Important news from Europe. Another country is taking a stand against the occupation. Haaretz:
The Dutch government has for the first time called for retail chains in the Netherlands to state the origin of products from West Bank settlements, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. This makes the Netherlands, one of Israel’s greatest friends in Europe, the second country in the European Union, after Britain, to recommend such labeling.
United Civilians for Peace statement says, Labeling products from Jewish settlements is a first step:
United Civilians for Peace welcomes the decision by the Dutch government to make labeling of products that originate in Jewish settlements in the West Bank and the Golan Heights mandatory. …
The Dutch government now requires retailers to cooperate in the labeling of fresh fruit and vegetables, wine, honey, olive oil, fish, meat, chicken, eggs and cosmetics from Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. …
Labeling of these products leads to clarity about the extent of illegal settlements earning profits from importing their products into Dutch shops. In 2009, a similar decision was made in the United Kingdom. The result was that many British supermarkets’ imports of products from Jewish settlements ended.
… A decision for labeling throughout the EU is soon expected.
More pressure. From Israel National News:
The Dutch decision comes one week after the EU formally recommended that its 27 member states “prevent” Israeli activity in Judea and Samaria through an economic boycott of Jewish communities in those regions.
Too little too late. What will a mere labeling do?
Whole world knows the settlement activity is unlawful and have known that for over 40 years. The occupation nor settlements wont vanish just because we label different merchandise.
Its like the police, instead of arresting a murderer put a patch on him/her instead, with the text – “this man is a murderer”.
Perhaps better than a label saying ‘Only democrat in town’. It’s nice to see more new names appearing on Mondoweiss. The word is spreading.
It’s symbolic. But symbols are real things and they have power. If nothing else it makes it easier to boycott settlement products.
There are many Regulations in Europe on country of origin labeling, and many Israeli companies operating in the West Bank/ Gaza, now Palestine are in breach of them,just to give two examples ..Ahava would appear to be in breach of the Cosmetic products [safety] Regulations 2008 section 12 [1] that regulation reads ” No person shall supply a cosmetic product unless the container and packaging displays the following in indelible, easily legible and visible lettering — inter alia “Where the cosmetic product is manufactured outside the EEA, the country of origin must also be specified”. [ The EEA is the European Union Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein.] I’m not sure how many European countries use “must” in their transposed regulations since the original Euro directive only said “may” but starting on 11 July 2013 as per Regulation [EC] No 1223/2009 the European Parliament on Cosmetic products Regulation require all European Countries, quoting Article 19 [on labeling] which states inter alia ” The country of origin shall be specified for imported cosmetic products”; Because AhavaUK Ltd put “Made by Ahava Dead Sea Laboratories Ltd, Dead Sea, Israel”. on their products this would appear to be a clear case of false country of origin, The Golan Heights Winery, falsely label their wine, product of Israel, when the wine is, according to World Trade Organization rules, made in Syria country code SY, the EU Regulation 607/2009 article 55, makes it an offence not to have the country of origin clearly described on the label, in these two instances the country of origin is compulsory, they are strict liability offences, the only defence available to the accused are Due diligence, which of course is no defence if the offender is aware of the offences yet does nothing about them. Unfortunately the local authorities whose duty it is to prosecute are reluctant to do so therefore National courts are going to have to force them to do it [Judicial Review] lawyers are at this time working on this very question, of course under the Prosecution of offences Act 1985 section 1, it is possible for any individual to prosecute, as Lord Wilberforce said in Gouriet v Union of Post office workers[1978] this historical right remains a valuable constitutional safeguard against inertia or partiality on the part of authority.
One should remember that this rings pretty hollow coming from the EU. Last year the report (“Trading away peace” see link below) showed that EU countries not only do business with the settlers, the money involved is 15 times greater, than the trade EU conduct with the palestinians.
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,IFHR,,ISR,,509b8acf8,0.html