A pro-independence militant West Papuan group says it will release a New Zealand pilot it has held hostage for a year via the United Nations, reports Reuters.
It was unclear when the 38-year-old pilot, Philip Mehrtens, who was kidnapped exactly a year ago yesterday when he landed a small commercial plane in a rugged mountainous area, would be released.
Terianus Satto of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB), one of several groups fighting for Papua’s independence from Indonesia, said in a statement that Mehrtens would be released to “protect humanity and . . . human rights”.
“TPNPB will return the pilot Philip Max Martherns [sic] to his family through the jurisdiction of the Secretary-General of the United Nations,” he said.
A spokesperson for Foreign Minister Winston Peters said: “New Zealand continues to work with all parties on securing Mr Mehrtens’ safe release. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has no further comment at this time.”
A low-level but increasingly deadly struggle for independence has been waged in the resource-rich western half of the island of Papua since it was brought under Indonesian control in a vote overseen by the United Nations in 1969 but rejected as flawed by most West Papuans.
Papuans are indigenous Melanesians like their neigbouring islanders in the independent state of Papua New Guinea.
Negotiations over pilot
Indonesia’s government and military, which have struggled against the pro-independence movement, have said they were in negotiations to free the pilot.
However, Asia Pacific Report says West Papuan activists are wary of negotiations with Indonesian authorities.
A statement last week by another faction seeking independence, the government of the “Federal Republic of West Papua”, declared that Indonesian authorities had been resisting diplomatic moves to free the pilot and negotiations had reached a “stalemate”.
The statement signed by the self-styled president Yoab Syatfle said: “The people of West Papua are of Pacific race and have closer affinity and share common customs and traditions with the people of Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji, New Caledonia, Australia, Cook Islands, Federal States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Palau, Republic of Marshall Islands, Samoa, Tonga and Tuvalu.”
Seeking negotiations for an independent future for West Papua, Syatfle said that since Mehrtens had been kidnapped, “60 innocent people had been killed, Indonesia had banned and closed access from air and land, closed 14 districts, closed 33 villages, and closed 39 churches [in the Nduga Regency].”
Indigenous people had had to move to other safe places and the Indonesian military controlled everything, the statement said.
“The Indonesian military never reached the location of the kidnappers [in a year] because it was a Papuan stronghold and because of the challenges of the mountains.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Standing in the footprints of those who first signed Te Tiriti o Waitangi, they listened to sermons from church ministers and Bible readings from politicians, while singing hymns.
But as always, the highlight was the spectacular sunrise, which washed the grounds in golden rays.
It was a moment which made standing in the longest queue in the world for coffee seem fine.
The waka came back to the beach — Kaihoe paddling strongly and proud just like their tūpuna — and the rowers were called ashore, then entertained the thousands of onlookers with a haka.
Watch a livestream of this morning’s ceremony:
The Waitangi dawn Service. Video: RNZ News
The grounds were awash with thousands of people again later in the morning, holding or wrapped in Tino Rangatiratanga and Te Whakaputanga flags for the hīkoi — another tradition.
About 1000 people marched onto the Treaty grounds, all echoing a call that has gone out again and again over the past few days — Uphold te Tiriti — Toitū te Tiriti!
Hīkoi leader Reuben Taipari acknowledged those who walked with him and encouraged everyone to continue the fight for their mokopuna.
The sun rises over the Treaty Grounds in Waitangi on Waitangi Day 2024. Image: RNZ
“This new generation coming through now, it’s a powerful generation. They are the raukura, they are the graduates of kōhanga reo, kura kaupapa, whare wānanga,” he said.
“They don’t have a struggle with who they are . . . so we need to support that new generation.
“We have the experience, but they have the energy.”
The hīkoi crossing Waitangi Bridge. Photo: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
It did not take long for the grounds and surrounding markets to fill up, with every piece of shade taken as the sun was scorching.
Lines for drinks, ice creams or anything cold were endless, while teens jumped from the bridge into sea below to cool off and show off.
The roads in and out of Waitangi ground to a stand-still as an endless stream of cars kept coming.
A boy on a horse south of Kawakawa. Image: RNZ
The festival was pumping — each stage was packed with spectators as kapa haka and bands entertained. All the free rides and bouncy castles were full of happy kids.
The most popular item being sold was anything with a Tino Rangatira or Whakaputanga flag on it, or iwi merch.
All accommodation was booked out weeks ago, but it did not stop people coming — some sleeping in their cars just to be part of the day.
This could be one of the biggest turn-outs in Waitangi on Waitangi Day, with tens of thousands of people attending, coming to Waitangi to be part of the Kotahitanga movement, and enforce the message of Toitū te Tiriti.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
In a statement yesterday, Foreign Minister Winston Peters strongly urged the West Papuan pro-independence fighters holding Mehrtens to release him immediately without harm.
Peters said his continued detention served nobody’s interests.
“We strongly urge those holding Phillip to release him immediately and without harm,” he said.
For the last year, a wide range of New Zealand government agencies has been working extensively with Indonesian authorities and others towards securing Mehrtens release.
The response, led by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, has also been supporting his family.
The Foreign Minister said they knew Mehrtens was able to contact some friends and family just before Christmas to assure them that he was alive and well.
He said he had spoken with the Mehrtens family recently and assured them the government was exploring all avenues to bring the pilot home.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
An activist organisation is accusing the Aotearoa New Zealand police of brutality after arrests were made at a pro-Palestine protest in Lyttelton today.
About 60 people took part in the protest at Lyttelton Port this morning, and police said four people were arrested about 1pm after blocking traffic.
Protesters had blocked a tunnel and poured a liquid onto the road, a police spokesperson said.
Police arrest pro-Palestine protesters and accuse the group of blocking traffic in Lyttelton today. Image: Allforallpalestine/RNZ
Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) secretary Neil Scott issued a statement saying members were “repulsed” by police actions at the protest, which he labelled “disgusting”.
“The police arrested seven people and pepper sprayed many, including senior citizens protesting peacefully,” Scott said.
Police ‘aggression’ increased
Police “aggression” toward the protest activities had been increasing during that time, Scott said, and the group wanted an investigation into officers’ actions at the latest protest.
Protest organiser Ihorangi Reweti-Peters told RNZ that police used “brute force” to stop protesters from blocking the road.
“Police were sort of rarking people up and saying, ‘come on then’, and ‘do it’.”
“Everyone was sprayed — pepper sprayed — and then the people were arrested.”
Three of those arrested had been released by early this evening, Reweti-Peters said.
Police have been contacted for comment.
Protest organisers are planning a pro-Palestine protest at Parliament and the US Embassy in Wellington next Tuesday.
The pro-Palestine protesters, accused of blocking traffic in Lyttelton today. Image: Allforallpalestine/RNZ
Thousands of people gathered before dawn in the Bay of Islands today to commemorate Aotearoa New Zealand’s Treaty of Waitangi amid heightened tensions between the coalition government and Māori.
Waitangi Trust chair Pita Tipene welcomed everyone and said the massive crowds were vastly different from when the country was stuck in the grip of the covid-19 pandemic.
“Several years ago when this commemoration and therefore this dawn service was not held because of the pressures of covid, I nonetheless came here with my mokopuna,” he said.
“We were the only ones here, so when I look out at the throng of people it’s very different to that morning when we sat here on the maho and I was forced to give karakia myself.”
Tipene said moving forward as a nation means we were also moving forward as individuals “learning from each other”.
The Waitangi Day dawn service 2024 this morning. Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
“When we learn to live with each other and our personal circumstances, I think we can all move forward too.”
Alistair Reese told the crowds Henry Williams, an Anglican priest who translated the English draft of the Treaty in Māori and explained its provisions to Māori leaders, told the chiefs that the Treaty was “Queen Victoria’s act of love to you”.
Reese said the Treaty was understood by many as a “sacrificial union”.
“It is an ethic that seeks the best outcome for the other and to paraphrase the apostle Paul, love is patient, love is kind, love does not dishonour others and love never fails,” he said.
“So if the Treaty was an act of love by Victoria to Māori, by extension it needs also to be an act of love by our government to Māori.”
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon shared a Bible reading from 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 about working as one body.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins said the Treaty was the country’s guide to navigating the challenges in partnership.
“Te Tiriti binds us together as we work towards a fairer Aotearoa, in which all of our people can flourish and prosper, [it] inspires us to be kind, to be compassionate, to be grateful and to do good.”
Departing Greens co-leader James Shaw chose a popular quote about love and Tina Turner’s “what’s love got to do with it” was also quoted in the speeches.
‘We’ve got a lot of work to do’ – Luxon
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon speaks at the Treaty Grounds, Waitangi Day 2024. Image: RNZ
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told RNZ’s Waitangi Day programme he wanted a country that was unified but respected differences too.
“I actually think that’s what’s amazing about Waitangi … where else on Earth would you see everyone, with all the diverse sets of opinions and views … actually all choose to come together and express those views in one place. I can’t think of any country that does it, I think it’s very unique and special.”
He said he had been inspired.
He visited a settlement on Friday with “Third World housing in a First World country”.
Luxon said the solution to housing was easing the consenting process, partnering up with iwi, and getting the money to the community to provide housing.
“When you look at the issues across Māoridom . . . we’ve got a lot of work to do.”
Speaking about increased attention on ACT and New Zealand First, Luxon said that was the reality of MMP.
“New Zealand First, ACT and National are all very united on getting houses built for Māori up and down this country, so that’s where we have great commonality.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Aotearoa New Zealand coalition government leaders have rejected allegations they are degrading tino rangatiratanga, saying the proposed Treaty Principles Bill will not “delegitimise” Māori.
The criticism was levelled by protesters at the Waitangi Treaty Grounds today.
The leaders of National, ACT and NZ First faced a confronting reception, with the crowd booing NZ First’s Winston Peters and drowning out ACT’s David Seymour.
But Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said there was “genuinely a sense of unity” and asked people to look beyond the “drama” of the protests and find common ground.
Ahead of the government’s arrival at the treaty grounds, veteran activist Tāme Iti led a hīkoi to the meeting house. The crowd carried white flags and chanted “honour Te Tiriti”.
A group performing a haka in support of NZ First MP Shane Jones at Waitangi Grounds today. Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
A pōwhiri followed, with the biggest challenge reserved for Seymour, the leader of the ACT party and main proponent of the Treaty Principles Bill.
He faced a kāhui (group) of kaiwero, while Peters and Prime Minister Luxon were each challenged by one kaiwero.
Seymour then had his speech drowned out with a waiata before a protester walked onto the ātea and was stopped by security.
Seymour called for his opponents to “start talking about ideas and stop attacking people”.
Prime Minister Luxon accepts the wero (challenge) at Waitangi Treaty Grounds. Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
Several Waiwero (warriors) issued a challenge (wero) to ACT’s David Seymour at Waitangi today. Image: Photo: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
‘Get some manners’ Peters was booed during his speech but quickly fired back.
“You tell me whoever said we’re getting rid of the Treaty of Waitangi. Stop the crap,” he said.
“Get some manners . . . get an education.”
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters . . . “Stop the crap.” Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
Among the protesters was Eru Kingi-Kapa, who told RNZ the government’s kōrero was degrading to the tino rangatiratanga of te ao Māori.
Seymour knocked back the allegations, saying ACT had a “long history” of allowing people to self-determine.
“We believe in tino rangatiratanga, perhaps more so than anyone.”
The coalition was devolving decision-making power to Māori, and it was the previous Labour government that “centralised everything”, such as Te Pūkenga, taking power away from Māori, he said.
Seymour described the pōwhiri as “pretty fiery”, but said, “I give as good as I get”.
Ahead of the government’s arrival at the treaty grounds, veteran activist Tāme Iti led a hīkoi to the meeting house. The crowd carried white flags and chanted “honour Te Tiriti”.
IN PICTURES | Politicians from National, NZ First and ACT have been welcomed onto Waitangi Marae – with the fiercest challenge reserved for David Seymour.
Here are some of the best moments caught on camera.
‘Opening up a debate’ NZ First MP Shane Jones also rejected the allegations the government and the Treaty Principles Bill were degrading tino rangatiratanga.
“I don’t believe anything our government is doing is delegitimising a personal choice many people make to be Māori,” he said.
“If you choose to accentuate that part of your whakapapa, [you’re] entitled to do that.”
Jones said the government was funding wānanga and marae throughout the country: “None of that delegitimises Māori.”
