RSS research
RSS News








NGO Monitor Reports

Center for Constitutional Rights: Serial Abuse of International Law

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) claims to be a non-profit legal and educational organization which uses litigation “to advance the law in a positive direction and “strengthen the broader movement for constitutional and human rights.” In the past, CCR has been active in advancing civil rights in the United States, but its activities have become more radicalized. This organization contributes to the demonization of Israel and exploitation of international law primarily through its lawsuits against Israeli officials for alleged “war crimes, extrajudicial killing, crimes against humanity, and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” In this process, CCR consistently disregards the context of terror, denies Israel’s right to self-defense, and accuses it of deliberately targeting civilians.

French Government Funding of Political NGOs

The French government provides local and international NGOs with substantial financial support, in addition to its support for the Palestinian Authority. Many of these NGOs, which claim to promote human rights, democracy, and development are in reality engaged in intense political advocacy campaigns directed against Israel, in contravention of French governmental funding guidelines. This report provides an overview of French funding mechanisms and NGO recipients in a method similar to previous NGO Monitor analyses of NGO funding by the European Union, Norway, UK, and Sweden.

Report on HRW’s Activities in 2006: Political Bias Undermines Human Rights

NGO Monitor´s systematic and detailed analysis shows a significant increase in Human Rights Watch´s focus on Israel in 2006, following a decline in 2005, and returning to the disproportionate agenda and lack of credibility characteristic of the 2000-2004 period. HRW publications dealing with Israel used unreliable and unverifiable "eyewitness" accounts, rather than photographic, documentary, or other evidence. These core deficiencies were particularly evident in its reporting on the July-August conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Similarly, HRW continues to use the language of demonization with respect to Israel, compared to publications on other Middle East countries. The evidence in this report demonstrates that despite HRW’s recognition "that international standards of human rights apply to all people equally," this powerful NGO continues to promote an anti-Israel political agenda.

“Human Rights First”: Without political bias

Human Rights First (HRF), based in New York and Washington, D.C., serves as an example of a human rights NGO which generally provides proportionate analysis and advocacy on the Middle East. In contrast to politicized groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, HRF presents a measured appraisal of human rights without erasing context and while preserving the core principles of universality and single standards. And although HRF officials, participated in NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban conference, Michael Posner later denounced the racism and antisemitism that marred the Durban meeting.

Double Standards: HRW/Amnesty/Christian Aid Statements on the Conflict between Fatah-al-Islam and the Lebanese Army

(Updated June 13, 2007) NGOs have largely remained silent regarding the intense fighting between the Lebanese Army and the Palestinian terror faction Fatah al-Islam in the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in Northern Lebanon. This silence stands in sharp contrast to the frequent condemnation of Israeli anti-terror operations, such as in Jenin during the IDF´s Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. This report will examine the responses of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Christian Aid (UK) to the fighting in Northern Lebanon and compare these with statements regarding Israel in the case of Jenin.

"EU-funded NGOs lead anti-Israel events on anniversary of 1967 war"

Many politicized and EU-funded NGOs that contribute to the demonization of Israel are holding activities and publishing reports coinciding with the fortieth anniversary of the 1967 War. These activities portray a one-sided view of events, repeating the Palestinian narrative and providing a distorted history of the war. These events are further exempleries of biased political agendas that are inconsistent with promoting universal human rights, and highlight the danger of government funding for these NGOs.

Amnesty International Report for 2006

Powerful NGOs such as Amnesty International have major political impacts, and often promote narrow agendas that are inconsistent with universal human rights. As part of NGO Monitor´s continuing assessment of this bias, we have systematically analyzed the relative emphasis on Israel in comparison to other countries in the Middle East in 2006. This research clearly demonstrates that in 2006, Amnesty International focused disproportionately on condemnations of Israel and singled out Israel to a far greater extent than Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Egypt, and other chronic abusers of human rights. This evidence of a clear political agenda is consistent with other studies and examples of Amnesty International´s bias and lack of credibility.

World Bank report on Palestinians based on false NGO reports and anti-Israel bias

On May 9, 2007, the World Bank published a report entitled “Movement and Access Restrictions in the West Bank: Uncertainty and Inefficiency in the Palestinian Economy.” As the following analysis demonstrates, the claims made by the so-called "technical team" of the World Bank’s report lack credibility, and are based entirely on the publications of a variety of highly politicized groups and NGOs and UN OCHA. As a result, the allegations and analysis contained in this report cannot reliably be used by policy makers attempting to deal with the challenges posed by the combination of ongoing Palestinian violence and economic crisis. In addition, this report is inconsistent with the World Bank´s apolitical humanitarian mission, and reflects negatively on this institution.

HRW/FIDH/OMCT statement on NGO official linked to PFLP

On May 2 2007, three major NGOs -- Human Rights Watch, FIDHand the World Organization Against Torture (OMCT) -- published a joint press release calling on Israel to lift the travel ban placed on Shawan Jabarin, the General Director of Al-Haq. The statement alleges that Jabarin was barred by Israel from attending the annual Congress of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) in Lisbon on April 19, 2007, and that "Israeli authorities have not explained why the restrictions are in place". NGO Monitor´s analysis of this statement shows these NGOs entirely erase Jarabin´s links to the PFLP and the legitimate security concerns. The result is a selective research and ideologically biased analysis, similar to others analyzed in previous NGO Monitor reports.

Claims in B´tselem/Hamoked report lack credibility

B´tselem and HaMoked released a report claiming that the Israel Security Agency continues to torture security detainees in violation of a Court decision. The Israeli Ministry of Justice (MOJ) issued a nine page letter detailing the questionable methodology and lack of verifiable sources in the report, and concluding that the report is "fraught with mistakes, groundless claims and inaccuracies." This public rebuttal reflects an important development in Israeli government policy with respect to such politicized NGO reports.

 First   «  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  »   Last 
Receive Updates!
follow us on twitter
friend us on facebook
At NGO Monitor
in $US
European Parliament
NGO Monitor History


Copyright 2014 The Amuta for NGO Responsibility - R.A. 58-0465508. All rights reserved.