APRODEV, CIDSE, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN) and the Quaker Council for European Affairs call on the members of the European Parliament involved in the international trade (INTA) committee to postpone its assent to ACAA, the Protocol on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products to the EU-Israel Association Agreement, until Israel’s practices comply with international humanitarian law and human rights law standards. The organisations also call on members of the AFET committee to support such a move.
The need for consistency
The expansion of the EU’s bilateral relations with Israel has to be coherent with the EU’s firm condemnation of Israel’s policies and practices that violate international law. The Treaty of the European Union refers to the obligation of the Union to “ensure consistency between the areas of its external action” (Article 21 TEU). The expansion of these bilateral relations also needs to conform to the EU’s human rights commitments. Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement states that the “Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement”. An assent to the ACAA Protocol would amount to the acceptance by the EU of Israel’s violations of human rights in its own territory and violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). It would send the signal to Israel that it can expect that its relations with the European Union can be further developed and intensified whilst still continuing its illegal policies inside Israel and inside the OPT. In 2008 the European Parliament withheld assent to the Protocol on the participation of Israel in Community Programs for similar reasons.
An opportunity to apply the “more for more” approach
Furthermore, the assent vote to the ACAA Protocol is an opportunity for members of the European Parliament to apply the more for more (or positive conditionality) principle outlined in the May 2011 communication “A new response to a changing neighbourhood” endorsed by the Foreign Affairs Council in June 2011 and the European Parliament in December 2011. Positive conditionality is an important instrument for the EU to promote democracy and respect for human rights, but should also be used as a crucial tool with its partners engaged in protracted conflicts with a view to promoting peace and stability by upholding international law.[1]
Apply benchmarks to reflect Israel’s obligations as an Occupying Power
To implement the more for more approach, the May 2011 communication outlines “deep democracy benchmarks” to assess the progress made by neighbouring partners towards building and consolidating democracy and respect for the rule of law. However, these benchmarks fail to take into account the existence of protracted conflicts in the ENP region. Therefore, APRODEV, CIDSE, the EMHRN and the Quaker Council for European Affairs recommend that the EU, including the European Parliament, adopts additional benchmarks drawn from international humanitarian and human rights law to include situations of conflict – and thus, in the case of Israel, take into account its obligations vis-à-vis the occupied Palestinian population. These benchmarks should include, among others[2]:
– the protection of civilians based on the basic IHL principles of distinction, military necessity and proportionality;
– the non-derogable right to life, including the prohibition of extra-judicial killings and the right to be free from torture and ill-treatment;
– the fundamental right of freedom of movement;
– respect for a range of economic, social and cultural rights for Palestinians;
– the prohibition to bring about a fundamental demographic change in the composition of the occupied territory;
– the prohibition of collective punishment;
– the right to a fair trial;
– and the fight against impunity.
When giving its consent vote on agreements signed between the EU and Israel, the European Parliament should first assess Israel’s compliance with these benchmarks. [3]
It is also important to note that Israel does not respect some of the human rights principles contained in the deep democracy benchmarks such as freedom of association and expression and non-discrimination against minorities within its internationally recognised borders.[4]
Given the need for consistency in EU external policy and the continued violations of international law by Israel, APRODEV, CIDSE, the EMHRN and the Quaker Council for European Affairs recommend that members of the European Parliament suspend their assent to the ACAA protocol until Israel makes tangible progress toward the respect of its international law obligations. In general, the undersigning organisations believe that the ‘more for more’ (or ‘less for less’) approach should be applied by the European Union in its relations with all South Mediterranean countries.
[1] For more details on this recommendation, see “EU-Israel Relations: Promoting and Ensuring Respect for International Law”, report published by APRODEV and EMHRN, February 2012. Available here.
[2] An update on Israel’s violations of these fundamental human rights and humanitarian law obligations is provided in Annex I of this letter.
[3] For more details on this recommendation, see “EU-Israel Relations: Promoting and Ensuring Respect for International Law”, report published by APRODEV and EMHRN, February 2012, p. 56.
[4] See Annex II for more information about violations of freedom of expression and association as well as discrimination against the Palestinian Arab minority in Israel.