However, the government was “opening up a debate” on the principles of the Treaty and how they were applied in New Zealand’s increasingly multicultural society, he said.
“We need to ensure, as this debate goes forward, we have a long-term view to the best interests of all Kiwis.”
Jones said he would take an active role in that debate.
He said some of the protesters were “unnecessarily rude”, but he understood where they were coming from.
“Young people . . . I was young once. Out in the hot sun, you can get carried away.”
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon speaks to the crowd at Waitangi today . . . “Every nation’s past isn’t perfect. But no other country has attempted to right its wrongs.” Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
National won’t support Treaty Principles Bill Luxon used his speech to reflect on Aotearoa’s history, before talking about his vision for Aotearoa in 2040.
The promises of the Treaty were not upheld, he said.
“Every nation’s past isn’t perfect. But no other country has attempted to right its wrongs.”
Speaking to media, he said National had “no intention, no commitment” to support ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill beyond the first reading.
There would also no referendum on the Treaty of Waitangi, he said.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The crowd booed a combative Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters and drowned out Associate Treaty Minister David Seymour, while Prime Minister Christopher Luxon sombrely reflected on history at the Waitangi Treaty Grounds today.
It was a confronting reception for the coalition government.
Thousands gathered for the annual commemorations and to carry on the kōrero begun about the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi at last month’s nation-wide hui.
The scene had been set over the weekend, as opposition parties, iwi leaders and the Kiingitanga arrived on Te Whare Runanga in a show of solidarity.
Waitangi National Trust Board chair Pita Tipene said there was a “lot of tension in the air” and Tāme Iti led a white flag hikoi onto the Treaty Grounds this morning.
Activist lawyer Annette Sykes called out ACT leader David Seymour for “tinkering with Te Tiriti” and presenting “rewritten lines in te reo Māori to the nation that don’t make any sense”.
‘Behind closed doors’
“David Seymour I want to talk to you from my Pākehā whakapapa, not my Māori one.,” she said.
“My father was a staunch Catholic. He would never tinker with the testament of the Bible.
“The ten commandments are what he lived by. He would never presume the audacity he had the ability to do that.
“But you Mr Seymour, who doesn’t speak Māori and has had to let a woman speak today.
“You are putting forward a rewrite of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. You do it behind closed doors.
“Thank goodness. Who is the hero that leaked the document from the Ministry of Justice?”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Dahdouh was later wounded in an Israeli drone attack that killed his colleague, Al Jazeera cameraman Samer Abudaqa. He is currently being treated for his injuries in a hospital Doha, Qatar.
Last month, his eldest son, Hamza — a journalist who worked with Al Jazeera — was also killed in an Israeli attack alongside fellow journalist Mustafa Thuraya, a freelancer.
Last Friday, India’s Kerala Media Academy announced that its Media Person of the Year award has been given to Wael Al-Dahdouh in recognition of his exceptional journalistic courage.
‘Global face of courage’
The academy said in a statement that Al-Dahdouh was “a global face of journalistic courage, who continues to work despite the heavy losses borne by his family”.
“His commitment and bravery are exemplary and set an example for other journalists not only in India but all over the world,” Bhaskar said.
According to UN reports, more than 122 journalists and media workers have been among more than 27,000 people killed in Israel’s nearly four-month offensive in Gaza.
Press freedom watchdog the Committee to Protect Journalists said last month that journalists were being killed in Gaza at a rate with no parallel in modern history and that there was “an apparent pattern of targeting of journalists and their families by the Israeli military.”
‘Struggling to keep alive’
Meanwhile, Ayman Nobani, reporting from Nablus in the occupied West Bank, says Palestinian journalists are “struggling to keep alive”.
He reported that Shorouk al-Assad, a member of the general secretariat of the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate, as saying that journalists in the besieged coastal enclave were living through unprecedented times as they were being targeted by Israeli forces.
“The most important challenge today is the survival of journalists in light of their targeting and bombardment by Israel, in addition to the killing of their families, the destruction of their neighbourhoods, and the death of their colleagues,” she told Al Jazeera.
She also said:
At least 73 media offices have been bombed since October 7;
All of Gaza’s radio stations are no longer operating due to bombardment, power outages, or the killing or displacement of staff;
Only 40 journalists remain in northern Gaza and they are besieged and isolated, with no means to send food or relief items to them; and
Some 70 journalists have lost close family members
Pacific protesters were prominent in the 17th week of Aotearoa New Zealand solidarity demonstrations for Palestine and a ceasefire in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza in Auckland today.
Flags of Fiji, Tonga and West Papua were featured alongside the sea of Palestinian banners and at least one group declared themselves as “Tongans for Palestine – Long live the intifada”.
The rally in Auckland’s Te Komititanga — also known as Britomart Square, an urban transport hub — drew a large crowd in the heart of New Zealand’s largest city shopping precinct.
Thousands of people have been taking part in the weekly protest rallies and marches across New Zealand since the war on Gaza began after a deadly attack on Israel last October 7 following 75 years of repression and occupation since the Nakba — the “catastrophe” — in 1948.
The death toll is now more than 27,000 — and more than 900 Palestinians have been killed since the ICJ (International Court of Justice) ruled that Israel must take steps to prevent civilian deaths.
Speakers in Auckland today drew parallels between the Zionist settler colonial project in Palestine and NZ’s colonial history, saying the Waitangi Treaty was now under threat from NZ’s most rightwing government in history.
The protest came just two days before Waitangi Day — 6 February 1840 — the national holiday marking the signing of the foundational Treaty of Waitangi between the British Crown and 500 traditional Māori chiefs.
“There are many things we can do in Aotearoa to stand on the right side of history,” said one of the organisers, Josie Sims of Solidarity Action Network Aotearoa (SANA).
“We’re calling on the NZ Defence Force to refuse their orders to go to Yemen. We’re asking for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador, and we’re asking that this government takes a clear position on an immediate ceasefire.”
The West Papuan Morning Star flag (red, white and blue) of independence – banned by Indonesia – along with the flags of Tino Rangatiratanga and Palestine fly high in Auckland today. Image: David Robie/APRMock corpses in Britomart Square (Te Komititanga) today representing the 27,000 Palestinians killed – mostly women and chIldren – since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza on October 7. Image: David Robie/APRThree “Jews for a Free Palestine” among the protesters at Britomart Square (Te Komititanga) today demanding a ceasefire in the war on Gaza. Image: David Robie/APR
The Palestinian Ambassador to Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific, Dr Izzat Abdulhadi, last night appealed for “unity”, “strategy” and “networking” for the pathway forward to an independent state.
Responding to speculation about “the day after” when Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza is finally over at a community event in Auckland’s Western Springs Garden Community Hall, he condemned draconian Zionist Israeli “plans” for the Occupied Palestinian Territories without consultation.
It was up to Palestinians themselves to decide through a process of self-determination, he told a crowd of about 60 people.
Palestine’s Ambassador Dr Izzat Abdulhadi . . . provided updates on the Israeli war on Gaza catastrophe and reflections on the future. Image: David Robie/APR
And he warned that reconstruction was a huge task with the United Nations indicating in a new report that 30 percent of the besieged enclaves buildings and much of the infrastructure are destroyed.
But first, the ambassador said, a permanent ceasefire was urgently needed to cope with the humanitarian needs of the Gaza carnage.
Facilitator Samar Al Malalha highlighted the death toll of more than 27,000 civilians — mostly women and children — after 118 days, but warned people not to just “think numbers”.
He said they ought to empathise with each and every person and child — and sometimes entire families — who had been killed.
A poetic vision
Architect and poet Dr Sameh Daraghmeh presented a poetic vision of the Palestinian diaspora and tangata whenua.
Architect and poet Dr Sameh Daraghmeh . . . a poetic vision of the Palestinian diaspora and tangata whenua relationship. Image: David Robie/APR
Meanwhile, more than 800 European and American officials have signed a letter to their governments denouncing Israel’s war on Gaza as “one of the worst human catastrophes of this century”.
According to current and former officials spearheading or supporting the initiative, the letter marks the first time that officials from US and Israel ally nations across the Atlantic have united to publicly criticise their governments over the war.
The officials argue that they are speaking up because they, as civil servants, consider that it is their duty to help improve policy and to work in their nations’ interests, and that they are speaking up because they believe their governments need to change direction on the war.
“Our governments’ current policies weaken their moral standing and undermine their ability to stand up for freedom, justice and human rights globally,” the letter was quoted by The New York Times as saying.
‘Breathtakingly hypocritical’
There was a “plausible risk” that their governments’ policies were contributing to “grave violations of international humanitarian law, war crimes and even ethnic cleansing or genocide,” it added.
The document protected the identities of signers as they feared reprisal.
Al Jazeera senior political analyst Marwan Bisahara said it was an important step for civil service officials to join other dissenting segments of society in the West who have called for an end to the war.
“We are already in the fourth month of this war, which has killed so many people — children, old people, young people,” he said.
“The fact that they [letter signees] too are joining in . . . accumulates pressure on Western governments that have been breathtakingly hypocritical.”
Bishara also said the International Court of Justice’s ruling last month likely played a role in the crafting of the letter.
“I think once the court [ICJ] came out with its decision imposing six interim orders, it in many ways encouraged a lot of people to start speaking more and more for justice [in Gaza].”
New Zealand’s commitment to the rule of law means it must also go beyond the UN court’s genocide case findings on Gaza, writes the University of Auckland’s Treasa Dunworth.
ANALYSIS:By Treasa Dunworth
As Newsroom has reported, 15 aid agencies have joined forces to call on the Aotearoa New Zealand government to do more to encourage an immediate and sustainable ceasefire in Gaza, in the wake of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decision.
Those 15 agencies are joining an international and increasingly loud chorus of calls for an immediate ceasefire.
I would go further, and remind the government that whatever it thinks of last month’s ICJ ruling, New Zealand has a number of international legal obligations to inform its response to Israel’s military attack on Gaza.
As most international commentary has highlighted, even fixated on, the ICJ did not order a ceasefire as South Africa requested. But the fact that it didn’t is a manifestation of how constrained the court was.
Despite its lofty title, the ICJ (sometimes referred to as the “World Court”) isn’t a “world” court in any meaningful sense of the word. It only has jurisdiction to consider issues in cases where countries have explicitly agreed to the court’s authority over them.
In this current litigation, the court was able to consider the case only on the basis that both South Africa and Israel are States Parties to the Genocide Convention. That meant South Africa had to frame its application through a “genocide lens”, and that the court had no power to go beyond the obligations arising out of that treaty. This jurisdictional conundrum partly explains why the court did not order a ceasefire — it didn’t have the authority to do so.
It also partly explains why the court could not order Hamas to release the remaining Israeli hostages. Hamas was not a party to the proceedings (the court can only hear proceedings on disputes between states), and despite the claim by Israel in its oral pleadings, the hostage taking by Hamas and their subsequent mistreatment and killing didn’t “plausibly”, according to the court, meet the threshold of genocide.
But the court did order Israel to take all measures in its power to prevent genocide, and ordered Israel to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions faced by Palestinians in Gaza.
Orders fall within ‘genocide jurisdiction’
These orders fall within the “genocide jurisdiction” because the treaty defines genocide as not only direct killing, but also “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”.
An immediate ceasefire would go a long way toward Israel complying with these orders so the calls for a ceasefire are well made, despite the court not having the power to order one.
What is New Zealand’s role in all this? What are the moral and legal responsibilities it has and should fulfil?
In its decision, the court (re)confirmed that all states parties to the Genocide Convention have a “common interest” in ensuring the prevention, suppression, and punishment of genocide. That includes New Zealand, which has a legal obligation to do what it can to ensure that Israel complies with the court’s orders.
This is not a question of New Zealand’s choice of foreign policy, but a legal obligation.
The second relevant international obligation for New Zealand arises from international humanitarian law (IHL) — the body of law which governs the conduct of war, and which includes prohibitions against the direct targeting of civilians, causing superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering, the taking of hostages, the use of “human shields” and engaging in indiscriminate attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure.
These rules don’t just apply to the parties directly involved in any given conflict — in this instance, Israel and Hamas. The relevant treaties stipulate all states have a shared responsibility “to ensure respect” for these rules. That responsibility exists independently of the lack of ICJ jurisdiction to consider these matters.
Must act in good faith
There is a third legal obligation for New Zealand in the wake of these orders. Although decisions of the court are only binding as between the parties to a case (here South Africa and Israel), as a member of the United Nations, New Zealand has a legal obligation to act in good faith towards the court, being one of the organs of the UN and its principal legal body.
