DOCSLIB.ORG

Israel, Valid Until December 30 1995, for the Purpose of Passage from the Judea and Samaria Area "For Personal Needs"

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Israel, Valid Until December 30 1995, for the Purpose of Passage from the Judea and Samaria Area HCJ 3519/05 1. Salah Nabil Yunis Uared 2. HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual v. 1. The Commander of the Army Forces in the West Bank 2. The Commander of the Army Forces in the Gaza Strip The Supreme Court Sitting as the High Court of Justice [July 12 2006] Before Justice E. Rivlin, Justice E. Rubinstein & Justice E. Hayut Petition for an Order Nisi For Petitioners: Gil Gan-Mor & Yossi Wolfson For Respondents: Dani Chorin JUDGMENT Justice E. Hayut: This petition regards the request of petitioner no. 1 (hereinafter: "petitioner"), who was held in administrative detention and released on February 21 2005 to the Gaza Strip, to allow him to return to the city of Jenin in the Judea and Samaria area, where he had been living with his family when he was arrested. The Essential Relevant Facts 1. Petitioner is a Palestinian, who was born in 1985. In 1994, when he was nine years old, petitioner arrived with his family, from Lebanon, to the Gaza Strip, and their entrance into the Gaza Strip was permitted at that time due to the fact that petitioner's father was an official in the Palestinian security apparatus. On December 18 1995, petitioner's father was granted a permit to enter Israel, valid until December 30 1995, for the purpose of passage from the Judea and Samaria area "for personal needs". Soon after, in 1996, as it appears from the petition and its appendices, the entire family moved to the city of Jenin, but in the Palestinian Population Registry, petitioner's family members, including petitioner, remain registered as residents of Gaza to this very day. On June 1 2004, petitioner was arrested near Shechem and placed in administrative detention, due to intelligence information collected by security officials that indicates that petitioner was involved in military terrorist activity. Approximately nine months after, on February 21 2005, petitioner was released, along with about 500 additional Palestinian prisoners and detainees, in the framework of a political gesture on the part of Israel toward the Palestinian Authority. Petitioner was released to the Gaza Strip, and according to the State's argument, that was since "the criterion for releasing prisoners in one place or another is their registered place of residence" (paragraph 12 to respondents' response, of June 25 2006, to the request for additional details). 2. After he was sent to the Gaza Strip, petitioners contacted respondents and requested that petitioner be allowed to return to his house in Jenin where his family lives, and not having been answered, this petition was submitted. In their preliminary response to the petition, respondents noted that their opposition to petitioner's passage from Gaza to Jenin stems from intelligence information regarding him, that indicates that petitioner is an active military terrorist who is liable to endanger the security of the area, the security of the State, and the safety of the public, and that the danger posed by him in Gaza is considerably smaller than the risk posed by him if he should be in the Judea and Samaria area. Petitioners raised principled arguments regarding the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as one territorial unit; regarding respondents' lack of authority to deny or restrict the right of the residents of these areas to move from one area to another; and regarding the purely technical meaning of the population registry and the address registered in it. Petitioners further argued that residents' conduct in this case constituted a violation of human rights and a breach of international law, as well as Israeli administrative and constitutional law, especially due to the lack of issuance of a residence assignment order regarding petitioner, with all the rights that entails, as discussed by this Court in HCJ 7015/02 Ajuri v. The Commander of IDF Forces in the West Bank, 56 PD (6) 352 (2002) (hereinafter: Ajuri), including: the requirement that the order be extended once every half year, the holding of a hearing and the granting of an opportunity to the assignee to make his arguments before the committee via an attorney, the duty to economically support the assignee and his family during the period that the order is in effect, and examination whether there is evidence of a real security risk stemming from the assignee himself, as opposed to merely an abstract risk. 3. In the decision of September 28 2005, another panel of this Court granted an order nisi ordering respondent no. 1 to give reason why he should not allow petitioner to return from Gaza to his home and his family in Jenin, in the West Bank. As a result, respondents filed a response, which they asked to see as their skeleton argument, in which they reiterate that their opposition to petitioner's passage from his registered place of residence in Gaza to Jenin is based upon updated intelligence information indicating that petitioner was involved in military terrorist activity, and is still involved in it today, and thus, according to their argument, he poses a real risk to the safety of the public and the security of the State. That risk, they further argue, is considerably smaller when petitioner is in Gaza than it would be if he were in the Judea and Samaria area. Regarding the legal basis of their position, respondents emphasize that according to the security legislation that applies in