Coalition negotiations a new Israeli Government and the Israeli Supreme Court and the Israeli Government will have important decisions to make about the extent to which israel today welcomes criticism of its human rights policies and particularly with regards to palestinians now the reason im asking this question is because i think. The the lower courts have interpreted the charges against you in a very broad political way essentially youve been found guilty of war can you guess the state of israel for simply saying that business businesses that operate in the all clear by the west bank how being too entrenched occupation just when did it become controversial to say that thats absolutely right and 2017 the Israeli Knesset passed a law that bans entry to those who call for boycotts of israel of course the outlawed self is problematic it essentially imposes a political litmus test who can enter it. Israel but what the court has done in this decision is interpretive valid law to call to include people who call for businesses to respect human rights by not operating in illegal settlements in the west bank that is a dramatically broader reading of whats already a problematic law and essence opening the door to denying entry and eventually deporting those who simply call for business is not to abuse rights to criticize israeli settlements which according to everybody in the International Community outside the Israeli Government are illegal are war crimes and contribute to serious rights abuse so this decision is very dangerous and the Supreme Court has a very significant decision to make which will speak to the heart of the extent to which israel welcomes those that challenges its policies towards palestinians in the future well i think there is no doubt that the settlement policies including various incentives for businesses are aimed at legitimizing the occupation so to some extent your advocacy ease on demining the state or the current policies of the state but what i cant understand is how Israeli Courts say getting around the fact that the occupation is still considered illegal israel is not claiming that were as bad as its constituent territory or is it already certainly the Israeli Court system has for a long time upheld Israeli Government policies and human rights abuses and settlements so the israelis have interpreted whats Crystal ClearInternational Law regarding for example the illegality of settlements which are clear violation of the 4th Geneva Convention to be illegal now what theyve done essentially in our case now is theyve gone beyond sanctioning merely Government Policies to supporting putting its rubber stamp on Government Policies to stamp out dissidents so thats an extra step that they have gone beyond mela speak lir here the original law does not distinguish between israel and its elite. Settlements in the occupied west bank and the objective really behind many of these anti boycott measures whether it be my deportation or whether it be laws that are being passed in the United States for example are to erase the distinction between israel within its borders and its settlements in the occupied west bank it is part of serving an agenda of a greater israel that includes illegal settlements what are also thought was very interesting in the new York Court Decision is just the equivocation and the sort of the false equation off your political opinion to the last prophet of the israeli state may incur if they kompany swear to take your opinion to heart and act on it and i this is something that i find very common in the israeli discourse every time you bring up some critical issue you know almost immediately accused of. Wanting to harm these really state how do you explain these types of hyperbole i mean do you think its conscious do you think its part of a strategy perhaps i certainly think its a universal tactic i used to cover egypt for Human Rights Watch we documented the very same pattern when a government doesnt want to deal with it serious human rights abuses the easiest way to dismiss criticism is to attack the messenger and to put a label on them in egypt the label they would put on you as being a supporter for Muslim Brotherhood and israel its been many things it can be antisemitism and increasingly it is labeling you a supporter of boycotts and that actually the Court Decision is not even based on my political opinion because Human Rights Watch is a rights group we dont take positions for example on political issues we document rights abuses by all actors Israel Palestinians and private companies and settlements and for the courts that human Rights Advocacy was interpreted to represent a threat to the state itself if advocacy and human rights abuse is a threat. To a system or a state i think the National Question to ask is what kind of state is it that basically wants to deport somebody documenting rights abuse what ive learned from my career documenting human rights abuse and ive been blocked access from places like egypt its said syria had a is any government that seeks to kick out people documenting abuses often in the end wont succeed in doing so and often its a sign that those human rights abuses themselves are quite serious well i think Prime Minister netanyahu went even further in his reaction to your case because he hinted at here as somebody who under the banner of justice and human rights actively works to dillard to demise this state of israel and negate its very ride to exist how do you take it does your work challenge israels right to exist thats quite simply a smear thats meant to the truck from our well researched findings the reality