This obligation aligns with New Zealand’s self-professed commitment to the international rule of law.
Thus, regardless of political preferences and whether the current government agrees or disagrees with the court’s findings, the findings have been made and New Zealand ought not undermine the court or the international rule of law.
Governments of all political persuasions repeatedly pronounce that a small nation such as ours depends on the international rule of law and a rules-based international order.
Now is the time for New Zealand to step up and defend that order, even if it feels uncomfortable, even if it annoys some of our “friends” (such as the US). We are legally obliged to step up and speak out.
Dr Treasa Dunworth is an associate professor, Faculty of Law, at the University of Auckland. First published by Newsroom and republished by Asia Pacific Report with the author’s permission.
This comes as the Banaban Human Rights Defenders Network has called on the Fiji government to investigate human rights violations on Rabi.
Rabi became home for Banaban Islanders after the destruction of Banaba due to phosphate mining by the colonial powers.
Rabi Administrator Iakoba Karutake . . . islanders’ human rights network concerned over “authoritarian control”. Image: RNZ Pacific/Fiji Sun
The network has expressed its concern at the authoritarian control Karutake is assuming.
The former FijiFirst government of Voreqe Bainimarama replaced the Rabi Council of Leaders in 2013 with a temporary administrator and the network wants the council re-instated.
No consultation claim
“A spokesperson with the group, Rae Bainteiti, said Karutake had acted without consulting the people.
Bainteiti said the administrator’s role only continued to exist because the Fiji government had neglected to hold elections for the Rabi Council of Leaders.
He also asked whether such a regulation was in conflict with the Fiji Constitution.
However, Karutake told RNZ Pacific that he had conducted community consultations and he believed the people of Rabi understood what he was trying to achieve.
He claimed people like Bainteiti were stirring people up but he wanted to maintain the calm.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Banaban Human Rights Defenders Network spokesperson Rae Bainteiti . . . claims Karutake has acted without consulting the people. Image: RNZ Pacific / Kelvin Anthony
New Zealand would likely continue funding the United Nations agency delivering aid in Palestine if concerns about its staff were dealt with, the Foreign Affairs Minister says.
It follows accusations by Israel that 12 agency staff were involved in the Hamas’ attacks on October 7, which left about 1140 dead and about 250 taken as hostages.
NZ Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters . . . “I think the New Zealand people would want us to respond to the crisis.” Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters told RNZ Morning Report the allegations warranted a proper investigation.
But he said the critical issue was the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
According to the Palestine Health Ministry more than 26,000 people have been killed in Gaza since Israel launched a war on the besieged enclave in response to October 7.
Awaiting UN investigation
Peters said it was possible there were a few “rotten apples” within UNRWA.
“If the matter has been dealt with, and with assurances that it does not happen in the future, then the crisis is of a level, we must, I believe, and I think the New Zealand people would want us to respond to the crisis rather than to react in that way and punish a whole lot of innocent people because of the actions of a few.” he said.
Peters said it would be premature to make a decision before the UN finished its investigation.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Speaking after today’s announcement, co-leader Marama Davidson refused to guarantee she too would not step down before the election but said she would stay on for at least the next 12 months.
Numbering 15 MPs, the team is its largest ever but also largely inexperienced. Among the mix in the co-leadership possibilities is the party’s first MP with a Pasifika whakapapa — Teanau Tuiono.
“It has been the privilege of my lifetime to serve as New Zealand’s Climate Change Minister for the last six years and as Green Party co-leader for nearly nine,” Shaw said in a statement.
“I’m very proud of what the Green Party has achieved over the last eight years.”
He said he would remain in Parliament to support his Members Bill, which would insert a new clause into the Bill of Rights Act stating that everyone has a right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.
The bill was introduced to Parliament in December and is yet to have its first reading.
He said the Greens had become party of government, with ministers, for the first time and had made political history by increasing its support at the end of each of our two terms — “a feat no other government support partner had achieved”.
Following Shaw’s exit from Parliament, two-thirds will be fresh-faced first-timers and just Davidson and Julie Anne Genter will have any experience of sitting in opposition.
So who are some potential contenders for the leadership?
Top Green Party leadership contenders . . . Chlöe Swarbrick (from left), Teanau Tuiono and Julie Anne Genter. Images: RNZ/Angus Dreaver, Samuel Rillstone, VNP/Johnny Blades
Chlöe Swarbrick (Auckland Central MP):
Ranked third on the party list, the Auckland Central MP appears to be the popular choice.
After losing the mayoral race in 2016, she joined the Green Party.
Winning the Auckland Central seat in 2020 and becoming the country’s youngest MP in 42 years, she has proven her popularity from early on.
She is the first Green MP ever to hold on to a seat for more than one term after winning again in the 2023 elections.
Swarbrick denied leadership ambitions in 2022, when more than 25 percent of delegates at the party’s annual general meeting voted to reopen Shaw’s position.
Still, she commands the highest profile of all Green MPs, regularly registering in preferred prime minister polls ahead of the party’s co-leaders.
If selected for the co-leadership, the 29-year-old would also become the youngest to co-lead the party.
Teanau Tuiono (List MP):
Teanau Tuiono (Ngāpuhi and Ngāi Takoto) moved to the fifth ranking on the party’s list after Jan Logie and Eugenie Sage retired in the 2023 elections.
As the party’s candidate Palmerston North, he became a list Member of Parliament — the party’s first MP with Pasifika whakapapa – in the 2020 general elections. And again was re-elected as a list MP in 2023.
Last year, his Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill was introduced in Parliament. The bill would restore the right to New Zealand citizenship for people from Western Samoa who were born between 1924 and 1949 — a right promised to them and found owed them by New Zealand’s then highest court.
In December, Tuiono was appointed as the third assistant speaker — the first Green Party MP to become a member on the speaker team.
He recently expressed concern over the lack of Pasifika voices in the government.
Julie Anne Genter (Rongotai MP): The MP for Rongotai currently stands in the fourth rank on the list. Since 2011, she has been elected to each Parliament while on the party’s list.
In 2017, Genter put her name forward for the Mount Albert byelection, but she came in second after Jacinda Ardern.
Genter served as the minister for women, associate minister for health and associate minister for transport from 2017 to 2020.
The Ombudsman twice investigated a letter she sent to then Transport Minister Phil Twyford during pre-consultation on the Let’s Get Wellington Moving indicative package draft Cabinet paper.
National had accused her of convincing Twyford to push back construction of a second Mount Victoria tunnel for at least a decade.
After the next transport minister released the letter in full, Genter said she stood by her comments and that the contents clearly reflected the Green party’s position.
Rules and voting Nominations will open on 31 January and close on 14 February.
Members will attend local meetings and vote, with a new co-leader to be announced on March 10.
Each branch is entitled to a certain number of votes proportionate to the number of members who live in that electorate.
The party’s rules were changed in 2022, removing the requirement for a male co-leader. Instead, members voted to mandate one female leader and one leader of any gender. One leader must also be Māori.
As Davidson meets both the female and Māori criteria, the vacancy can be filled by any Green member, in or out of Parliament.
Green Party co-leaders Marama Davidson and James Shaw . . . . political history in Aotearoa New Zealand. Image: Niva Chittock/RNZ News
Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark, who led the UN Development Programme which oversees UNRWA, told RNZ Morning Report today it was the biggest platform for getting humanitarian aid into Gaza for a populations that is 85 percent displaced.
People are on the verge on starvation and going without medical supplies, she said.
“If you’re going to defund and destroy this platform, then the misery and suffering of the people under bombardment can only increase and you can only have more deaths.”
Clark said it was “most regrettable that countries have acted in this precipitous way to defund the organisation on the basis of allegations”.
Al Jazeera reports that top Palestinian officials and Hamas have criticised the decision by nearly a dozen Western countries led by the US to suspend funding (totalling more than US$667 million) for UNRWA — the UN relief agency for Palestinians — and called for an immediate reversal of the move, which entails “great” risk.
Ireland, Norway and Spain and others (with funding totalling more than $497 million) have confirmed continued support for UNRWA, saying the agency does crucial work to help Palestinians displaced and in desperate need of assistance in Gaza.
The Norwegian aid agency said the people of Gaza would “starve in the streets” without UNRWA humanitarian assistance.
Hamas’ media office said in a post on Telegram: “We ask the UN and the international organisations to not cave into the threats and blackmail” from Israel.
Defunding ‘not right decision’
Former PM Clark did not deny the allegations made were serious, but said defunding the agency without knowing the outcome of the investigation was not the right decision, RNZ reports.
“I led an organisation that had tens of thousands of people on contracts at any one time. Could I say, hand on heart, people never did anything wrong? No I couldn’t. But what I could say was that any allegations would be fully investigated and results made publicly known,” she said.
UNRWA funding cuts — why Israel is trying to destroy the UN Palestinian aid agency. Video: Al Jazeera
“That’s exactly what the head of UNRWA has said, it’s what the Secretary-General’s saying, that process is underway, but this is not a time to be just cutting off the funding because a small minority of UNRWA staff face allegations.”
Luxon suggested Clark’s plea would not affect New Zealand’s response.
“I appreciate that, but we’re the government, and they’re serious allegations, they need to be understood and investigated and when the foreign minister [Winston Peters] says that he’s done that and he’s happy for us to contribute and continue to contribute, we’ll do that.”
He compared the funding of about $1 million each year (in June) with the $10 million in humanitarian assistance provided by the government for the relief effort — “and we’ve split that money between the International Red Cross and also the World Food Programme”.
Clark said people could starve to death or die because they did not receive the medication they needed in the meantime.
If major donor countries like the United States and Germany continued to withhold funding, UNRWA would go down and there was no alternative, she said.
Clark did not believe there was any coincidence in the allegations being made known at the same time as the International Court of Justice’s ruling on the situation in Gaza.
According to the BBC, the court ordered Israel to do everything in its power to refrain from killing and injuring Palestinians and do more to “prevent and punish” public incitement to genocide. Tel Aviv must report back to the court on its actions within a month.
Clark said the timing of the UNRWA allegations was an attempt to deflect the significant rulings made of the court and dismiss them.
Israel had provided the agency with information alleging a dozen staff were involved in the October 7 attack by Hamas fighters in southern Israel, which left about 1300 dead and about 250 taken as hostages.
More than 26,000 people — mostly women and children — have been killed in Gaza since Israel launched a major military operation in response, according to the enclave’s Health Ministry.
UNRWA was founded in the wake of the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 to provide hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees who were forcibly displaced with education, healthcare, social services and jobs. It started operations in 1950.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
About 500 protesters marched through the heart of Auckland’s tourist suburb of Devonport today to the Royal New Zealand Navy base, accusing the government of backing genocide in the Middle East.
Demanding a “ceasefire now” in Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza that has killed almost 27,000 Palestinians — mostly women and children — so far, the protesters called on the New Zealand government to scrap its support for the US-led Red Sea maritime security operation against Yemen’s Houthis.
Speakers contrasted New Zealand’s “proud independent foreign policy” and nuclear-free years under former Labour prime ministers Norman Kirk and David Lange with the “gutless” approach of current Prime Minister Christopher Luxon.
Among many placards condemning the New Zealand government’s stance, one read: “We need a leader not a follower — grow some balls Luxon”. Others declared “It is shameful for NZ troops to aid genocide”, “Hands off Yemen” and “Blood on your hands”.
Led by the foreign affairs activist group Te Kūaka NZA and Palestinian Youth Aotearoa, the march was organised in reaction to Luxon’s announcement last week that New Zealand would deploy six NZ Defence Force officers to the Middle East in support of the US-led attacks on Yemen.
“We are appalled our government is dragging New Zealand into a new war in the Middle East instead of supporting diplomatic efforts to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza,” Te Kūaka spokesperson Dr Arama Rata said.
Police guard at the entrance to Auckland’s Devonport Naval Base today. Image: David Robie/APR
‘Unpopular, dangerous move’
“This is an unpopular, undemocratic, and dangerous move, taken without a parliamentary mandate, or authorisation from the United Nations Security Council, which could further inflame regional tensions.”
Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) secretary Neil Scott branded the New Zealand stance as preferring “trade over humanity!”
A child carrying a “blood on your hands” placard today protesting over the childrens’ deaths in the Gaza Strip. Image: David Robie/APR
He said that in South Africa’s case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) the ruling indicated “plausible genocide” by Israel in its war on Gaza and that state was now on trial with an order to comply with six emergency measures and report back to The Hague within one month.