the area, respondent no. 1 has the authority to prevent Palestinians who are not residents of the Judea and Samaria area – which has been declared a closed area – from passing from Gaza to that area, to the extent that it is necessary in order to protect its security, a fortiori after the declaration of the end of the military government in the Gaza Strip on September 12 2005. According to respondents' argument, their position has been confirmed time and time again by this Court, and they further argue that their position does not contradict the ruling in Ajuri, the case of family members of a terrorist who were residents of the Judea and Samaria area, whose residence had been assigned to the Gaza Strip for security reasons, pursuant to the order issued by respondent no. 1. In this case, however, there is a petitioner whose registered address is in the Gaza Strip, and for that reason was released there. Regarding the registration, respondents further argue that for years, and even after the signing of the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip on September 28 1995 (hereinafter: "the interim agreement"), respondent no 1's permission for changing one's residence from the Gaza Strip to the Judea and Samaria area was needed, and the Palestinian side recognized said authority of respondent no. 1. Respondents further argue that the parties routinely acted accordingly until September 2000, and that during all those years Israel approved moves of residence to the Judea and Samaria area according to applications relayed by the Palestinian Authority, unless there was a security reason preventing it. In September 2000, and in light of the armed conflict that broke out between Israel and the Palestinians, Israel stopped approving passage of Palestinians from Gaza to the Judea and Samaria area and changing of residence to the Judea and Samaria area, except in a number of exceptional cases which were approved for humanitarian reasons over the past year. According to respondents' arguments, respondent no. 1 was never asked by the Palestinian Authority to approve a move of the residence of petitioner and his family from Gaza to Jenin, and such approval was thus of course not given. Thus, respondents further argue, petitioner and his family have been present in Jenin since 1996 with no legal permit, and petitioner cannot rely upon that situation in order to receive the relief he requests. Last, respondents argue that the issue of changing residence from the territory of the Gaza Strip to the Judea and Samaria area is a political issue that touches upon the relations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, and was even discussed in the contacts between those parties until recently. In light of that character of the issue, and in light of the fact that it regards the State's foreign relations, respondents are of the opinion that the government has the prerogative to decide it, and that it is not proper for the Court to intervene in it. 4. In the hearing we held on July 12 2006 after the filing of the skeleton arguments, respondents declared that due to the military terrorist activity in which petitioner was involved, petitioner had become wanted by the security agencies. Respondents once again asked to present classified and updated intelligence material regarding petitioner in camera, in order to provide a basis for their argument regarding the real risk posed by him. However, petitioners did not consent to presentation of that material before us in camera, and thus we were not able to examine it. Discussion 5. Petitioners raise serious and important questions in this petition, which we have surveyed above. According to the thrust of their argument, these questions should be examined at the outset, and especially, it should be determined whether respondents acted within the framework of their authority when they removed petitioner to the Gaza Strip. The individual balance regarding petitioner, including examination of the risk posed by him, should come, according to their argument, only at the second stage, after their principled stance has been accepted, and this Court should declare the removal to Gaza void and order petitioner's return to the Judea and Samaria area.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • At the Supreme Court Sitting As the High Court of Justice
    Disclaimer: The following is a non-binding translation of the original Hebrew document. It is provided by HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual for information purposes only. The original Hebrew prevails in any case of discrepancy. While every effort has been made to ensure its accuracy, HaMoked is not liable for the proper and complete translation nor does it accept any liability for the use of, reliance on, or for any errors or misunderstandings that may derive from the English translation. For queries about the translation please contact [email protected] At the Supreme Court HCJ 5839/15 Sitting as the High Court of Justice HCJ 5844/15 1. _________ Sidr 2. _________ Tamimi 3. _________ Al Atrash 4. _________ Tamimi 5. _________ A-Qanibi 6. _________ Taha 7. _________ Al Atrash 8. _________ Taha 9. HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual, founded by Dr. Lotte Salzberger - RA Represented by counsel, Adv. Andre Rosenthal 15 Salah a-Din St., Jerusalem Tel: 6250458, Fax: 6221148; cellular: 050-5910847 The Petitioners in HCJ 5839/15 1. Anonymous 2. Anonymous 3. Anonymous 4. HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual, founded by Dr. Lotte Salzberger – RA Represented by counsel, Adv. Michal Pomeranz et al. 10 Huberman St. Tel Aviv-Jaffa 6407509 Tel: 03-5619666; Fax: 03-6868594 The Petitioners in HCJ 5844/15 v. Military Commander of the West Bank Area Represented by the State Attorney's Office Ministry of Justice, Jerusalem Tel: 02-6466008; Fax: 02-6467011 The Respondent in HCJ 5839/15 1. Military Commander of the West Bank Area 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Arrested Development: the Long Term Impact of Israel's Separation Barrier in the West Bank