here is that we have documented rights abuses here for nearly 3 decades and if you see the documentation of rights abuse as a threat to your states legitimacy its a sign that your states legitimacy may be tied to very serious human rights abuse in this case were talking about a over 50 year long occupation thats defined by institutional discrimination in systematic rights abuse the reality here israeli officials and said if attacking. Human Rights Groups that are documenting abuses or other critics of government policy should address the very serious human rights issues that we have documented and that are quite clear to anyone who understands the reality on the ground now you just mentioned this systematic human rights abuse especially when it comes to the palestinians and i personally thought that you made a very aliquot end point by saying that when the hospitality website side arab a. M. B. O. Booking dot com facilitate the ranting of accommodation in the all cute. Territories they sensually partake in an openly discriminatory system because the palestinians are not allowed to you and to not allow to leave are not allowed to build not allowed even to stay for a few days and those ranted accommodations that are built on the land of that ancestors why do you think this argument though failed to persuade the company such as air b. N. B. Youre absolutely right that the companies that operate in settlements inherently contribute to an benefit from serious rights abuses they get permits that are systematically denied to palestinians they operate on land stolen from palestinians they pay taxes that go back to entrenching settlements and they partake in a 2. 00 tiered labor system legal slave or system and which palestinians are treated under military law and israelis under israeli civil law at the end of the day air b. N. B. Was persuaded it did announce that it was going to stop listing in settlements in order to not contribute to human suffering on the ground however they sensual got bullied into changing their opinion they were lawsuits filed against the u. S. State said that they would take measures to ensure that their employees didnt use air b. N. B. Site and air b. N. B. Capitulated it didnt change its policy it just said were not going to delist instead were going to donate the profits from settlements elsewhere so they still acknowledge that their policy is contributing to suffering they just refuse to take the logical step that follows from that finding because like in the case of Human Rights Watch here in israel and many others they faced pressure as a result of taking a principled Decision Just to be clear the type of strike the type of compromise that caribbean be tried to strike continuing listing those properties but pledging to. Give all the proceeds to charity is that good enough in terms of not entrancing the injustice and not entrenching the occupation its absolutely insufficient theres. I know what washed their hands but theyre not washing their hands because the un Guiding Principles on business and human rights makes it very clear you cannot contribute to rights abuse what air b. N. B. Is still doing is brokering a rental on land stolen from palestinians who themselves cant stay there theyre still doing that theyre still facilitating a transaction by which somebody can stay in in the illegal settlement on land taken from palestinians who by military order cant enter the settlements so theyre still making that transaction work yes they may not be getting a profits anymore from that transaction although theyre still getting revenues from what theyve stated but theyre still contributing and allowing that action to take place of course it does not whitewash their involvement theyre still being involved in very serious rights abuse he you mentioned a moment ago that neither you chris no nor Human Rights Watch as an organization supported the boy divestment and sanctions movement apart from considering boycotts in general as a form of legitimate peaceful protest why youre not siding with the b. D. S. Movement given that the your views on legality and the ethics of deriving profits from the occupation seem to be quite similar because the reality is Human Rights Watch is not a Political Organization we do not take positions on wars on occupations and on political movements such as the boycott Divestment Sanctions Movement which has certain Political Goals what we do is we tell governments and companies and other actors not to abuse rights and what decades of our research has shown is that any company that operates in a settlement invariably contributes to rights abuse so we Tell Companies dont engage in those activities dont operate in settlements if you want to adhere to International Law but we dont tell consumers what to do whether or not to boycott that company and certainly we dont prescribe a political solution our objective here is to call for everybody to respect the rights and its quite clear you cant respect rights and do business in a settlement ok well mr shapiro we have to take. Very short break now but we will be back in just a few moments. What is do before you came here where did you work before you came here when you lived. Death row in many u. S. States Capital Punishment is still practiced convicted prisoners can spend years waiting for execution but most of the time the victims families they are very much in favor the Death Penalty there are some people that because of what they did have given up the right to live among us some are even proven innocent after years on death row and how many more exonerations is it going to take before