“This is something that has been obvious to all of us for months based on Israel’s actions on the ground in Gaza and Israeli politicians’ stated intent,” Scott said.
“Yet [our] government refuses to call for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire. It refuses to take any action to oppose that genocide.”
Referring to the Houthis (as Ansarallah are known in the West) and their blockade of the Red Sea, Scott said: “Ships and containers heading to Israel — no other ships to be impacted.
“They [Houthis] state that they are carrying out an obligation to oppose genocide under Article 1 of the Genocide Convention. They will end their blockade when Israel ends the genocide.
The lines are drawn . . . the “ceasefire now” and “hands off Yemen” protest at Devonport Naval Base today. Image: David Robie/APR
‘Oppose Israeli genocide’
“This is something every country in the world is meant to do. Oppose Israeli genocide — that includes Aotearoa.
“So what does Prime Minister Luxon, Minister of Foreign Affairs [Winston] Peters and Minister of Defence [Judith] Collins do? They decide to send our sailors to the Red Sea to defend ships — getting our Navy to be complicit in defending Israeli genocide.”
His comments were greeted with loud cries of “Shame”.
Scott declared that the protesters were calling on the government to “acknowledge New Zealand’s obligations” under Article 1 of the Genocide Convention; expel the Israeli ambassador until the genocide ends, and to “immediately rescind the order to send our sailors” to join the US forces “defending Israeli genocide”.
The protesters also called on New Zealand’s Defence Force chief Air Marshal Kevin Short and Navy chief Rear Admiral David Proctor to stand by the legal obligations of the Genocide Convention to oppose Israeli genocide.
Pointing to the HMNZS Philomel base as Navy officers and a police guard looked on, Green Party MP Steve Abel referenced New Zealand’s “proud episode 50 years ago” when the late Prime Minister Norman Kirk dispatched the frigate HMNZS Otago (and later the Canterbury) to Moruroa atoll in 1973 to protest against French nuclear tests.
He also highlighted Prime Minister David Lange’s championing of nuclear-free New Zealand and the nuclear-free Pacific Rarotonga Treaty “a decade later” in the 1980s.
Abel called for a return to the “courageous” independent foreign policies that New Zealanders had fought for in the past.
Today’s Devonport naval base protest followed a series of demonstrations and a social gathering in Cornwall Park over the holiday weekend in the wake of the “first step” success against impunity by South Africa’s legal team at The Hague last Friday. Other solidarity protests have taken place at some 17 locations across New Zealand.
Rallying cries near the entrance to the Devonport Naval Base today. Image: David Robie/APR“Grow some balls Luxon” placard in the protest today at the Devonport Naval Base. Image: David Robie/APRGreen Party MP Steve Abel . . . contrasted the Luxon government’s weak stance over the Middle East with the “proud” days of the Royal NZ Navy in protesting against French nuclear testing.
“In Gaza, we have nearly two million people of the 2.3 million residents completely dependent on UNRWA for their daily shelter, food, and survival.”
Sharp said what was happening now in Gaza was a man-made famine.
“This loss of funding comes at a time where UNRWA is a lifeline for millions of people,” he said.
Sharp said they were urging the countries that had cut funding to reverse those decisions.
He said the allegations of staff from UNRWA being involved in the October 7 attacks came as a shock.
“United Nations employees must remain neutral, independent, and impartial,” he said.
UNRWA is ‘humanitarian’
“UNRWA is a humanitarian agency — we don’t have a police force, we don’t have an intelligence service or a criminal justice capacity, so we have no authority to monitor what our staff do outside their work.
“But, we also don’t work in a vacuum, our staff are drawn from a population which is under ongoing occupation and we are aware of the neutrality risks that this poses,” Sharp said.
New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said it would review its contribution for the UNRWA, which is under fire after 12 of its staff allegedly took part in the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7.
The ministry said in a statement that this country had been providing UNRWA with $1 million a year in funding.
“As we always do prior to releasing funds, we will assess the situation again prior to that payment being made,” the statement said.
At least nine countries, including top donors the US and Germany, had paused funding after allegations by Israel about 12 staff who had since been dismissed.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
“In Gaza, we have nearly two million people of the 2.3 million residents completely dependent on UNRWA for their daily shelter, food, and survival.”
Sharp said what was happening now in Gaza was a man-made famine.
“This loss of funding comes at a time where UNRWA is a lifeline for millions of people,” he said.
Sharp said they were urging the countries that had cut funding to reverse those decisions.
He said the allegations of staff from UNRWA being involved in the October 7 attacks came as a shock.
“United Nations employees must remain neutral, independent, and impartial,” he said.
UNRWA is ‘humanitarian’
“UNRWA is a humanitarian agency — we don’t have a police force, we don’t have an intelligence service or a criminal justice capacity, so we have no authority to monitor what our staff do outside their work.
“But, we also don’t work in a vacuum, our staff are drawn from a population which is under ongoing occupation and we are aware of the neutrality risks that this poses,” Sharp said.
New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said it would review its contribution for the UNRWA, which is under fire after 12 of its staff allegedly took part in the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7.
The ministry said in a statement that this country had been providing UNRWA with $1 million a year in funding.
“As we always do prior to releasing funds, we will assess the situation again prior to that payment being made,” the statement said.
At least nine countries, including top donors the US and Germany, had paused funding after allegations by Israel about 12 staff who had since been dismissed.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Agnes Callamard, the secretary general of Amnesty International, has called the funding cuts to the UN’s Palestinian humanitarian relief agency a “heartless decision” by some of the world’s richest countries “to punish the most vulnerable population on earth because of the alleged crimes of 12 people”.
In a post on X, formerly Twitter, she added: “Right after the ICJ [International Court of Justice] ruling finding risk of genocide. Sickening.”
While nine Western nations, including the US, rushed to suspend UNRWA’s funding after allegations that members from the agency participated in the October 7 attack, the same countries have failed to formally revise their ties to Israel despite mounting reports of genocidal abuse by Israeli forces.
Sickening heartless decision of the richest countries in the world to punish the most vulnerable population on earth because of the alleged crimes of 12 people. Right after the ICJ ruling finding risk of genocide. Sickening. https://t.co/ARrPqUdyHA
The Director-General of the World Health Organisation, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, said that “cutting off funding” to UNRWA at what he called a “critical moment” would only “hurt the people of Gaza who desperately need support”.
The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs highlighted the plight of some 1.9 million displaced Palestinians in Gaza with the main UN agency delivering humanitarian aid losing its major financial backing.
“Scenes of forcibly displaced people are a disgrace to humanity,” it said in a statement.
“Over half a million Palestinians in Khan Younis were instructed by the occupying forces to evacuate their homes, including hospitals and health centres, in a cruel expansion and deepening of forced displacement from southern regions.”
UNRWA employs about 30,000 people and provides humanitarian aid, education, health and social services to 5.9 eligible Palestinian refugees living in Gaza, the occupied West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.
The UNRWA donors funding breakdown in 2022. Graphic: Al Jazeera
The UN agency received almost US$1.2 billion in pledged in 2020, with the US being the biggest donor providing $343.9 million. The fifth-largest donor, Norway, provided $34.2 million and is continuing is funding in spite of the action by the US and its allies.
Hani Mahmoud, reporting for Al Jazeera from Rafah, southern Gaza, said the entire city of Khan Younis continued to be pounded by Israeli bombardment.
“Thousands of people have been ordered to evacuate and are going through security checkpoints with facial recognition technology,” he said.
“Women and children are separated from the men. A large number of people have been detained and dehumanised during the process.
Video showed people “trying to flee the horror” on different routes away from the bombing they were targeted by tank and artillery shells and small-arms fire, and also Israeli attack drones that hovered low over the city.
There were reports of many people killed.
“Intense fighting is now taking place in the southeastern part of Khan Younis at the edges of Rafah city,” he said.
The documented heart-wrenching scenes of forced #displacement, under the occupation’s aggression, unfold a tragedy for thousands of Palestinian refugees. This includes women, children, the elderly, individuals with special needs, and the sick, forced to flee from central areas of… pic.twitter.com/SkGqRPSqKz
Meanwhile, a “Return to Gaza Conference” in Jerusalem — attended by Israeli cabinet ministers and members of the parliamentary Knesset — has laid out a plan for the re-establishment of 15 Israeli settlements and the addition of six new ones, on where recently destroyed Palestinian communities stood.
An Israeli humanitarian lawyer, Itay Epshtain, said the fact that Israeli officials would convene a high level meeting to plan what he called an act of aggression — the acquisition of occupied territory and its colonisation — was an early indication of intent to breach the provisional measures ordered by the International Court of Justice last Friday.
That #Israeli officials would convene a high level meeting to plan an act of aggression – the acquisition of occupied territory and its colonization – is an early indication of intent to breach the provisional measures order by the @CIJ_ICJ.
The International Court of Justice rejected Israel’s request to dismiss the genocide case brought against it by South Africa yesterday, ruling by a massive majority that the case shall proceed and instructing Israel to refrain from killing and harming Palestinians in the interim.
Imperial media are aggressively emphasising the absence of a ceasefire order in their headlines and many Israel apologists are framing that absence as a victory for their favorite ethnostate.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu . . . “The charge of genocide levelled against Israel is not only false, it’s outrageous.” Image: AJ screenshot APR
But such performative chest-thumping is severely undercut by the way high-level Israeli officials are currently accusing the ICJ of antisemitism and saying Israel should ignore its rulings.
“The international court of justice went above and beyond when it granted South Africa’s antisemitic request to discuss the claim of genocide in Gaza, and now refuses to reject the petition outright,” complained Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant in response to the ruling.
Israeli officials accuse international court of justice of antisemitic bias https://t.co/QoUltAdHgG
“The decision of the antisemitic court in The Hague proves what was already known: This court does not seek justice, but rather the persecution of Jewish people,” said Israeli national security minister Itamar Ben Gvir.
Ben Gvir also tweeted “Hague Schmague” immediately after the ruling was issued, which will probably go down in history as the most Israeli tweet of all time.
Everyone’s arguing about whether or not the ICJ’s ruling is helpful, and I don’t know enough one way or the other to be sure either way, but from where things stand right now it does seem unlikely to me that managers of the Israeli war machine would be getting this freaked out and whipping out their tired old “antisemitism” song and dance if there wasn’t something of substance to it.
The genocide case against Israel. Video: Al Jazeera
International lawyer Francis Boyle, who won provisional measures against Yugoslavia at the ICJ in 1993, said the following of the ruling:
“This is a massive, overwhelming legal victory for the Republic of South Africa against Israel on behalf of the Palestinians. The UN General Assembly now can suspend Israel from participation in its activities as it did for South Africa and Yugoslavia.
“It can admit Palestine as a full member. And — especially since the International Criminal Court has been a farce — it can establish a tribunal to prosecute the highest level officials of the Israeli government, both civilian and military.”
So take that for whatever that’s worth to you. In any case the butchery in Gaza still urgently needs to be ended, and only time will tell whether Friday’s development had any major effect on the outcome of this horror.
But what I wouldn’t have given to be a fly on the wall at the meetings they were having at the US State Department on Friday.
The ACT Party’s election promise of a referendum for Aotearoa New Zealand to redefine and enshrine the “principles” of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) is likely to dominate debate at this year’s Rātana and Waitangi Day events.
ACT’s coalition agreement with the National Party commits the government to supporting a Treaty Principles Bill for select committee consideration. The bill may not make it into law, but the idea is raising considerable alarm.
Leaked draft advice to Cabinet from the Ministry of Justice says the principles should be defined in legislation because “their importance requires there be certainty and clarity about their meaning”. The advice also says ACT’s proposal will:
change the nature of the principles from reflecting a relationship akin to a partnership between the Crown and Māori to reflecting the relationship the Crown has with all citizens of New Zealand. This is not supported by either the spirit of the Treaty or the text of the Treaty.
Setting aside arguments that the notion of “partnership” diminishes self-determination, the 10,000 people attending a hui at Tūrangawaewae marae near Hamilton last weekend called by King Tūheitia were motivated by the prospect of the Treaty being diminished.
Do we need Treaty principles? The Treaty principles were developed and elaborated by parliaments, courts and the Waitangi Tribunal over more than 50 years to guide policy implementation and mediate tensions between the Māori and English texts of the document.
