Activism and BDS Beat 24 January 2013
Politicians in Oslo have been pushing for the exclusion of British-Danish security firm G4S from bidding for public contracts because of its involvement in Israel’s violations of international law and human rights, Norwegian newspaper Dagsavisen reported on 16 January.
Meanwhile, the Umeå branch of the Swedish church will no longer hire G4S, due to its role in the occupation and Israeli prisons.
Lisa Tegby, the vicar of Umeå, told Swedish radio sation Studio One that she believes the action is supported by UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk’s report to the UN General Assembly, which calls for a boycott of companies profiting financially from the settlements in the West Bank (reported in Swedish newspaper Dagen on 12 January).
Tegby responded to criticism: “I say no, and cry out loud, when Israel violates human rights in the West Bank, as well as I say no, and cry aloud, what is happening in Syria, or in parts of China or what happened in South Africa.”
Legality of BDS
In the UK, councilors on the North London Waste Authority claimed they could not exclude Veolia from a public contract despite its involvement in Israeli settlements.
However one expert in Norway disagrees: “It is factually and legally incorrect to suggest that companies cannot be excluded from government goodies on the basis of a poor human rights record,” wrote Mark Taylor on The Laws of Rule website on 16 January.
Veolia ultimately abandoned the tender procedure after a two-year campaign by the No to Veolia Action Group and a heated debate in the media.
Taylor continued in his article:
There are an increasing number of public authorities, both local and national, that are imposing human rights and other ethical requirements through procurement rules. Most already do so for issues such as corruption – both here [in Norway] and abroad – and there is no law preventing them from doing so with respect to human rights.
Taylor assisted in the drafting of a report [PDF] which was launched at the UN Human Rights Council early December, which says:
Many jurisdictions allow public authorities to impose human rights due diligence obligations on companies seeking to be awarded public contracts. This is the case, for example, in the EU.
There is no legal obstacle to including human rights in ethical procurement rules, nor in excluding businesses who don’t meet human rights standards, according to Taylor: “The only obstacle is politicians who would rather drag their feet.”
G4S still complicit
In response to questions from Swedish media, G4S claimed it will pull out of its controversial contracts in the West Bank.
Debbie McGrath, G4S communications manager in London, told Norwegian newspaper Dagsavisen on 16 January that this concerns a police station, a prison and a few checkpoints. The company have not deployed personell down there, but it provides security systems, she added.
Adam Mynott, another G4S communications manager in London, told Swedish radio Studio One that G4S will have left the West Bank by 2015, because its customers do not live up to the company’s ethical guidelines, wrote Swedish newspaper Dagen on 12 January.
McGrath and Mynott handled G4S damage control efforts following the company’s failure to supply enough guards to the London 2012 Olympics.
However, Richard Falk investigated G4S’s intention “to exit a number of contracts involving the servicing of security equipment at the checkpoints in the wall, prisons and police stations in the West Bank.” G4S does not intend to end all operations in Israeli settlements, concluded Falk, because the company continues its contracts with private enterprises operating in the settlements.
Moreover, G4S will remain complicit with Israel’s violations of international law through its services to Israeli prisons where thousands of Palestinian political prisoners are held. Israel’s transfer of thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including children, from the occupied territory to military prisons inside Israel is a violation of Article 76 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
G4S secures Israeli abuses
The vicar of Umeå is right about Richard Falk’s support. Falk calls on civil society to “vigorously pursue initiatives to boycott, divest and sanction” against companies such as G4S, Veolia and Volvo until they bring their policies and practices into line with international laws and standards.
In November 2012, Richard Falk sent a letter to the member councilors of the North London Waste Authority urging it not to award the multi-billion waste contracts to Veolia “due to its deep and ongoing complicity with Israeli violations of international law.”
In a report to the UN General Assembly, Falk addressed the legal responsibility of business enterprises and corporations in activities relating to Israel’s settlements in the occupied West Bank. In the G4S case study, Falk writes:
G4S Israel (Hashmira) is the Israel subsidiary of G4S. The company provides resources and equipment for Israeli checkpoints. The company also provides security services to businesses in settlements, including security equipment and personnel to shops and supermarkets in the West Bank settlements of Modi’in Illit, Ma’ale Adumim and Har Adar and the settlement neighbourhoods of East Jerusalem. In addition, after the company purchased Aminut Moked Artzi, an Israeli private security company, it took over its entire business operations, which include security services to businesses in the Barkan industrial zone located near the settlement of Ariel.
Falk reminds G4S that when it joined the UN Global Compact Group, CEO Nick Buckles said that it would “give us extra impetus to ensure respect for human rights, the environment and ethical behaviour are part of everything we do worldwide.”
- Richard Falk
- Israeli settlements
- UN Global Compact
- Nick Buckles
- political prisoners
- No to Veolia Action Group
G4S is the security company of the Danish ministries...
Permalink Tina X replied on
I've contacted my member of Parliament to get this issue back on the agenda, but the last time it was dismissed by the Minister of Finance.
I've also tried to shed some light on it here in Denmark, but no one listens.
What to do?
What to do?
Permalink Adri Nieuwhof replied on
Are you in touch with Danish activists? You find information in the following article:
Thank you, yes I am.
Permalink Tina X replied on
Thank you, yes I am.
And now I got a message from the above mentioned MP that he will take it to the President of Parliament and if that doesn't work he will make a proposal to be dealt with in a Parliamentary assembly.
In the meantime it has come to my knowledge that a lot (maybe all) Danish ministries are using G4S as security guards. This will not stand and I will continue this fight!