Solitary confinement and the incarceration of Palestinian narratives

According to reports in the Palestinian media, Israel’s domestic security agency, Shin Bet, has ordered the extension of solitary confinement for three Palestinian prisoners in Megiddo Prison, citing stale “security concerns” as a pretext.

In a statement by the Palestinian Prisoners’ Society paraphrased by Ma’an news agency and the Palestinian Information Centre, Hasan Khaizaran, Majed Al-Jubeh and Mohammad Naifeh have all received an extension order. All three have already been held in solitary confinement for much longer than the internationally-recommended maximum of 15 days. The punitive action is regarded as a retaliatory measure related to the Palestinian uprising against Israeli state and settler violence in the occupied West Bank.

An unnamed spokesperson for the Addameer prisoners’ NGO, quoted by Ma’an, said: “We know there is a potentially huge number of Palestinians being held in solitary confinement as of 1st October. However, it is difficult to follow-up with the huge number of arrests that have taken place since the start of last month.” The spokesperson added that solitary confinement “is always used” as a punitive measure in Israeli jails. “This always happens whenever there is an escalation.”

As usual, Israeli violence is structured in a manner that conceals other systematic forms of abuse. While attention is diverted towards the current Palestinian uprising in the West Bank, other atrocities continue to take place under Israel’s warped legislative system. The events which have been accessible through social media have also, in a way, contributed to the world being oblivious to the other forms of violence against vulnerable Palestinians whose visibility is, unfortunately, only accentuated through additional human rights violations by Israel.

International condemnation of the current solitary confinement of Palestinian prisoners is unlikely to be forthcoming. Previous discourse at an international level regarding the practice consisted of the usual perfunctory statements which, as befits the UN and its adherents, still ensured that a definite condemnation of the practice as torture was avoided. In a 2011 discourse, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture stated, “The practice should be used only in very exceptional circumstances and for as short a time as possible.” He went on to stress that no universal definition for solitary confinement even exists, due to different practices.

UN discourse, however, fails to take into account a situation where an entity — in this case Israel —operates beyond the realms of legality and creates a dangerous metaphor, as well as a precedent, out of solitary confinement, that is not just related to incarceration. Israel has ensured that, beyond the human rights violations related to imprisonment, Palestinians are confined to a dimension that not only shackles their rights as Shin Bet dictates, but also dictates and implements the restriction of Palestinian narratives.

The UN is conscious of Israel’s manipulation of international laws and conventions. Despite the convenience of solitary confinement not having a universal definition, the international organisation knows that Israel has always disregarded its ineffective measures and declarations which do not even provide a solid foundation for preventing human rights violations. Israel has, since its creation on occupied Palestinian land in 1948, thrived upon a narrative that deploys double standards.

It is about time that each violation suffered by Palestinians is analysed within the entire context of colonial violence, as well as Israel’s illegal presence. Defining Israel’s brutal oppressive policies in isolation will only normalise its perverse rationale.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.