The Māori text, which more than 500 rangatira (chiefs) signed, conferred the right to establish government on the British Crown. The English text conferred absolute sovereignty; 39 rangatira signed this text after having it explained in Māori, a language that has no concept of sovereignty as a political and legal authority to be given away.
Because the English text wasn’t widely signed, there is a view that it holds no influential standing, and that perhaps there isn’t a tension to mediate. Former chief justice Sian Elias has said: “It can’t be disputed that the Treaty is actually the Māori text”.
On Saturday, Tūheitia said: “There’s no principles, the Treaty is written, that’s it.”
This view is supported by arguments that the principles are reductionist and take attention away from the substance of Te Tiriti’s articles: the Crown may establish government; Māori may retain authority over their own affairs and enjoy citizenship of the state in ways that reflect equal tikanga (cultural values).
Author and Professor of Māori Studies at the University of Auckland, Margaret Mutu, who was in attendance at the recent hui-ā-iwi at Tūrangawaewae marae, says the government is required to honour Te Tiriti o Waitangi.https://t.co/zSusoi5RERpic.twitter.com/dMrxjtMRan
Democratic or undemocratic? The ACT Party says this is undemocratic because it gives Māori a privileged voice in public decision making. Of the previous government, ACT has said:
Labour is trying to make New Zealand an unequal society on purpose. It believes there are two types of New Zealanders. Tangata Whenua, who are here by right, and Tangata Tiriti who are lucky to be here.
Liberal democracy was not the form of government Britain established in 1840. There’s even an argument that state government doesn’t concern Māori. The Crown exercises government only over “its people” – settlers and their descendants. Māori political authority is found in tino rangatiratanga and through shared decision making on matters of common interest.
Tino rangatiratanga has been defined as “the exercise of ultimate and paramount power and authority”. In practice, like all power, this is relative and relational to the power of others, and constrained by circumstances beyond human control.
But the power of others has to be fair and reasonable, and rangatiratanga requires freedom from arbitrary interference by the state. That way, authority and responsibility may be exercised, and independence upheld, in relation to Māori people’s own affairs and resources.
Assertions of rangatiratanga Social integration — especially through intermarriage, economic interdependence and economies of scale — makes a rigid “them and us” binary an unlikely path to a better life for anybody.
However, rangatiratanga might be found in Tūheitia’s advice about the best form of protest against rewriting the Treaty principles to diminish the Treaty itself:
Be who we are, live our values, speak our reo (language), care for our mokopuna (children), our awa (rivers), our maunga (mountains), just be Māori. Māori all day, every day.
As the government introduces measures to reduce the use of te reo Māori in public life, repeal child care and protection legislation that promotes Māori leadership and responsibility, and repeal water management legislation that ensures Māori participation, Tūheitia’s words are all assertions of rangatiratanga.
Those government policies sit alongside the proposed Treaty Principles Bill to diminish Māori opportunities to be Māori in public life. For the ACT Party, this is necessary to protect democratic equality.
In effect, the proposed bill says that to be equal, Māori people can’t contribute to public decisions with reference to their own culture. As anthropologist Dr Anne Salmond has written, this means the state cannot admit there are “reasonable people who reason differently”.
Today thousands answered the Māori Kings call for unity by descending on Tūrangawaewae marae for a national hui to discuss Act’s proposal to redefine the principles of the treaty. Here’s David Seymour being grilled by @moanatribe on his questionable use of the word apartheid. pic.twitter.com/1E9pItTqLm
Liberal democracy and freedom Equality through sameness is a false equality that liberal democracy is well-equipped to contest. Liberal democracy did not emerge to suppress difference.
It is concerned with much more than counting votes to see who wins on election day.
Liberal democracy is a political system intended to manage fair and reasonable differences in an orderly way. This means it doesn’t concentrate power in one place. It’s not a select few exercising sovereignty as the absolute and indivisible power to tell everybody else what to do.
This is because one of its ultimate purposes is to protect people’s freedom — the freedom to be Māori as much as the freedom to be Pakeha. If we want it to, democracy may help all and not just some of us to protect our freedom through our different ways of reasoning.
Freedom is protected by checks and balances on power. Parliament checks the powers of government. Citizens, including Māori citizens with equality of tikanga, check the powers of Parliament.
One of the ways this happens is through the distribution of power from the centre — to local governments, school boards and non-governmental providers of public services. This includes Māori health providers whose work was intended to be supported by the Māori Health Authority, which the government also intends to disestablish.
The rights of hapū (kinship groups), as the political communities whose representatives signed Te Tiriti, mean that rangatiratanga, too, checks and balances the concentration of power in the hands of a few.
Checking and balancing the powers of government requires the contribution of all and not just some citizens. When they do so in their own ways, and according to their own modes of reasoning, citizens contribute to democratic contest — not as a divisive activity, but to protect the common good from the accumulation of power for some people’s use in the domination of others.
Te Tiriti supports this democratic process.
Dr Dominic O’Sullivan is adjunct professor, Faculty of Health and Environmental Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, and professor of political science, Charles Sturt University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.
The Brussels Declaration, organised by the International Parliamentarians for West Papua (IPWP), has also launched a new phase in the campaign for a UN visit.
European parliamentarian Carles Puigdemont, formerly president of the state of Catalonia that broke away illegally from Spain in 2017 and an ex-journalist and editor, said during the meeting that the EU should immediately halt its trade negotiations with Indonesia until Jakarta obeyed the “will of the international community” and granted the UN access.
“Six years have now passed since the initial invite to the High Commissioner was made — six years in which thousands of West Papuans have been killed and over 100,000 displaced,” said Wenda.
“Indonesia has repeatedly demonstrated that words of condemnation are not enough. Without real pressure, they will continue to act with total impunity in West Papua.”
‘Unified call’
Wenda said the call to halt European trade negotiations with Indonesia was not just being made by himself, NGOs, or individual nations.
“it is a unified call by nearly half the world, including the European Commission, for international investigation in occupied West Papua,” he said.
“If Indonesia continues to withhold access, they will merely be proving right all the academics, lawyers, and activists who have accused them of committing genocide in West Papua.
“If there is nothing to hide, why all the secrecy?”
Since 2001, the EU has spent millions of euros funding Indonesian rule in West Papua through the controversial colonial “Special Autonomy” law.
“This money is supposedly earmarked for the advancement of ‘democracy, civil society, [and the] peace process’,” Wenda said.
“Given that West Papua has instead suffered 20 years of colonialism, repression, and police and military violence, we must question where these funds have gone.
‘Occupied land’
“West Papua is occupied land. We have never exercised our right to self-determination, which was cruelly taken from us in 1963.
“States and international bodies, including the EU, should not invest in West Papua until this fundamental right has been realised. Companies and corporations who trade with Indonesia over our land are directly funding our genocide.”
Wenda added “we cannot allow Indonesia any hiding place on this issue — West Papua cannot wait any longer”.
New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has been warned that Māori will not sit by without a fight if the government attempts to meddle with te Tiriti o Waitangi.
As politicians of all stripes have flocked to Rātana near Whanganui, it was a rare chance for Māori to address politicians directly on the pae — something that holds extra weight this year, because the annual celebrations come so soon after last weekend’s national hui.
Among those in attendance were Labour and Green MPs, Prime Minister Luxon, Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters, and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones, while Te Pāti Māori were welcomed on Tuesday. ACT did not have a representative there.
Rāhui Papa, a representative of the Kiingitanga and Waikato-Tainui, said they were watching the rhetoric coming out of the Beehive very closely.
“Quite frankly, te iwi Māori — and the hui at Turangawaewae confirmed, the hui here at Rātana has confirmed — that if there is any measure of meddling with Te Tiriti o Waitangi, Māori will not sit idly by.
“The message is: The Tiriti o Waitangi is sacrosanct in the view of te ao Māori. We truly believe that the only treaty in town is the one that was written in the indigenous language.”
Rāhui Papa at Rātana Pā . . . “The Tiriti o Waitangi is sacrosanct in the view of te ao Māori.” Image: Angus Dreaver/RNZ
Amid a climate of concern over the Treaty Principles legislation, Luxon is calling for calm over a bill he himself has said feels divisive.
Government ‘will honour the Treaty’
“The government has no plans and never has had plans to amend or revise the Treaty, or the Treaty settlements that we have all worked so hard together to achieve.
“The government will honour the Treaty.”
His speech to the Rātana faithful largely a speech to all Māori — and focusing on his favourite word: outcomes.
“Ours will be a government with goals for better healthcare, better school achievement, and less welfare dependency.
“When I talk about wanting better outcomes, I’m not talking about giving out hand-outs to close the gaps. I want to improve the opportunities so that people who are prepared to get to work and work hard, can make the most of their opportunities and get ahead.”
Kamaka Manuel at Rātana Pā . . . “What we do see is the first part of the word ‘outcomes’ – or like ‘Māori out’.” Image: Angus Dreaver/RNZ
Ratana representative Kamaka Manuel told the government that promise of better outcomes was hard to believe.
“What we do see is the first part of the word ‘outcomes’ — or like ‘Māori out’ — and we’re left with the last part: ‘how come’.”
Māori outcomes ‘gone backwards’
He once again reiterated his claim that outcomes for Māori had gone backwards under Labour, and that National had “no intention and no commitment” to take ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill beyond a first reading.
There may be no commitment or intention at this point to do so, but Luxon has repeatedly refused to categorically rule out further support for it.
“It’s consistent with our coalition agreements, we have said and I don’t know how to be any clearer about it, there is no commitment to support it beyond the first reading.”
He was asked by reporters if he would say National would clearly say they would not support it further, but Luxon again said there was “no intention, no commitment”.
Deputy PM Winston Peters at Rātana Pā . . . lashing out at Labour to pockets of heckling. Image: Angus Dreaver/RNZ
For a day full of politicians, Rātana is not supposed to be overtly political.
Deputy Prime Minister Peters acknowledged that — but still gave a political speech anyway — lashing out at Labour to pockets of heckling.
“These people will promise you a bridge where there is no river . . . I want to ask you this question: what’s their record?.”
impromptu standup
In an impromptu standup with reporters, NZ First’s Shane Jones said a review of the Waitangi Tribunal would need to address whether its powers should remain intact.
“An institution that’s been around for 50 years should not expect to continue on uncritically for another set of decades without being reviewed.”
Labour’s Reuben Davidson (left) and Willie Jackson (centre) at Rātana Pā . . . . Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver
Spurred on by speeches from the morehu, Labour’s Willie Jackson said it had made the opposition parties more united than ever.
“What they were saying the whaikōrero was that there was one enemy . . . and the enemy was the government, and so they wanted us to all . . . to come together as a group — Greens, Pāti Māori, Labour.”
Labour leader Chris Hipkins, in his first public appearance of the year, spent all of a minute talking about Labour’s deep connection to Rātana — and then went on the attack.
“The role of us as political leaders is to light that path forward, it’s not to exploit the fear that comes from uncertainty.”
Rātana celebrations. Video: RNZ
Hipkins said the current government’s approach was emboldening racism, which he later clarified related to things like the Treaty Principles Bill.
Policies ‘enable racism’
“I don’t think those are things that a responsible government should do.
“The policies of this current government encourage, foster, and enable racism in New Zealand and we should call that out for what it is.”
This time last year, Hipkins was speaking as prime minister. He now admitted — from the benefit of hindsight — the last government didn’t get it all right.
“One of the things that we didn’t get right was that making sure we were bringing non-Māori New Zealanders along with us on that journey.”
There was a notable absentee — the ACT Party, whose Treaty Principles Bill National has agreed to support to Select Committee, but no further.
“We know there could have been some trepidation like last week at Turangawaewae where we only had a couple from the three-headed taniwha government that we have in New Zealand today,” Rāhui Papa said.
Carmel Sepuloni (Labour), Marama Davidson (Greens) and Labour opposition leader Chris Hipkins at the Rātana celebrations: “The role of us as political leaders is to light that path forward, it’s not to exploit the fear.” Image: Angus Dreaver/RNZ
‘Dishonour’ to Māori world
Greens’ co-leader Marama Davidson told reporters that ACT’s no-show at Rātana was a display of “absolute ignorance” and a dishonour to the Māori world.
“It dismisses the mana and the importance of Ratana, of Wiremu Pōtiki Ratana, and te ao Māori and their political voice.”
“There was a time when they didn’t manage to invite me and now they seem to be complaining that they’ve invited me but I haven’t come. I guess one day the stars will align.”
