NGO superpower, Human Rights Watch, has long promoted Palestinian NGO, Al Haq, in its publications. It regularly cites to Al Haq reports and has been the leader in the campaign to end the travel restrictions on suspected PFLP senior activist and Al Haq’s General Director, Shawan Jabarin. Based on information discovered by NGO Monitor, it turns out that one of the members of HRW’s Middle East and North Africa Advisory Board, Charles Shamas, is a co-founder of Al Haq; has “advised the PLO/PNA on IHL-related diplomacy”; and led the lobbying effort of the EU “into reversing their de facto acceptance of Israel’s administrative annexation of the occupied Palestinian and Syrian territories”. How can HRW even PRETEND to have any objectivity in its reporting on the Arab-Israeli conflict?
Background on Al Haq:
Al Haq is also a leader in NGO lawfare against Israel and the BDS movement. Al Haq is funded by many European governments, foundations, and international NGOs (Norway, Sweden, Ireland, Christian Aid, Diakonia, Ford Foundation, Open Society Institute).
In many of HRW’s Jabarin appeals, the organization omits any reference to Jabarin’s alleged ties to the PFLP or of the Israeli Supreme Court decisions excerpted below:
On March 10, 2009, the court found that:
We found that the material pointing to the petitioner’s involvement in the activity of terrorist entities is concrete and reliable material. We also found that additional negative material concerning the petitioner has been added even after his previous petition was rejected. This negative basis strengthens the security authorities’ position, according to which the prohibition placed on the petitioner leaving the country is not intended for “punishment” for his forbidden activity, but due to relevant security considerations.
In its decision of July 7, 2008 the court stated that:
We are dealing with reliable information according to which the petitioner is among the senior activists of the terrorist organization, The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. And in June 2007, the court again found that: This petitioner is apparently active as a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, in part of his hours of activity he is the director of a human rights organization, and in another part he is an activist in a terrorist organization which does not shy away from acts of murder and attempted murder, which have nothing to do with rights, and, on the contrary, deny the most basic right of all, the most fundamental of fundamental rights, without which there are no other rights – the right to life.