The VaTican & Jerusalem - PASSIA Online Store

The Vatican & JerusalemannexesAs concluded by the PLO-NAD legal team:Neither the Fundamental Agreement nor the Legal Personality Agreement between Israeland the Holy See contain a territorial clause. However, Article 4.1 of the FundamentalAgreement touches on the Jerusalem question, declaring the State of Israel’s continuingcommitment to maintain and respect “the Status Quo in the Christian Holy Places towhich it applies and the respective rights of the Christian communities there under.”Under this Article the State of Israel offers guarantees for Christian sanctuaries (e.g., theBasilica of the Holy Sepulcher, the Basilica of the Nativity and the Tomb of the Virgin)found in areas (East Jerusalem & Bethlehem) that under international law and UNresolutions are considered occupied territory. The fact that the Fundamental Agreementis not limited in applicability to Christian Holy Places located only in Israel propercould be construed as an implicit recognition of Israel’s authority over this occupiedterritory (which included Bethlehem at the time of the conclusion of the agreement) oras a recognition of the reality that the State of Israel is the de facto power that exercisedauthority temporarily as an occupying power over these territories.Similar considerations apply to the Legal Personality Agreement between Israel and the Holy See,which stipulates that “the State of Israel agrees to assure full effect in Israeli law to the legal personalityof the Catholic Church itself,” including institutions located in occupied areas, and fails to define whatis meant by ‘Israel’ when it provides that “the law which covers any legal transactions or other legal actsin Israel between any legal person and any party shall be the law of the State of Israel.”That being said, the question of the violation of the duty of non-recognition does not arise onlywith regard to the agreements signed with Israel by the Holy See. Many of the bilateral agreementsconcluded by the Israeli state with third states contain territorial clauses which may appear incompatiblewith the obligations of those states under international law. For instance, the 1994 Peace Treaty withJordan stipulates “to provide freedom of access to places of religious and historical significance,” withno explicit mention of the names or geographical locations of these sites.“Muslims and Christians Together for Jerusalem’s Sake”Since the beginning of the Palestinian resistance for Jerusalem, and consistent with the traditionallygood relations among Christians and Muslims in Palestinian lands, 1 leaders of both faiths 2 had stoodhand in hand to defend indiscriminately the rights of Arabs in the city, be they Muslims or Christians. 3The suffering endured by members of both communities under Israeli rule further contributed tointer-faith cooperation on the question of Jerusalem, which in the words of the Latin Patriarchof Jerusalem, Fouad Twal, is regarded as “an indispensable condition to create a climate of trust,friendship and collaboration.” 4A public example of this solidarity was given inApril 1990, when the Higher Council for IslamicWaqf Affairs and Holy Sites issued a “Statement ofSolidarity with the Christian Churches in Jerusalem,” 5where it expressed its “profound anxiety and pain[over] the dangerous Israeli aggressions taken up bysettler groups supported by the Israeli governmentupon the Christian holy places and properties in theheart of the historic Christian Quarter in the HolyCity of Jerusalem.” 6 In June 1996, another strongillustration of a Muslim-Christian united voice onthe Jerusalem issue was conveyed in a conferenceconvened in Beirut by the Middle East Council Visit of the Haram al-Sharif by Pope Benedict XVI,of Churches and the Arab Working Group on May 2009. © APChristian-Muslim Dialogue. In the final statement,entitled “Muslims and Christians Together for Jerusalem’s Sake,” 7 spiritual leaders of the Arab world1 Cf. Sabella, Bernard. “Jerusalem: A Christian Perspective,” in Jerusalem: Religious Aspects, op. cit.2 Mubarak Awad, a member of the Palestinian Greek Orthodox denomination born in Jerusalem in 1943, was among themany Christians who actively defended Palestinian lands. Known as the “Arab Gandhi,” Awad advocated nonviolence asa technique and strategy for resisting the Israeli occupation (boycotting the payment of taxes, the consumption of Israeliproducts, replanting uprooted trees, etc.). In 1983, he established the Palestinian Centre for the Study of Nonviolence,which was joined by both Palestinian Muslims and Christians. Awad was deported by the Israeli authorities for allegedlyinciting civil uprising during the First Intifada.3 Abdul-Hadi, Mahdi. “Introduction,” in Jerusalem: Religious Aspects, op. cit.4 Fouad Twal, Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, in “Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem Calls to Establish Independent Palestinian State,” op. cit.5 “Statement of Solidarity with the Christian Churches in Jerusalem by the Higher Council for Islamic Waqf Affairs and HolySites, April 1990,” in Abdul-Hadi, Mahdi (ed.). “Muslim Statements and Positions,” Documents on Jerusalem, op. cit.6 Manifestations of solidarity were also frequent on the Christian side. Cf. for instance: Pope VI’s general allocution on 31August 1969 following the arson of the al-Aqsa Mosque by an Australian citizen, Denis Michael Rohan (Osservatore Romano,1-2 September 1969); or “Middle East Council of Churches (MECC), Statement Concerning the Massacre at Al-Haram Al-Sharif, 11 October 1990,” PASSIA Documents on Jerusalem, op. cit.7 “Muslim and Christian Spiritual Leaders, ‘Muslims and Christians Together for Jerusalem’s Sake,’ Beirut, 14-16 June 1996,”in Abdul-Hadi, Mahdi (ed.). “Muslim Statements and Positions,” Documents on Jerusalem, op. cit.88 89