Seymour has never attended Rātana festivities, describing it as a “religious event”, but he will be attending Waitangi next month.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Palestinian photojournalist Motaz Azaiza, who has been documenting the impact of the war in the Gaza Strip, has left the enclave for Qatar and gave his first interview there with the Doha-based Al Jazeera global news channel.
Azaiza announced on Instagram yesterday that he was leaving the besieged enclave before boarding a Qatari military airplane at Egypt’s El Arish International Airport.
However, it was unclear how he was able to leave Gaza or why he had evacuated, reports Al Jazeera.
“This is the last time you will see me with this heavy, stinky [press] vest. I decided to evacuate today. … Hopefully soon I’ll jump back and help to build Gaza again,” Azaiza said in a video.
The 24-year-old Palestinian captured the attention of millions globally — including in the South Pacific — as he filmed himself in a press vest and helmet to document conditions during Israel’s war, which has killed more than 25,000 people in Gaza.
“Motaz Azaiza – A 24-year-old man from Gaza, in 108 days, did what CNN, Fox, the BBC, and all their ‘journalism’ predecessors refused to do for 75 years.
“Humanise a people!”
– Khaled Beydoun
Israel launched its offensive after Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, killing 1,139 people and taking more than 200 people captive. It has killed more than 25,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, in a relentless attack on Gaza since then.
Azaiza’s coverage often took the form of raw, unfiltered videos about injured children or families crushed under rubble in the aftermath of Israeli air strikes.
He said he has had to “evacuate for a lot of reasons you all know some of it but not all of it”.
In his post, he was seen on a video about to board a grey plane emblazoned with the words “Qatar Emiri Air Force”.
“First video outside Gaza,” he said in one clip, revealing that it was his first time on a aircraft. “Heading to Qatar.”
He also shared a video of the inside of the plane as it landed in Doha.
Palestinian photojournalist Motaz Azaiza leaves Gaza after his “heroic” humanitarian reporting . . . “we are all Palestinian.” Video: Al Jazeera
Since the start of the war, the photojournalist has amassed millions of followers across multiple platforms.
His Instagram following has grown from about 27,500 to 18.25 million in the more than 108 days since October 7, according to an assessment of social media analytics by Al Jazeera.
His Facebook account grew from a similar starting point to nearly 500,000 followers. He now has one million followers on X, formerly known as Twitter.
As well as his social media posts, Azaiza has produced content for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNWRA).
I left Gaza with a broken heart and eyes filled with tears.
There was no other option after 108 days of continuous massacres against us.
It’s time to move somewhere else so I can do more work and I pray that I can be a reason to stop this war and help rebuild Gaza again.
I’ve… pic.twitter.com/kg3FwTi38d
Social media users thanked Azaiza for his coverage of the war, many saluting him as a hero.
“Thank you for everything you have done, you have moved mountains, what you have done in the last 100 days people can’t do in their whole lifetime. You were a pivotal voice in showing the world the Israeli atrocities in Gaza. Wishing you well and safety,” one user said on X.
Another, Khaled Beydoun, wrote on Instagram, “Motaz Azaiza – A 24-year-old man from Gaza, in 108 days, did what CNN, Fox, the BBC, and all their ‘journalism’ predecessors refused to do for 75 years.
“Humanise a people!”
“I’m so glad you had the opportunity to get out, God willing, YOU WILL RETURN TO A FREE PALESTINE,” wrote another.
“We love you so deeply,” American musician Kehlani wrote, adding, “Thank you for your humanity.”
“Frame that vest. It’s the armor of one of history’s greatest heroes,” comedian Sammy Obeid said.
Pacific peoples joined with tangata whenua at the weekend, calling on the Aotearoa New Zealand government to uphold indigenous principles and language.
Former Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio was a panel speaker, saying it was “an absolute privilege to support and participate in this vital work”.
“It is right for Maori to lead this conversation and not politicians, as the political timeline is short-term while Maori perspectives are long-term and intergenerational.”
Aupito said these conversations were not just limited to Māori peoples, but needed to be held within strong leadership structures.
“This is the right time to have a conversation on nationhood and identity, and using indigenous knowledge and cultural intelligence and frameworks is better than using Pakeha frameworks that have often been the source of pain, harm and colonisation.”
Aupito was also asked to light one of the fires representing the mauri, or spirit of the words shared — the wind then carrying the message across the country.
‘Privilege to light fire’
“It was a privilege to be asked to light a fire as a symbol of Pacific people’s support and for the spirit of the event to now spread among the Pacific communities throughout Aotearoa New Zealand.”
In his speech, Kiingi Tuheitia Pootatau said the political message had been heard around the world.
“We’ve sent a strong message, and that message has been heard around the world . . . our time is now, kotahitanga (unity) is the way.”
Auckland union organiser Teisa Unga said Pacific communities needed to look back on the shared history with New Zealand to understand shared ties with tangata whenua.
“We’ve grown up, and because we haven’t been taught our history, we actually don’t know the road map of where we are right now and we have this sense of amnesia.
“We need to look back and actually remember who we are, where we come from, and then that’ll start igniting a fire that we need to take it back to the culture and Te Tiriti, remembering that that was there first.”
Tongan community leader Pakilau Manase Lua said it was disappointing that Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was not there to hear the concerns of Māori iwi.
‘Unfortunate that PM’s not here’
“It’s unfortunate that he’s not here — in saying that, we’ve got Waitangi coming up, and what was said here probably will be repeated at Waitangi.
“The atmosphere here was still a little bit charged, with some quite heavy topics that are being discussed, but it’s been amazing.”
Mana Moana programme director Dr Karlo Mila said she was impressed by the clear intentions laid out by different cross sections of iwi.
“What was quite amazing for me, was to see different hapu and iwi come forth with really, really clear resolutions about what they wanted to put forward so that they could get some kind of unity around it, there was a lot of coherency in their messages.
“It felt like a real moment in history for all the provocations that are coming from the new government.”
This week, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will aim to reassure Māori leaders about the coalition government’s actions at the annual Ratana gathering, where both he and Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters are expected to speak.
Republished with permission.
The Hui-ā-Iwi at Tūrangawaewae marae . . . a strong message that has been heard around the world. Image: RNZ
Union members at the Australian public broadcaster ABC have today passed a vote of no confidence in managing director David Anderson for failing to defend the integrity of the ABC and its staff from outside attacks, reports the national media union.
The vote was passed overwhelmingly at a national online meeting attended by more than 200 members of the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance (MEAA), the union said in a statement.
Union members have called on Anderson to take immediate action to win back the confidence of staff following a series of incidents which have damaged the reputation of the ABC as a trusted and independent source of news.
The vote of ABC union staff rebuked Anderson, with one of the broadcaster’s most senior journalists, global affairs editor John Lyons, reported in The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age as saying he was “embarrassed” by his employer, which he said had “shown pro-Israel bias” and was failing to protect staff against complaints.
This followed revelations of a series of emails by the so-called Lawyers for Israel lobby group alleged to be influential in the sacking of Lebanese Australian journalist Antoinette Lattouf for her criticism on social media of the Israeli genocidal war on Gaza that has killed 25,000 people so far, mostly women and children.
Another pro-Israel WhatsApp lobbying the ABC.
It makes me sick in the stomach to see people celebrate my sacking.
It makes me sick in the stomach to see an alleged Ita Buttrose response saying I’m now gone.
It makes me worry about the ABC’s integrity https://t.co/6qTeU7f8Wzpic.twitter.com/L9Te8A1Ynx
Staff have put management on notice that if it does not begin to address the current crisis by next Monday, January 29, staff will consider further action.
The acting chief executive of MEAA, Adam Portelli, said staff had felt unsupported by the ABC’s senior management when they have been criticised or attacked from outside.
Message ‘clear and simple’
“The message from staff today is clear and simple: David Anderson must demonstrate that he will take the necessary steps to win back the confidence of staff and the trust of the Australian public,” he said.
“This is the result of a consistent pattern of behaviour by management when the ABC is under attack of buckling to outside pressure and leaving staff high and dry.
“Public trust in the ABC is being undermined. The organisation’s reputation for frank and fearless journalism is being damaged by management’s repeated lack of support for its staff when they are under attack from outside.
BREAKING NEWS:
Censorship Crisis at the ABC.
Senior ABC journalist accuses ABC of bowing to “a group of lawyers lobbying for a foreign power.”
“The clue is in the name: ‘Lawyers for Israel’ thought that they could run a campaign to bully an ABC journalist out of her job —… pic.twitter.com/VbyFfGqpnB
“Journalists at the ABC — particularly First Nations people, and people from culturally diverse backgrounds — increasingly don’t feel safe at work; and the progress that has been made in diversifying the ABC has gone backwards.
“Management needs to act quickly to win that confidence back by putting the integrity of the ABC’s journalism above the impact of pressure from politicians, unaccountable lobby groups and big business.”
The full motion passed by MEAA members at today’s meeting reads as follows:
MEAA members at the ABC have lost confidence in our managing director David Anderson. Our leaders have consistently failed to protect our ABC’s independence or protect staff when they are attacked. They have consistently refused to work collaboratively with staff to uphold the standards that the Australian public need and expect of their ABC.
Winning staff and public confidence back will require senior management:
Backing journalism without fear or favour;
Working collaboratively with unions to build a culturally informed process for supporting staff who face criticism and attack;
Take urgent action on the lack of security and inequality that journalists of colour face;
Working with unions to develop a clearer and fairer social media policy; and
Upholding a transparent complaints process, in which journalists who are subject to complaints are informed and supported.
A further resolution passed unanimously by the meeting read:
MEAA members at the ABC will not continue to accept the failure of management to protect our colleagues and the public. If management does not work with us to urgently fix the ongoing crisis, ABC staff will take further action to take a stand for a safe, independent ABC.
A Palestinian advocate has appealed to the New Zealand government to call for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza and to back the South African genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
“A sovereign state like New Zealand that has historically stood for what is morally correct must not bend to foreign pressure, and must reject policies aligned with the United Kingdom of Israel and the United States of Israel which blindly endorse and support the apartheid regime,” said Billy Hania of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA).
He was speaking at the pro-Palestinian rally and march in Auckland Tāmaki Makaurau yesterday as the Gaza death toll rose above 25,000 dead, mostly women and children.
Palestinian advocate Billy Hania speaking in Aotea Square yesterday . . . “The Zionist project is failing in Palestine.” Image: David Robie/APR
Belgium is among the latest of 61 countries — and the first European nation — to support the genocide case and a growing number of other lawsuits are also being brought against Israel.
Swiss prosecutors have also confirmed that a “crimes against humanity” case has been filed against Israeli President Isaac Herzog during his visit to the World Economic Forum in Davos last week. No further details were given.
“The Zionist project is failing in Palestine — the apartheid entity with 75 years of colonial terror has achieved nothing for the Jewish people, oppressing and killing Palestinians through a violent settler colonial approach,” Hania said.
“Mass killing of Palestinians will achieve nothing for the Jewish people. Without respect for Palestinian rights and respect for life in Palestine, there will be no peace period.”
‘One holocaust not enough?’
Constrasting the shrinking support for Israel with massive citizen protests “in their millions” taking place around the world, Hania criticised Germany’s intervention in the genocide case supporting Tel Aviv while also planning to provide 10,000 tank munitions to “the apartheid regime with which to massacre Palestinians — as if one holocaust was not enough”.
“We are calling on the New Zealand government to support the South African ICJ case in addition to supporting the recent Chile-Mexico ICC war crimes initiative. This initiative is technically important with Israel being a signatory to the ICC,” Hania said.
He also thanked Indonesia for its legal initiative.
“Stop the genocide now” placard in yesterday’s Auckland rally calling for a ceasefire in the war in Gaza. Image: David Robie/APR
“More than 100 days of targeting Palestinian civilians and civilian infrastructure to exterminate Palestinian life is committing genocide, the crime of all crimes and with total impunity,” Hania said.
“More than 60,000 tons of explosives dropped over Gaza in 100 days equals three nuclear bombs, more than the infamous nuclear tragedy on Japan that led to its immediate surrender. It’s fundamentally different for Gaza as surrendering does not exist in Palestine vocabulary.”
He said the more than 100 Israel hostages would remain in Gaza until the “thousands of Palestinian hostages are freed”.
“The Gaza siege must end, West Bank Israeli settler extremist violence must end, there must be respect for worshippers and Muslim religious sites attacks by Israeli extremists is well documented and must end.”