    B’TSELEM - The Israeli Information Center for ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT Human Rights in the Occupied Territories 8 Hata’asiya St., Talpiot P.O. Box 53132 Jerusalem 91531 The Long Term Impact of Israel's Separation Tel. (972) 2-6735599 | Fax (972) 2-6749111 Barrier in the West Bank www.btselem.org | [email protected] October 2012 Arrested Development: The Long Term Impact of Israel's Separation Barrier in the West Bank October 2012 Research and writing Eyal Hareuveni Editing Yael Stein Data coordination 'Abd al-Karim Sa'adi, Iyad Hadad, Atef Abu a-Rub, Salma a-Deb’i, ‘Amer ‘Aruri & Kareem Jubran Translation Deb Reich Processing geographical data Shai Efrati Cover Abandoned buildings near the barrier in the town of Bir Nabala, 24 September 2012. Photo Anne Paq, activestills.org B’Tselem would like to thank Jann Böddeling for his help in gathering material and analyzing the economic impact of the Separation Barrier; Nir Shalev and Alon Cohen- Lifshitz from Bimkom; Stefan Ziegler and Nicole Harari from UNRWA; and B’Tselem Reports Committee member Prof. Oren Yiftachel. ISBN 978-965-7613-00-9 Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................ 5 Part I The Barrier – A Temporary Security Measure? ................. 7 Part II Data ....................................................................... 13 Maps and Photographs ............................................................... 17 Part III The “Seam Zone” and the Permit Regime ..................... 25 Part IV Case Studies ............................................................ 43 Part V Violations of Palestinians’ Human Rights due to the Separation Barrier ..................................................... 63 Conclusions................................................................................ 69 Appendix A List of settlements, unauthorized outposts and industrial parks on the “Israeli” side of the Separation Barrier .................. 71 Appendix B Response from Israel's Ministry of Justice .......................
    [Show full text]
  • RIPE for ABUSE RIGHTS Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements WATCH in the West Bank
    HUMAN RIPE FOR ABUSE RIGHTS Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements WATCH in the West Bank Ripe for Abuse Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements in the West Bank Copyright © 2015 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 978-1-6231-32392 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide. We scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of human rights for all. Human Rights Watch is an international organization with staff in more than 40 countries, and offices in Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Goma, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, Nairobi, New York, Paris, San Francisco, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, Tunis, Washington DC, and Zurich. For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org APRIL 2015 978-1-6231-32392 Ripe for Abuse Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements in the West Bank Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1 International Law Violations .....................................................................................................4 Expanding Settlement Agriculture, Restrictive Anti-Palestinian Policies ...................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hoveret Eng2.Indd
    Violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians and their property has been a daily occurrence for many years in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The report A Semblance of Law: Law Enforcement upon Israeli Civilians in the West Bank reveals the dynamic that leads to the absence of effective law enforcement in regards to Israeli civilians in the West Bank who commit offenses against Palestinians. The report documents serious faults in all stages of the law enforcement process: when offenses are committed, IDF soldiers present on the scene show a grave tendency to ignore them; Palestinians face physical and bureaucratic difficulties when they attempt to file complaints; and above all, the investigation stage shows faults in the examination of incidents, failure to implement the required investigatory steps, and sometimes an unwillingness to undertake even a cursory investigation. Yesh Din - Volunteers for Human Rights was founded in March 2005, and since then its volunteers have been working for a structural and long-term improvement of the human rights situation in the OPT. The organization collects and disseminates credible and current information on systematic human rights abuses in the OPT; applies public and legal pressure on the state authorities to stop them; and raises public awareness of human A Semblance rights abuses in the OPT. In order to realize its goals effectively, Yesh Din operates according to a unique model among human rights organizations in Israel: of Law the organization is run and staffed by volunteers, and is assisted on a daily basis by a professional staff Law Enforcement of lawyers, human rights experts and strategic and communications consultants.
