crimes committed during the recent conflict. Clause 3 conditions the return of displaced residents to border areas on the disarmament of non-state armed groups, which the organisations say conflicts with international humanitarian law requirements for civilian return once hostilities end. Clause 13 prevents civilians from pursuing legal action in international forums. The conflict, which began in early March, has killed at least 4,300 people and displaced hundreds of thousands. Lebanon's President responded that the agreement empowers the Lebanese army and does not legitimise Israeli occupation. Hezbollah rejected the agreement as void. By late June, over 646,000 internally displaced persons had begun returning, though approximately 500,000 remained displaced and significant infrastructure damage persists in southern towns.
Read the full story at Al Jazeera ↗
The Israel-Lebanon framework agreement “threatens to betray the victims of war crimes” in Lebanon, according to six prominent human rights and media freedom organisations.
In a joint statement released on Friday by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Lebanese Center for Human Rights (CLDH), Legal Agenda, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) and the Union of Journalists in Lebanon, they warned that parts of the agreement “appear to be aimed at preventing victims of serious international crimes from seeking justice before international forums”.
The organisations pointed out that clauses 3 and 13 of the agreement, brokered by and signed in the United States on June 26, were particularly concerning as they would “prevent Lebanon and Israel from having recourse to international courts, including the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice”.
The six organisations warned that “Clause 3 further violates international law and the prohibition of forced displacement, conditioning the return of residents to specified zones along the border, currently occupied by Israel, to the ‘successful disarmament of non-state armed groups and dismantlement of their infrastructure”.
“Under international humanitarian law, people must be allowed to return once hostilities have ended or the reasons for their displacement cease to exist,” their joint statement said.
The organisations said that Clause 13 was particularly concerning as it prevents civilians from “actions in international political or legal fora [forums]”. This comes after “months of hostilities resulting in immense civilian harm, including as a result of war crimes, violations of international humanitarian law, and gross human rights abuses”.
Many in Lebanon have protested and criticised the government for signing the agreement with Israel.
Many critics of the framework deal, which does not force the Israeli army to withdraw from the areas it occupies, are people most impacted by the war, which has killed at least 4,300 people, injured over 12,000 and forced hundreds of thousands from their homes since early March.
The six organisations said the US-brokered agreement appears to “contradict the countries’ international legal obligations to pursue accountability for serious international crimes committed on their territories,” although it “does not appear to commit Israel to halt any initiatives in international forums against Hezbollah”.
“Victims of war crimes and other violations deserve justice,” said Agnes Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International. “Any agreement that fails to center their rights to justice, accountability and reparations will falter underneath the very impunity it builds.”
Ghida Frangieh, head of litigation at Legal Agenda, added: “Accountability and respect for international law are not bargaining chips. They are legal obligations. International law is clear: States cannot waive or negotiate away their obligation to investigate and prosecute the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. Nor can states extinguish individual rights to truth, justice and reparation”.
But Lebanon’s President said on Friday that the framework deal with Israel “does not legitimise the continued Israeli occupation of Lebanon”, but instead empowers the Lebanese army to extend its authority across the country’s territory.
Joseph Aoun made the remarks during a meeting with a delegation from the Association of Lebanese Universities, the Lebanese Order of Physicians and the Lebanese Maronite Order, according to a statement from the presidency.
“Our sovereign decision to separate our track from the Iranian-US track is a problem for some who have become accustomed to being under guardianship that controls us, decides for us and negotiates on our behalf,” Aoun said, adding that the Lebanese army will “fully assume its responsibilities in achieving security and stability in the south after the withdrawal of Israeli forces”.
Meanwhile, with a “ceasefire” in Lebanon agreed on June 21 as part of a deal between Iran and the US, and the Israel-Lebanon framework agreement signed five days later, many displaced Lebanese have been returning to their homes in southern Lebanon.
In a report on Thursday, the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) said 646,107 IDPs (internally displaced persons) have begun returning to their communities, while about 500,000 others remain displaced, based on data collected with local authorities since June 22.
Lebanese authorities said they were working to remove informal encampments in and around capital Beirut and to reduce the number of official shelters.
However, many people in southern Lebanon said they have nowhere to return to, as dozens of towns and villages near the border have been destroyed by Israeli forces.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the military “will not leave” southern Lebanon as long as Hezbollah remains a “threat”. Hezbollah has rejected the deal with Israel as “null and void”, saying any attempt to link an Israeli withdrawal to its disarmament crossed “all red lines”.
Read the full story at Al Jazeera ↗
Six organisations—Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Lebanese Center for Human Rights, Legal Agenda, Reporters Without Borders, and Union of Journalists in Lebanon—issued a joint statement on the agreement Clauses 3 and 13 of the agreement prevent Lebanon and Israel from pursuing cases in international courts including the ICC and ICJ Clause 3 conditions civilian return to border zones on disarmament of armed groups International humanitarian law requires people be allowed to return once hostilities end or displacement reasons cease Clause 13 prevents civilians from pursuing actions in international legal or political forums The conflict has killed at least 4,300 people, injured over 12,000, and displaced hundreds of thousands since early March The agreement does not force Israeli army withdrawal from occupied areas The agreement appears to contradict countries' international legal obligations to pursue accountability for serious crimes The agreement does not appear to commit Israel to halt initiatives against Hezbollah in international forums Lebanon's President stated the agreement empowers the Lebanese army and does not legitimise Israeli occupation As of late June, 646,107 internally displaced persons had begun returning Approximately 500,000 displaced persons remained displaced Prime Minister Netanyahu said the military will not leave southern Lebanon while Hezbollah remains a threat Hezbollah rejected the deal as null and void
Read the full story at Al Jazeera ↗
- Six human rights organisations warn that the US-brokered Israel-Lebanon agreement contains clauses preventing both countries from pursuing cases in international courts, potentially blocking justice for war crime victims
- Clause 3 conditions civilian returns to occupied border zones on disarmament of armed groups, which rights groups say violates international humanitarian law
- Lebanon's President argues the deal empowers the Lebanese army and does not legitimise Israeli occupation, while Hezbollah rejects the agreement entirely
- As of late June, over 646,000 internally displaced persons have begun returning home, though some 500,000 remain displaced and many southern towns face destruction