Written Evidence from Mazen Masri (MEP0058)

1. My name is Mazen Masri, and I am a Senior Lecturer in Law at the City Law School of City, University of London. My area of expertise is constitutional law, and I have a special research interest in constitutional and international law dimensions of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. I have practiced law in Israel in the past and I served as a legal advisor to the Negotiations Affairs Department of the PLO. This submission is based on my current research. The submission is made in my personal capacity.

2. I will limit my submission to one topic only which is the emphasis on Israel’s constitutional definition as a Jewish state, and the implications that this emphasis has on a possible two-state solution. This theme is related to question 2 of the inquiry’s terms of reference, more specifically ‘The viability and potential opportunities of a two-state solution’, as well question 4.
3. Israel is defined as a Jewish and democratic state in its basic laws, which have constitutional status. This definition plays an important role in defining the polity, the public culture, state policies and the scope of protection of constitutional rights. The meaning of the terms ‘Jewish and democratic’ was discussed a number of times by the Supreme Court of Israel (Central Election Committee for the Sixteenth Knesset v. Bishara, 2003; Ka’dan v. Land Administration of Israel, 2000). The Court stated that the definition means, among other things, that the state should promote Jewish immigration, Jewish nationalism, Jewish culture and heritage, Jewish settlement, and a special role for the Jewish organisations such as the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund. The Supreme Court further asserts that this definition means that there should be a Jewish majority in Israel, and that Israel must preserve a Jewish majority so as to remain a Jewish state.
4. For the 1.6 million Palestinians who are Israeli citizens, who constitute 20% of the population, this emphasis on the ethnic/religious dimension translates into discrimination, despite a nominal commitment to equality emphasised by the judiciary. Discrimination, in many cases as a matter of law and policy, can be identified in almost all aspects of life in Israel. Adalah, a human rights organisation dedicated to achieving equal individual and collective rights for Palestinians in Israel, counts more than 50 Israeli laws that discriminate against the Palestinian citizens of Israel. The number of statutes on this list seems to be constantly on the rise. This legal discrimination permeates the social, economic and political spheres. In almost all conceivable areas including health, education, income, employment, budget allocation, social welfare and development, Israel’s Palestinian citizens fare worse, and in some cases, much worse than the Jewish citizens. Palestinians are significantly underrepresented in all branches of government, the civil service and public sector, despite legislation that mandates ‘appropriate representation’ in the civil service and legislation that protects equality in employment in general.
5. Indeed, some of the issues that the Foreign Office has already raised with the Government of Israel, such as the plans to demolish the Bedouin village of Umm al-Hiran in the Naqab/Negev could be easily linked to the definition of the state. The plan includes the demolition of an Arab village to make room for the construction of a town that is designated as Jewish. This is in line with the idea that as a Jewish state, the state facilitates and encourages Jewish settlement. The definition of the state and the mindset that it reflects make such actions possible and even desirable from the point of view of the Israeli state and wide sectors of Israeli society.
6. Congruent with the emphasis on the Jewish character, the state justifies favourable treatment in a number of areas, most notably immigration rights, and justifies restricting rights of the Palestinian citizens of Israel. Essentially, the emphasis on the Jewish character and its pervasiveness in the legal system and political life create a situation where there are two classes of citizenship: those who belong to the (Jewish) nation and those who do not belong, that is, the Palestinians in Israel. In many ways, it is seen as a license to discriminate against Palestinian citizens in some impotant policy areas.
7. This emphasis on the Jewish character has implications for any settlement between Israel and the PLO based on the idea of two states. The ‘two-state’ framework and the formula ‘two states for two peoples’ emphasise the ethnic (and, for Israel, the religious) character of each state (or future state in the case of the Palestinians). Accordingly, Israel would be the state of the Jewish people—including those Jews who are not Israeli citizens—and would not be the state of Israeli citizens who are not Jewish. Conversely, the future Palestinian state would be ‘the nation- state’ of the Palestinian people, including those Palestinians who are Israeli citizens. In the case of Israel, this would intensify the current hierarchy among the different classes of citizens and the differential allocation of rights.
8. Successive Israeli governments have emphasised Israel’s Jewish character in the context of the two-state settlement, stating that such a description is an Israeli demand for any negotiated agreement to be reached. This emphasis seems to have been shared by the US Administration under President Obama, and it is reasonable to assume that the current US Administration shares it. While it is not clear what the UK policy on this issue is, it would be reasonable to assume, based on the fact that the UK Government shares many of the underlying assumptions with the American Administration and the Government of Israel, that the UK Government accepts this emphasis.
9. A two-state solution, which emphasises the ethnic/religious character, is likely to provide more room to assert and emphasise Israel’s Jewish character at the expense of the Palestinian citizens of Israel, rendering their citizenship even more flawed, and exacerbating the current state of inequality between Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel. The existing discriminatory treatment is likely to intensify and deepen.
10. This could have serious implications for both Palestinians and Israelis. In addition to the intensification of discrimination against the Palestinian citizens, a stronger emphasis on the Jewish character might also strengthen the religious dimension of the definition in a manner that might affect secular Israelis.
11. I therefore recommend that UK policy on the Middle East Peace Process emphasise equality as one of the cornerstones of any settlement. The risk of a settlement that would increase discrimination exists whether the final outcome is two states or one state. This recommendation is relevant for the current UK policy of supporting the two-state solution, and is even more relevant for any policy responses to the failure of the such a solution. I would also recommend that UK policy should pay more attention to the actions and policies of the Israeli Government against the Palestinian citizens of Israel, given the intensification of the discriminatory policies and racist discourse in public life, and the parallels between Israel’s policies on both sides of the Green Line.