    [Show full text]
  • A Threshold Crossed Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution WATCH
    HUMAN RIGHTS A Threshold Crossed Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution WATCH A Threshold Crossed Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution Copyright © 2021 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 978-1-62313-900-1 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide. We scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of human rights for all. Human Rights Watch is an international organization with staff in more than 40 countries, and offices in Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Goma, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, Nairobi, New York, Paris, San Francisco, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, Tunis, Washington DC, and Zurich. For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org APRIL 2021 ISBN: 978-1-62313-900-1 A Threshold Crossed Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution Map .................................................................................................................................. i Summary ......................................................................................................................... 2 Definitions of Apartheid and Persecution .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • [Emblem of the State of Israel] at the Supreme Court Sitting As The
    Disclaimer : The following is a non-binding translation of the original Hebrew document. It is provided by Hamoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual for information purposes only. The original Hebrew prevails in any case of discrepancy. While every effort has been made to ensure its accuracy, HaMoked is not liable for the proper and complete translation nor does it accept any liability for the use of, reliance on, or for any errors or misunderstandings that may derive from the English translation. For queries about the translation please contact [email protected] [Emblem of the State of Israel] At the Supreme Court Sitting as the High Court of Justice HCJ 2088/10 HCJ 4019/10 Before: Honorable President (retired) D. Beinisch Honorable Justice M. Naor Honorable Justice E. Hayut The Petitioners in HCJ 2088/11 : HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual, founded by Dr. Lotte Salzberger and 12 others. The Petitioners in HCJ 4019/10 HaMoked: Center for the Defence of the Individual, founded by Dr. Lotte Salzberger and 15 others. v. The Respondent s in HCJ 2088/10 : 1. Military Commander of the West Bank 2. Military Commander of the Gaza Strip 3. Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories 4. Minister of Interior 5. Minister of Defense 6. Deputy Minister of Defense 7. State of Israel The Respondents in HCJ 4019/10 1. Military Commander of the West Bank 2. Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories 3. Official in charge of the population registry in the Civil Administration Petitions for Order Nisi Session dates: 2 Nissan 5771 (April 6, 2011) 16 Kislev 5772 (December 13, 2011) Representing the Petitioners in HCJ 2088/10 and HCJ 4019/10: Adv.
    [Show full text]
  • Monthly Summary – February 2011
    Israel Security Agency Monthly Summary – February 2011 Monthly Summary – February 2011 February 2011 has seen a decrease in the number of attacks compared to previous month: 61 attacks as opposed to 83 in January. The decrease was salient in the Gaza Strip (18 attacks as opposed to 30 in January) and in the Judea and Samaria (23 attacks as opposed to 33). Yet, in spit of the decrease in the number of attacks within the Judea and Samaria area, the number of attacks in February is higher than its level in the last quarter of 2010 (18 attacks in December, and 20 attacks in October and November). Whereas, the Gaza Strip, besides seeing a decrease has also noted a Grad rocket launched towards Be'er Sheva (February 23) - the first launching the city has experienced since Operation Cast Lead. Four Israelis were treated for trauma. The number of attacks In the Jerusalem area remains the same (20 attacks). As for casualties from terror attacks – two Israeli security officers were injured by firebombs in Judea (February 26). 1 www.shabak.gov.il Israel Security Agency Monthly Summary – February 2011 Data regarding terror attacks in February 2011 Following is a regional distribution of attacks: 18 attacks in the Gaza Strip (as opposed to 30 in January); 23 attacks in the Judea and Samaria (as opposed to 33 in January); and 20 attacks in Jerusalem (as in January). Jerusalem and the Judea and Samaria – most attacks executed in February (41 out of 43) were in the form of firebombs (January: 47 out of 53).
