Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March/April 2022, pp. 56-57
Waging Peace
FOLLOWING A four-month hunger strike, countless appeals from Palestinian human rights groups and global public outcry, Israeli courts in January agreed to end the arbitrary administrative detention of Palestinian prisoner Hisham Abu Hawash on Feb. 26. While this was a welcome decision, Abu Hawash now faces considerable health issues, and many other Palestinians continue to languish in Israeli custody without ever having faced trial or received an official sentence.
American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) presented a webinar on Abu Hawash’s case, and on the broader Israeli practice of administrative detention, on Jan. 14.
Yumna Patel, Palestine news director for Mondoweiss, started the conversation with some context on what exactly administrative detention is and provided the basic details of Abu Hawash’s case.
Israeli forces raided Abu Hawash’s home in the middle of the night in October 2020, placing him under arrest and then under administrative detention, initially with an order of six months. However, his detention was extended, as is the case with most Palestinian prisoners. Further still, the Israeli Supreme Court refused to listen to any of Abu Hawash’s appeals until he served at least two years in administrative detention. When it became obvious that the courts could not provide legal redress for Abu Hawash, he began his hunger strike, garnering him media attention and support. As Patel explained, prisoners facing administrative detention often view hunger strikes as their only means of resistance.
Palestinian freelance journalist Shatha Hammad spoke in Arabic (translated by Sikander Rahman) during the webinar and offered a historical perspective on administrative detention in Israel, which originates from a 1945 British Mandate ruling. As of 2021, the number of Palestinian detainees under administrative detention has gone up, reaching 500 prisoners. The prisoners have engaged in mass protests in recent months, but as Hammad noted, their efforts can only gain traction with continued support from the outside world.
Both Hammad and Patel pointed out that administrative detention violates international law. For example, Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that no one can be arbitrarily arrested. Palestinian detainees are also denied the right to a public court, as administrative detention cases are handled in closed courts with only the detainee’s lawyer present.
After learning about Abu Hawash’s case, some might wonder what they can do on behalf of Palestinian prisoners. Part of Abu Hawash’s successful hunger strike was the outcry it generated over social media, as well as the broader changing tides surrounding pro-Palestine solidarity in the U.S.
Patel noted that in the past several decades, the ability of groups and individuals to question Israeli actions has grown, even though activists still face an abundance of backlash. There is a “total world of difference in terms of what we are seeing, in terms of solidarity worldwide and pro-Palestine action and activism on university campuses” compared to just a decade ago, she said. Hammad, too, stressed the importance of ongoing solidarity, awareness and participation in an economic, cultural and political boycott of Israel. As she exclaimed toward the end of her discussion, Palestinian protesters are fighting not just for their rights but for the “rights of all occupied people around the globe.”
—Mariam Marwan
