Maan News Agency, March 9, 2010
Tomorrow the Israeli Defense Ministry will go on trial as a court hears the case against it, filed by the family of an American woman who was killed by Israeli Defense Forces in March of 2003.
The civil suit charges the Defense Ministry with responsibility for the death of Rachel Corrie, a 23-year-old activist who was crushed to death by an army-manned bulldozer as she protested a home demolition in the Gaza Strip.
Hussein Abu Hussein, the attorney who filed the petition on behalf of Corrie’s parents, comments, “We claim that her assassination was intentional.” Or, at the very least, he says, the army is guilty of “huge negligence.”
Abu Hussein cites the state’s acknowledgment of the fact that Corrie and other members of the International Solidarity Movement—a Palestinian-led peace organization that advocates non-violent means of resistance to the Israeli occupation—were demonstrating in the area for several hours before Corrie was struck by the bulldozer. He also points out that Corrie was wearing a fluorescent orange vest to increase her visibility.
“If you see people, you should stop and think of all the needed steps not to harm [them]. Instead of stopping the D9, which weighs 64 tons, they continued. And due to that, [Corrie] was killed.”
Bowing to pressure from the US government, Israel has recently issued visas to four ISM activists—one US citizen and three UK nationals—that witnessed the incident. The activists, who have been barred from entering Israel in the past, will testify during the trial, which is expected to last two weeks.
But Israel will not issue an entry permit to Dr. Ahmed Abu Nakira, the Gazan physician who saw Corrie after she was injured and declared her dead. The state rejected the request for entry on the grounds that there is no coordination between Israel and Gaza, due to the Israeli blockade that began after Hamas rose to power in 2007.
“It’s an obstacle to justice,” Abu Hussein says. “On the one side, [Israel] won’t give permission [for Dr. Abu Nakira] to come; on the other they won’t allow him to testify by videoconference, which is used daily by courts everywhere in the modern world.”
Speaking shortly after Corrie’s death, an IDF spokesperson called the incident a “regrettable accident.” An internal investigation conducted by the Israeli army later absolved the soldier operating the bulldozer of any wrong doing. The report, released in April of 2003, claimed that Corrie was not killed by the “engineering vehicle” but “was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved.” The army accused Corrie and the other activists present of behaving in an “illegal, irresponsible, and dangerous” manner.
Abu Hussein says that the army’s investigation lacked transparency. The civil suit, which was filed in 2005, is the only way to hold the state accountable for Corrie’s death, he says.
While it is exceedingly rare for the Israeli Defense Ministry to take direct responsibility in such cases, the state has made financial reparations to a handful of families like the Corries. Just two months after Corrie’s death, British journalist and filmmaker James Miller, 34, was shot to death by an Israeli soldier. After an army investigation found no wrongdoing, the UK warned it would extradite the soldiers involved. Last year, Israel settled out of court with Miller’s family for approximately 1.5 million GBP.
“The family is not seeking money. They’re seeking acknowledgement of responsibility by the state,” Abu Hussein says. If the Corries do receive compensation from Israel, they intend to donate the sum to “the matters Rachel was struggling for—for peace.”
Abu Hussein says the Corries’ suit “underscores that Israel doesn’t prosecute” soldiers accused of wrongdoing and that the state behaves as though it is “exempt from accountability.”
“In the cases brought by Palestinians against the IDF, more than 90 percent are denied,” he says, pointing to a culture of immunity that has been criticized human rights groups.
From 2000 to 2009, the Israeli NGO Yesh Din monitored almost 2000 IDF investigations into incidents in which a Palestinian or international claimed the army was guilty of a criminal offense, including unlawful shooting that led to injury or death. Indictments were filed in only six percent of these cases. Many of the soldiers who were prosecuted cut deals with the court that reduced the severity of both the charges and punishments.
“When we look at the number of cases, and we look at the fact that only six percent yield indictments, it is safe to assume that a soldier in the field today will know that he can get away with pretty much anything,” Yesh Din’s research director Lior Yavne remarks.
A media liaison for the Corries emphasized that the family hopes the upcoming trial will bring attention to ongoing human rights abuses perpetrated by the Israeli army in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. “The issue is Palestine and human rights defenders,” the liaison says. “They want to highlight Gaza in light of [the UN-commissioned] Goldstone [report] and Operation Cast Lead.”
The Corries were unavailable for comment.