Pro-Palestinian protesters march down Auckland’s Queen Street yesterday calling for an immediate ceasefire and an end to the killing of children in the Israeli war on Gaza. Image: David Robie/APR
24 massacres cited
Hania stressed that the current war did not start on October 7 with the deadly Hamas resistance movement attack on southern Israel as claimed by the Israeli government.
He cited a list of 24 massacres of Palestinians by Zionist militia that began at Haifa in 1937 and Jerusalem the same year, including the Nakba – “the Catastrophe” — in 1948 when 750,000 Palestinians were forced out of their homes and lands with the destruction of towns and villages.
Hania also referred to a recent New York Times article that warned Israel was in a strategic bind over its failed military policies, saying Israel’s objectives were “mutually incompatible”.
The cited New York Times article saying Israel’s two main goals in its war on Gaza are “mutually incompatible”. Image: NYT screenshot APR
“Israel’s limited progress in dismantling Hamas has raised doubts within the military’s high command about the near-term feasibility of achieving the country’s principal wartime objectives: eradicating Hamas and also liberating the Israeli hostages still in Gaza,” wrote the authors Ronen Bergman and Patrick Kingsley.
Israel had established control over a smaller part of Gaza at this stage of the war than originally envisaged in battle plans from the start of the invasion, which were reviewed by The Times.
Citing Dr Andreas Krieg, a war analyst at King’s College London, from the article, Hania quoted:
“It’s not an environment where you can free hostages.
“It is an unwinnable war.
“Most of the time when you are in an unwinnable war, you realise that at some point — and you withdraw.
“And they didn’t.”
“Adolf and his zombie” poster at the rally in Auckland yesterday calling for an immediate ceasefire in Israel’s war on Gaza. Image: David Robie/APR
For two months now, the United States and other Western countries backing Israel have been talking about “the day after” in Gaza. They have rejected Israeli assertions that the Israeli army will remain in control of the Strip and pointed to the Palestinian Authority (PA) as their preferred political actor to take over governance once the war is over.
In so doing, the US and its allies have paid little regard to what the Palestinian people want. The current leadership of the PA lost the last democratic elections held in the occupied Palestinian territory in 2006 to Hamas and since then, it has steadily lost popularity.
In a recent public opinion poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR), some 90 percent of respondents were in favour of the resignation of PA President Mahmoud Abbas, and 60 percent called for the dismantling of the PA itself.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas . . . low public trust in the PA, but there is a reason why the US insists on supporting its takeover of Gaza. Image: Al Jazeera
Washington is undoubtedly aware of the low public trust in the PA, but there is a reason why it insists on supporting its takeover of Gaza: its leadership has been a reliable partner for decades in maintaining a status quo in the interests of Israel.
The US would like that arrangement to continue, so its backing for the PA may be accompanied by an attempt to revamp it in order to solve its legitimacy problem. But even if this effort succeeds, it is unlikely the new iteration of the PA would be sustainable.
A reliable partner Perhaps one of the main factors that has convinced the US that the PA is a “good choice” for post-war governance in Gaza is its anti-Hamas stance and willingness to conduct security coordination with Israel.
Since the Israel’s war on Gaza began on October 7, the PA and its leadership have not issued an official statement offering explicit political support for the Palestinian resistance. Their rhetoric has predominantly focused on condemning and disapproving of attacks on civilians on both sides, while also rejecting the expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland.
In a political address on the ninth day of the war, Abbas criticised Hamas, asserting that their actions did not represent the Palestinian people. He emphasised that the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) is the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people and underscored the importance of peaceful resistance as the only legitimate means to oppose Israeli occupation.
This statement was later retracted by his office.
In December, Hussein al-Sheikh, a PA official and secretary-general of the executive committee of the PLO, also criticised Hamas in an interview with Reuters. He suggested its armed resistance “method and approach” has failed and led to many casualties among the civilian population.
The stance of the PA is consistent with its own narrow political and economic interests which have come at the expense of the Palestinian national cause. It has systematically and brutally stamped out any opposition and any support for other factions, including Hamas, in order to maintain its rule over West Bank cities while Israel continues with its brutal occupation and dispossession of the Palestinian people.
In Israel’s war on Gaza in 2008–2009, the PA leadership hoped to regain administrative control of Gaza with assistance from Israel. During that conflict, the PA prohibited any activities in the West Bank in support of Gaza and threatened to arrest participants.
I, myself, faced harassment and the threat of arrest for attempting to join a demonstration against the war. Similar positions were adopted by the PA, albeit with less aggressive measures, in subsequent Israeli assaults on Gaza, as its leadership came to recognise that Hamas was unlikely to relinquish its control over the Strip.
Since October 7, the PA has taken a bolder stance, marked by more aggressive actions. Its security forces have suppressed demonstrations and marches held in support of Gaza, resorting to shooting live ammunition at participants. Additionally, the PA has recently detained individuals expressing support for the Palestinian resistance.
While cracking down on Palestinian protests, the PA has done nothing to protect its people from attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinian communities, which have resulted in deaths, injuries and the displacement of hundreds of people in the occupied West Bank.
Additionally, the Israeli army has intensified its raids in the PA-administered areas, leading to the arrest of thousands and the killing of hundreds of Palestinians, with no reaction from the PA.
The PA’s inability to offer basic protection has added to the deterioration of its legitimacy among Palestinians. Furthermore, by taking a stance against the Palestinian resistance and aligning itself with Israel and the US, the PA is only further undermining its own legitimacy.
Palestine Authority – PA 1.0
Washington is aware of the growing unpopularity of the PA and its leadership among Palestinians but it is not giving up on it because it seems to believe that that can be fixed. That is because the US has tried to revamp the authority before as it has always faced problems with legitimacy due to the way it was set up.
As a governing institution, the PA was established to bring an end to the first Intifada.
Conceived under the interim peace agreements in Oslo, it was envisioned as an administrative body to oversee civil affairs for Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip and certain parts of the West Bank, excluding occupied East Jerusalem.
It effectively took on a role as an Israeli security contractor in exchange for certain benefits related to administering Palestinian population centres. The PA faithfully fulfilled its mandate, carrying out routine arrests and surveillance of Palestinian individuals, whether they were involved in actions against Israel or were activists opposing its corrupt practices.
Thus, Israel strategically benefitted from the establishment of the PA, but the same cannot be said for the Palestinian people, as they continued to experience the ravages of a military occupation.
Expected independent state
“Despite this, the PA under Yasser Arafat — or what we can call PA 1.0 — leveraged patronage and corruption to maintain some level of support. Notably, Arafat viewed the Oslo process as an interim measure, expecting a fully independent Palestinian state by 2000.
He pragmatically engaged in security collaboration with Israel, hoping to build trust and ultimately achieve peaceful coexistence. In 1996, responding to ongoing Palestinian resistance, he even declared a “war on terror” and convened a security summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, involving Israel, Egypt and the US.
In 2000, the civil and security arrangements overseen by the PA became increasingly fragile and eventually collapsed, triggering the eruption of the second Intifada. This uprising was a response to Israel’s policies of settlement expansion, its firm refusal to accept any form of Palestinian sovereignty between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, and broader social and economic grievances.
In 2002, the Bush administration conceived the idea of refurbishing the PA as part of the Road map for peace. While Arafat’s leadership was perceived as a hindering factor, he had already collaborated with the US by implementing structural reforms, including the creation of a prime minister’s position.
Seeking to reshape the Palestinian leadership, the US engaged with potential alternative leaders, including Mahmoud Abbas, who eventually assumed the presidency of the PA in 2005 after the suspicious death of Arafat.
The PA took its first blow when Hamas won the elections in 2006 and was able to form a government. The US and EU rejected the results, boycotted the government and suspended financial assistance to the PA, while Israel halted the transfer of tax revenues.
Meanwhile, the PA security apparatus leadership refused to deal with the Hamas government and continued their work as usual, claiming they reported to the PA president’s office.
For several months, Hamas struggled to maintain its PA government, while Abbas and his supporters made significant efforts to isolate it.
In 2007, Hamas took over the PA security apparatus in the Gaza Strip and assumed control of all PA institutions. Abbas declared Hamas an unwanted entity in the West Bank and ordered the expulsion of the Hamas government and the imprisonment of many Hamas operatives.
After splitting the PA into two entities, one in the Gaza Strip and another in the West Bank, Abbas, along with allies Mohammed Dahlan and Salam Fayyad, led efforts to restructure the PA in the West Bank with full support from the US and the EU.
Restructuring PA 2.0
Under what we can call PA 2.0, two major restructuring efforts took place. First, it consolidated the Palestinian security apparatus under a united command. Led by US Army General Keith Dayton, the revamping of the Palestinian security forces aimed at deepening their partnership with the Israeli state and army.
Additionally, it sought to cultivate a vested interest among PA personnel in maintaining the role of the PA. Second, the restructuring of the PA consolidated its budget, placing all its resources under the Ministry of Finance.
This restructuring did not result in a “better” PA. It remained a dysfunctional entity, which mismanaged resources and service provision, leading to a severe deterioration in living standards for the majority of Palestinians.
Its leadership enjoyed certain privileges due to its security coordination with Israel and engaged in widespread corruption practices that have raised concerns even among PA supporters.
Meanwhile, Israel’s settlement enterprises continued expanding without limits and the violence employed by the Israeli army and settlers against ordinary Palestinians only worsened.
Restructuring PA 3.0? The lack of support for the PA leadership and its dysfunction have raised concerns about whether it can play a role in the upcoming post-Gaza war arrangements that the US administration is trying to put together.
That is why Washington has signalled it will seek to revamp the PA once again — into PA 3.0 — with the aim of addressing the needs of various parties. The US administration and its allies seek an authority that can provide security to Israel and engage in a peace process without altering the status quo.
Since the start of the war, several US envoys have visited Ramallah carrying the same message: that the PA needs to be revamped. In December US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan met with Abbas and al-Sheikh (the PLO secretary-general) urging them to “bring new blood” into the government. Al-Sheikh is considered a possible successor to Abbas, who could be part of these efforts to restructure the PA.
However, after more than 100 days since the start of the Israeli war on Gaza, it looks like Washington does not have a concrete plan and only has some general ideas which the PA has declared a readiness to discuss. More importantly, the US vision does not seem to take into account the will of the Palestinian people.
The Palestinian public clearly demands a leadership that can head a democratic, national entity capable of fulfilling the Palestinian national aspirations, including creating an independent state and realising the Palestinians’ right of return to their homelands.
Revamping the PA implies intensifying cooperation with Israel and providing Israeli settlers with more security, which effectively means more insecurity and dispossession for the Palestinians.
As a result, the Palestinian people will continue to perceive the PA as illegitimate and public anger, upheaval and resistance will continue to grow.
In this sense, the US vision for revamping the PA would fail because it would not address the core issues of Israeli occupation and apartheid, which successive American administrations have systematically and purposefully ignored.
Samer Jaber is a political activist and PhD researcher specialising in political economy at Royal Holloway, University of London. He is also a fellow with the Council for At-Risk Academics (CARA). He focuses on the Arab world and the Middle East region. This article was first published by Al Jazeera.
New Zealand’s opposition parties have seized on a leaked ministerial memo about the coalition government’s proposed Treaty Principles bill, saying the prime minister should put a stop to it.
ACT is defending the bill, while National has repeated its position of supporting it no further than select committee.
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi posted a screenshot of part of a page of the leaked document on social media on Friday, saying it showed the government’s “intentions to erase Te Tiriti o Waitangi”.
How 1News TV reported the Treaty “leak” on its website. Image: 1News screenshot APR
1News also reported that it had a full copy of the leaked report, which it said warned the proposal’s key points were “at odds with what the Treaty of Waitangi actually says”.
Ministry of Justice chief executive Andrew Kibblewhite confirmed the leak “of a draft paper seeking to include the Treaty of Waitangi Bill in the Legislation Programme for 2024” would be investigated.
“We are incredibly disappointed that this has happened. Ministers need to be able to trust that briefing papers are treated with utmost confidentiality, and we will be investigating the leak as a priority.
“All proposed Government Bills are assigned a priority in the Legislation Programme. The draft paper was prepared as part of that standard process, and had a limited distribution within the Ministry of Justice and a small number of other government agencies.
“We will be keeping Minister [of Justice Paul] Goldsmith informed on our investigation and will not be making any further comment at this stage.”
