Skip to main content

New US Anti-Boycott Act Could Criminalize Israel's Critics the World Over

There is growing international controversy over the US' Israel Anti-Boycott Act, legislation which would expand a 1970s-era export law and expose individuals engaging in a range of activities to sweeping penalties, including criminal prosecution and hefty fines. 

Critics say it is a clear breach of the US Constitution's free speech protections.

The Act would amend and expand the Export Administration Act of 1979, which prohibits US citizens and companies from complying with or supporting boycotts imposed by a foreign country on a US ally. 

It was passed in response to the Arab League's boycott of Israel, which obliged US firms to boycott Israel and Israeli companies as a condition of doing business.

The new Act expands the law by prohibiting all US citizens and businesses from boycotting Israel and Israeli businesses (including businesses operating in the occupied Palestinian territories) in adherence with any boycott administrated by international governmental organizations, such as the United Nations and the European Union. 

Even unintentional violators could be fined up to $250,000, and wilful violations are subject to criminal prosecution, carrying a maximum sentence of up to US$1 million and 20 years in prison.

While a seemingly meager change, the original law could at least be said to have protected US companies from foreign government coercion — the proposed new amendments prohibits individuals from participating in certain boycotts outright, a right protected under the US Constitution's First Amendment.

While the Act's supporters have been quick to point out no international governmental organization is currently engaged in a boycott against Israel, its statement of policy expressly opposes the United Nations Human Rights Council's March 2016 resolution calling for a database of companies operating in the occupied Palestinian territories, and declares Congress views the policy as a move to "boycott, divest from, or sanction Israel" — in other words, the Act's authors evidently take the UNHRC's proposals as tantamount to a boycott.

As a result, any individual or business that refuses to purchase goods made in Israel or the occupied Palestinian territories by even one company would be violating the law. 

Given the severe penalties for falling foul of the Act's provisions, it's presumable at least some citizens and businesses would refrain from boycotting Israel at all out of fear of reprisal.

Moreover, aside from limiting the right to not purchase goods for political reasons, the Act prohibits individuals from even requesting information about whether a person is doing business in Israel, regardless of whether the requester is actually engaged in a boycott.

While the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement — a renowned global campaign seeking to apply economic and political pressure to Israel in order to compel the country to comply with international law —  is theoretically not covered by the law, as BDS members and supporters often refer to international governmental organizations' boycott requests or policies to support their own advocacy, the Act threatens to sanction BDS-supporting individuals and/or companies too. 

The bill also could sanction BDS supporters who identify companies dealing with businesses listed in the UNHRC database.

The Act's lead author, Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland, has claimed individual American citizens who back boycotts Israel would face no legal consequences as a result of the bill — but the Office of Antiboycott Compliance's own website clearly defines a "US person" as all individuals, corporations and unincorporated associations resident in the United States, including the permanent domestic affiliates of foreign concerns, including US citizens abroad (except when they are employed by non-US businesses).

Furthermore, even if the Act's authors promise not to prosecute individual consumers under the bill, subsequent governments may have different ideas and interpretations, meaning private citizens have every reason to be concerned about its passing.

Luckily for critics, co-sponsors of the bill have faced immense pressure over their support, and several, including Republican Joe Kennedy III of Massachussets, and Democrats Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Ron Wyden of Oregon, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.

At a July 22 town hall meeting in New York, Gillibrand was questioned on her co-sponsorship by representatives of campaign group Jewish Voices for Peace. 

In response, she said she was reviewing the Act, and criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whom she said had no vision for peace in the region.


Popular posts from this blog

Armenian protesters block traffic, railways & airport as protest leader loses PM bid

Anti-government protesters disrupted traffic in Armenia’s capital, blocking railways and roads leading to Yerevan International Airport, after the parliament voted against opposition leader Nikol Pashinyan’s bid for interim PM.
Protesters managed to block streets connecting downtown Yerevan to residential districts, disrupting transportation in Armenia’s capital, footage from the scene shows. 
Yerevan’s metro system has also been paralyzed as demonstrators sit on the tracks, preventing trains from passing.
Meanwhile, protesters disrupted traffic on a road leading to Yerevan’s Zvartnots International Airport, located just 12km from the center of the city. 
Consequently, some passengers had to go the rest of the way on foot in order to catch their flights, according to Sputnik news agency.
Railway services have also been disrupted all across the country amid the demonstrations, a spokesman for South Caucasus Railways confirmed to Interfax. 
Some other highways, including the one connecting th…

Iran Killing Command: The use of firearms in dealing with protesters

The document you see on the image is the order of the commander of the Tehran repressive force to all the units based in the city.

Based on this agenda, the mercenaries of the corrupt government Islamic Republic of Iran have been allowed to use firearms in the event of any protest movement against people by the regime.
This is a murder command.
The repressive force of the law, known to the world's famous police and guardians, should protect the lives of its citizens, by freeing their mercenaries, they allow them to murder Iranians who are protesting the corruption in the government and you have the important message that if you come to the streets in protest of corruption and torture and massacre, we will kill you.
Because, according to criminal Khomeini, maintenance of the system is obligatory.
A corrupt government that is so hideous that spend billions of dollars from the national treasury and popular capitalto the suppression of its people and the countries of the region, must be ov…

ایران فرمان قتل : دستور استفاده از سلاح گرم در برخورد با معترضان

سندی که در تصویر میبینید دستور فرمانده نیروی سرکوبگر انتظامی تهران به همه یگانهای مستقر در این شهر است.
بر اساس این دستور کار ، مزدوران حکومت فاسد نظام جمهوری اسلامی اجازه یافته اند که درصورت بروز هرگونه جنبش اعتراضی از سوی مردم علیه رژیم ، از سلاح گرم استفاده کنند.
این دستور یک فرمان قتل است.
نیروی سرکوبگر انتظامی که به ظاهر و تعریف شناخته شده پلیس در سراسر جهان ، میبایست حافظ جان شهروندان باشد ، با آزاد گذاشتن دست مزدوران چکمه پوش خود انها را مجاز به قتل ایرانیان معترض به فسادهای موجود درلایه های حکومت میکنند و این پیام مهم را در خود دارد که اگر در اعتراض به  فساد و شکنجه و کشتار به خیابانها بریزید شما را خواهیم کشت.
چرا که به گفته خمینی دجال، حفظ نظام از اوجب واجبات است.
حکومت فاسدی که انقدر وقیح هست که میلیاردها دلار از خزانه ملی و سرمایه مردمی را صرف سرکوب مردم خود و کشورهای منطقه میکند باید سرنگون کرد.
اکنون چهل سال است که کشور ما به اشغال این ملایان جنایکتارخونخوار و اسلام تحمیلی در آمده است .
هنوز باورش برای برخی سخت است که درک کنند کشور ما به معنای واقعی کلمه از سوی بنیادگرایان الله…