Israel retains effective jurisdiction over 97% of the territory of the West Bank and 40% of the Gaza Strip, with about half of the overall population. In these areas, Israel engages in numerous policies and practices that violate economic, social and cultural rights. Moreover, from these areas Israel imposes closures that violate economic, social and cultural rights of people in Areas A, thereby affecting the remaining population. In conclusion, the Committee has clear and convincing legal and factual grounds to apply the Covenant to numerous Israeli policies and practices that violate the economic, social and cultural rights of Palestinians in the WBGS.
There are two additional points that the Committee should consider in assessing Israeli compliance with the Covenant.
First is that Israel has used the threat of violating the economic, social and cultural rights of Palestinians as a means of blackmailing the Palestinian Council/Authority into violating the civil and political rights of Palestinians. A few examples might clarify this point. Israel already agreed under the Interim Agreement to take a number of actions that would have advanced Palestinian economic development. These include, among others, redeploying the military from most of the WBGS, respecting the "territorial integrity and unity of the West Bank and Gaza Strip," permitting the safe passage of people and goods between the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and allowing Palestinians to open a seaport and airport for access to the outside world and to foreign markets. However, Israel has refused to honor these commitments until the Palestinian Council/Authority cracks down on the "infrastructure of terror." In actual practice this has meant torturing and abusing prisoners, jailing anyone who fits the generic "description" of an Islamist, setting up security courts without due process, and repressing all opposition including free speech by journalists and political dissent by human rights activists.
The second point is that Israeli violations of economic, social and cultural rights in the WBGS continue to occur within the parameters of the Oslo process. Despite lip service to human rights in Article 19, the Interim Agreement has been implemented in a manner that is extremely damaging to human rights. We are aware that the Committee is not charged with correcting the many flaws of the Oslo process. However, it is squarely within the Committee's mandate to criticize Israeli policies and practices that have an adverse effect on economic, social and cultural rights. It is also well within the Committee's mandate to note with grave concern the extent to which these policies and practices are linked to the Oslo process, as well as the unfortunate compatibility of the Oslo process with widespread violations of Palestinians' economic, social and cultural rights.