ACT: ‘That is what I believe our country needs’ The bill was an ACT Party policy during the election, which National in coalition negotiations agreed to progress only as far as the select committee stage. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in Parliament last year said “that’s as far as it will go”.
Party leader David Seymour defended the bill.
“Over the last 40 years, the principles of the Treaty have evolved behind closed doors with no consultation of the average New Zealander, no role for them to play in it whatsoever,” he said.
ACT leader David Seymour . . . people in the bureaucracy had become set in that way of thinking about the Treaty. Image: RNZ/Angus Dreaver
That referred to the courts’ attempts over the last few decades to reconcile the differences between the English and reo Māori texts of the Treaty, based in part on the findings of the Waitangi Tribunal — an independent body set up by a previous National government to examine the Treaty’s role in New Zealand.
Seymour said people in the bureaucracy had become set in that way of thinking about the Treaty, but that it had made the country feel more divided by race.
“And when ACT comes along and says, ‘hey, we need to have an open discussion about this and work towards a unified New Zealand’, you expect that they’re going to be resistant. Nonetheless, there’s the band aid this government has, and that is what I believe our country needs.
“I believe that once people see an open and respectful debate about our founding document and the future of our constitutional settings, that’s actually something that New Zealanders have been wanting for a long time that we’re delivering, and I suspect it might be a bit more popular than the doomsayers anticipate.”
In a statement, he said the party was speaking for Māori and non-Māori alike who believed division was one of the greatest threats to New Zealand.
“We’re proposing a proper public debate on what the principles of the Treaty actually mean in the context of a modern multi-ethnic society with a place in it for all.
“ACT’s goal is to restore the mana of the Treaty by clarifying its principles. That means the New Zealand government has the right to govern New Zealand, the New Zealand government will protect all New Zealanders’ authority over their land and other property, and all New Zealanders are equal under the law, with the same rights and duties.”
He said they would be consulting all New Zealanders on it, and once it got to select committee they would have a chance to recommend changes to the bill, which would then be put to the public as a referendum.
Te Pāti Māori: ‘The worst way of rewriting the Tiriti’ Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer told RNZ News she was not surprised to see ministry officials warning against the bill.
“The extent and the depth of the erasing of Tangata Whenua, the arrogance to assume to rewrite a Treaty based on one partner’s view — and that was a partner who only had 50 rangatira sign — is really alarming.”
She said she did not trust Prime Minister Christopher Luxon would not support the bill any further than the select committee stage.
“It’s the worst way of rewriting the Tiriti we could ever have expected, it’s made assumptions that don’t exist and again has highlighted that they rate the English version of te Tiriti.
“I’m not quite sure when the last time you could believe everything a prime minister said was factual,” she said.
“The prime minister has been caught out in his own lies . . . the reality is that a clever politician and intentional coalition partner will roll anyone out of the way to make sure that something as negatively ambitious as what this rewrite is looking like can happen.”
She said one of Māoridom’s biggest aspirations was to be a thriving people “and ensure that through our whakapapa te Tiriti is respected”, she said, criticising Luxon’s refusal to attend this weekend’s national hui.
“He didn’t have to be the centre of all the discussions, a good leader listens,” she said.
Labour: ‘A total disgrace and a slap in the face for the judiciary’ Labour’s Māori Development spokesperson Willie Jackson however said the bill was a “total breach” of the Treaty, its obligations, and the partnership between Māori and the Crown.
“It’s a total attack on the Treaty and the partnership that we have, that Māori have with the Crown, and it continues the negative themes from this government from day one.
“The reality is that the Treaty principles — in terms of what’s been drawn up in terms of the ‘partnership’ — was already a compromise from Māori. That’s why the judiciary wrote up the partnership model — so if they want to go down this track they’ll open up a can of worms that they’ll live to regret.”
He said the government should not be pushing ahead with the bill.
“Absolutely, absolutely not, and Luxon should show some leadership and rule it out now. This is a disgrace, what ACT are doing, a total disgrace and a slap in the face for the judiciary and all the leaders who in past years have entrenched the partnership.
“You’re talking about National Party leaders like Jenny Shipley, Jim Bolger, Doug Graham, John Key. This is just laughable and idiotic stuff that is coming from Seymour, and Luxon should shut this down now because it goes in the face of legal opinion, legal history, judiciary decisions since 1987, prime ministerial decisions from National and Labour.
“All of a sudden we’ve got this so-called expert Seymour who thinks he knows more than every prime minister of the last 40 years and every High Court judge, Supreme Court judge — you name it … absolute rubbish and it should be thrown out.”
He said Seymour was “trying to placate his money men . . . trying to placate some of his extreme rightwing mates”.
He did not trust the government to do as Luxon had said it would, and end support for the bill once it reached select committee.
“I mean surely this government would be the last group of people you’d trust right now wouldn’t you think? These are people that are going to disband our magnificent smokefree laws to look after their tax cuts.
“They also must be told in no uncertain terms that there can be no compromise on the Treaty relationship.”
Greens: ‘All of the kupu are a breach’ Green Party Māori Development spokesperson Hūhana Lyndon also said the government should not proceed with the bill, arguing all the words proposed by ACT for replacing the principles were a breach of the Treaty itself.
“All of the kupu are a breach to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and this is the choice of the National government to allow this to go ahead into select committee. There’s been no consultation with te iwi Māori or the general public.
“The government shouldn’t proceed with it. Te Tiriti o Waitangi is Te Tiriti o Waitangi — and those words need to be given effect to by the government, any changes to Te Tiriti o Waitangi is between hapū, iwi and the Crown.”
She said the new words proposed to assert a specific interpretation of te Tiriti and its historical context “does not give effect to te Tiriti and does not honour the sacred covenant that our tūpuna signed up for”.
“Ultimately, as we can see, even the government advice is cautioning strongly that the proposed words in the Treaty principles bill will be contentious, and could splinter — and, in fact, undermine — the strong relationship of te iwi Maori with the Crown to date as we have our ongoing conversation around how we honour te Tiriti o Waitangi.
“As we’ve seen with this government thus far, they are rushing through bad legislation under urgency, and this is no different to what we saw before Christmas.”
National: ‘It’s just a simple coalition agreement’ National’s Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith repeated to RNZ the party’s stance was to only progress it as far as the select committee, and no further.
“That’s what the prime minister has indicated,” he said. Asked why the government was even supporting it that far, he said it was part of the coalition agreement.
“Look, it’s just a simple coalition agreement that we have with the ACT Party, we agreed to support it to the select committee so that these matters can be given a public hearing, people can debate it. And so that was the agreement that we had.
“The process that we’ve got will introduce a bill that will have the select committee hearing, lots of different views on it and its merits.”
Asked about National’s position on whether the Treaty principles needed to be defined in law, he said their position was very clear, “that we support this piece of legislation going to the Select Committee and that’s as far as our support goes”.
He rejected Waititi’s suggestion it was an attempt to erase the Treaty.
“Look, I think there’ll be a lot of inflamed rhetoric over the coming weeks, and I’m not going to contribute to that . . . there’s no intention whatsoever to erase the Treaty and that’s not what this bill would do.”
When asked about the memo’s author saying the bill would be in opposition to the Treaty itself, he said the memo was a draft and the matter would be debated at select committee.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The Age has revealed the dismissal of ABC broadcaster Antoinette Lattouf last December 20 was the nasty fruit of a campaign waged against chair Ita Buttrose and managing director David Anderson.
The official reason for Lattouf’s dismissal was ordinary: she shared a post by Human Rights Watch about Israel “using starvation of civilians as a weapon of war in Gaza”, calling it “a war crime”.
It also noted the express intention of Israeli officials to pursue this strategy. Actions were also documented: the deliberate blocking of food, water and fuel “while wilfully obstructing the entry of aid”.
Lattouf shared it after management directed staff not to post on “matters of controversy”.
Prior to The Age revelations, much had been made of Lattouf’s fill-in role as a radio presenter — which was intended for five shows.
The Australian, owned by News Corp, had issues with Lattouf’s statements on various online platforms. It found it strange in December that she was appointed “despite her very public anti-Israel stance”.
She was accused of denying that some protesters had called for Jews to be gassed outside the Sydney Opera House on October 7. She also dared to accuse the Israeli Defence Forces of committing rape.
Leaked messages from a WhatsApp group called ‘Lawyers for Israel’ indicate that Australia’s public broadcaster – ABC – might have been lobbied into firing journalist Antoinette Lattouf.@meenakshirv reports. pic.twitter.com/1Nfl2kEDx6
‘Lot of people really upset’
It was considered odd that she discussed food and water shortages in Gaza and “an advertising campaign showing corpses reminiscent of being wrapped in Muslim burial cloths”. That “left a lot of people really upset’,” The Australian said.
ABC managing director David Anderson . . . denied “any external pressure, whether it be an advocacy group or lobby group, a political party, or commercial entity’. Image: Green Left
If war is hell, Lattouf was evidently not allowed to go into quite so much detail about it — at least concerning the fate of Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli war machine.
What has also come to light is that the ABC’s managers were not targeting Lattouf on their own. Pressure had been exercised from outside the media organisation.
According to The Age, WhatsApp messages by a group called “Lawyers for Israel” had been sent to the ABC as part of a coordinated campaign.
Sydney property lawyer Nicky Stein told members of that group to contact the federal Minister for Communications asking “how Antoinette is hosting the morning ABC Sydney show” the day Lattouf was sacked.
They said employing Lattouff breached Clause 4 of the ABC code of practice on “impartiality”.
Stein went on to insist that: “It’s important ABC hears from not just individuals in the community but specifically from lawyers so they feel there is an actual legal threat.”
No ‘generic’ response
She goes on to say that a “proper” rather than “generic” response was expected “by COB [close of business] today or I would look to engage senior counsel”.
Did such threats have any basis? Even Stein admits: “There is probably no actionable offence against the ABC but I didn’t say I would be taking one — just investigating one. I have said that they should be terminating her employment immediately.”
It was designed to attract attention from ABC chairperson Ita Buttrose, and it did.
ABC political reporter Nour Haydar . . . resigned last week citing concern about the ABC coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza. Image: Green Left
Robert Goot, deputy president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry and part of the same group, boasted of information he had received that Lattouf would be “gone from morning radio from Friday” because of her “anti-Israeli” stance.
There has been something of a journalistic exodus from the ABC of late.
There had been, for instance, the creation of a “Gaza advisory panel” at the behest of ABC news director Justin Stevens, ostensibly to improve coverage.
Must not ‘take sides’
“Accuracy and impartiality are core to the service we offer audiences,” Stevens told staff. “We must stay independent and not ‘take sides’.”
What proves acceptable, a condition that seems to have paralysed the ABC, is to never say that Israel massacres, commits war crimes and brings about conditions approximating genocide.
Little wonder then that coverage of South Africa’s genocide case against Israel in the International Court of Justice does not get top billing on the ABC.
Palestinians and Palestinian militias, however, can always be described as savages, rapists and baby slayers. Throw in fanaticism and Islam and you have the complete package ready for transmission.
Coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the mainstream media of most Western countries, as the late Robert Fisk pointed out, repeatedly asserts these divisions.
After her resignation, Haydar told the Sydney Morning Herald: “Commitment to diversity in the media cannot be skin deep. Culturally diverse staff should be respected and supported even when they challenge the status quo.”
Sharing divisive topics
Haydar’s argument about cultural diversity should not obscure the broader problem facing the ABC: policing the way opinions and material on war, and any other divisive topic, is shared with the public.
The issue goes less to cultural diversity than permitted intellectual breadth.
Lattouf, for her part, is pursuing remedies through the Fair Work Commission and seeking funding through a GoFundMe page, steered by Lauren Dubois.
“We stand with Antoinette and support the rights of workers to be able to share news that expresses an opinion or reinforces a fact, without fear of retribution.”
Kenneth Roth, former head of Human Rights Watch, expressed his displeasure at Lattouf’s treatment, suggesting the ABC had erred.
ABC’s senior management, via a statement from Anderson, preferred the route of craven denial. He rejected “any claim that it has been influenced by any external pressure, whether it be an advocacy group or lobby group, a political party, or commercial entity”.
Dr Binoy Kampmark is a senior lecturer in global studies at RMIT University, Melbourne. This article was first published by Green Left Magazine and is republished here with permission.
RNZ / Angus Dreaver
(@kelvin_morganNZ) 
“The clue is in the name: ‘Lawyers for Israel’ thought that they could run a campaign to bully an ABC journalist out of her job —… 