we as a society realize that this is not working and we actually do something about. The accounting fraud at Deutsche Bank is only now just being revealed. At the tip of the iceberg this theyre sitting on a half a quadrillion worth of worth close to rivet of that if the mark to market would would be greater than 5 times global g. D. P. This isnt in fact the beginning of lehmann to point out. Its hard to take some from somebody if you know have something to replace. The work to do this interview today and all these market and then they take me. 4 years or. So are going to you start selling drugs. If well hear some to put the money back. Then just me all the way the law i almost gave basically my colors peace before so where. Do you know its a good many security positions open to you that. Day or jack me again. You see people did not their course you know see you coming in the herd and this seems like the hurry a bit run into the house like they dont want to they dont want to talk to your kids or mil or anything like that. Sort of go or come. And do. Drugs just try every day. To some give me. Welcome back to worlds apart with marsha care israel and palestine director at Human Rights Watch mr sze care as you mentioned before is really israel Supreme Court has frozen the your expulsion order. You still have a couple of months to stay in israel but if you lose i are you planning to do your work from some other location or will you have to find another special a specialized nation we will not let any government whether it be the egyptian the saudi the israeli the russian will not let any government dictate who covers human rights abuses for us and that country so even if im deported will continue to do the same work using the same tools covering the same subjects with the same intensity and vigor as we currently do of course not having access to israel and palestine will mean will hurt victims of human rights abuse that will lose access to a respected. International rights group it will mean having less direct contact with affected governments including the Israeli Government but it wont change the way we work were consistent and unfortunately with israel weve been documenting rights abuses here for several decades weve always had access to 0 in the West Bank Gaza but by taking this decision israel be joining the ranks of countries such as cuba venezuela. You know north korea some of the worst human rights abusers that we work on israel proclaims itself to be the one democracy in the middle east at the same time that we have offices and stuff working in places like tunisia jordan and lebanon so if the court does uphold the district Court Decision and the government goes forward with deportation it will be a sign of just how far this government has gone and disrespecting the most basic democratic norms now speaking about of your e. U. You personally israel is not the 1st country to try to kick you out if im not mistaken both the syrian and the egyptian governments have been quite unhappy with your work you just imagined Israel Considers and actually prides itself on being the only democracy in the middle east how does the latest developments really seat with title that there is mention that in almost every interview i have with the israeli officials that they are the only democracy in the middle east and therefore they should be allowed a little bit more than all the other countries whether it comes to human rights or odd policy issues look democracies do not deport human rights defenders over there peaceful expression democracies do not rule over millions of people for another people you know for decades on democracy is rule of the people not the rule of one people over another democracies do not compile dossiers on human rights defenders in my case that. Consisted of Student Group websites from when i was a student years ago petitions i signed tweets tweets i made the reality is theres been a serious deterioration in the most basic. Outlets of discussion in israel today i mean my case is not an isolated event it comes at a time in which israeli rights defenders are being accused of demeaning the state in the army for their advocacy at a time in which many other International Rights advocates have been denied entry at the time to which the state has detained in some cases you know travel ban from travel palestinian rights defenders there is a larger context here in the context starts with the fact that israel has been occupying palestinians for 52 years and that occupation itself has deteriorated the most basic ideas of what a legitimate democratic government looks like inside of israel well i think this is actually a very important conversation because i come from a country with a very checkered human rights record and there are some political and also structural historic reasons for that but we are kind of used to the discourse that Human Rights Violations out only. The demain of the of the autocratic regimes and i personally think that the main difference between democracies in the talkers is that the talker have more leeway abusing their own people whereas democracies are more constrained domestically but they take it out on people in their countries is that too simplistic of a formulation because its not just we are not only taking a talking about israels treatment of palestine but for example a your own experience of working with gone bay detainees and the american treatment of iraqis in the iraqi prison thats their record there is also quite questionable when you consider it from a democratic clades thats absolutely true i mean unfortunately i mean Human Rights Watc