    [Show full text]
  • Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements in the West Bank
    HUMAN RIPE FOR ABUSE RIGHTS Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements WATCH in the West Bank Ripe for Abuse Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements in the West Bank Copyright © 2015 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 978-1-6231-32392 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide. We scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of human rights for all. Human Rights Watch is an international organization with staff in more than 40 countries, and offices in Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Goma, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, Nairobi, New York, Paris, San Francisco, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, Tunis, Washington DC, and Zurich. For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org Ripe for Abuse Palestinian Child Labor in Israeli Agricultural Settlements in the West Bank Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1 International Law Violations .....................................................................................................4 Expanding Settlement Agriculture, Restrictive Anti-Palestinian Policies .................................... 6 Palestinian
    [Show full text]
  • Judgments of the Israel Supreme Court: Fighting Terrorism Within the Law
    Judgments of the Israel Supreme Court: Fighting Terrorism within the Law Volume Two 2004-2005 Contents Introduction 5 Israel's Security Fence 7 HCJ 2056/04 Beit Sourik Village Council 7 v. The Government of Israel HCJ 7957/04 Zaharan Yunis Muhammad Mara'abe 62 v. The Prime Minister of Israel Safe Access to Rachel's Tomb 150 HCJ 1890/03 Bethlehem Municipality et Al 150 v. The State of Israel - Ministry of Defense The "Early Warning" Procedure 183 HCJ 3799/02 Adalah 183 v. GOC Central Command, IDF Prisoner Release 209 HCJ 1671/05 Almagor - Organization of Terrorism Victims 209 v. The Government of Israel Administrative Detention 218 HCJ 11026/05 A 218 v. The Commander of IDF Forces in the Judea and Samaria Areas Introduction This volume is a compilation of several important cases heard by the Supreme Court of Israel on terrorism, security activities and Israeli policy in the West Bank. The previous volume of “Judgments of the Israel Supreme Court: Fighting Terrorism within the Law,” reported on cases from 1997 to 2004. This successor volume contains cases from 2004 and 2005. The years 2004 and 2005 were significant in the development of Israel’s security policy. First, Israel disengaged from the Gaza Strip, removing Jewish settlements and its army presence in the area. Second, these years saw a marked increase in the building of a security fence meant to impede terrorist movement into Israel from the West Bank. Diplomatic efforts were undertaken; a summit was held between Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Sharm el-Sheik, Egypt, on February 8, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • Appropriating the Past: Israel's Archaeological Practices in the West Bank
    Appropriating the Past Israel’s Archaeological Practices in the West Bank << | < | 1 | > December 2017 Table of Contents Researched and Written by: Ziv Stahl | Legal consulting and assistance with writing Introduction | 3 chapter on the legal background: Atty. Shlomy Zachary | Comments and Editing: Yonathan Mizrachi, Lior Amihai, Miryam Wijler, Yonatan Kanonich, Gideon Suleimani, and Chemi Archaeology in Occupied Territory - Legal Background | 5 Shiff | Legal Consulting: Atty. Ishai Sneydor | Geographic Information and Maps: Hagit Ofran | Hebrew Editing: Anat Einhar | English Translation: Dana Hercbergs | English The Staff Officer for Archaeology - Background for the Management Editing: Talya Ezrahi and Jessica Bonn | Graphic Design: Lior Cohen of Archaeology in the West Bank | 12 Archaeology as a Means for Taking Over Palestinian Lands | 14 Emek Shaveh is an Israeli NGO working to defend cultural heritage rights To whom does the Archaeology Belong? Archaeology as a Tool for and to protect ancient sites as public assets that belong to members of all Dominating the Narrative | 23 communities, faiths and peoples. We object to the fact that the ruins of the past have become a political tool in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict Case Study: Tel Shiloh-Khirbet Seilun on the Lands of Qaryut and work to challenge those who use archaeological sites to dispossess disenfranchised communities. We view heritage site as resources for Village | 32 building bridges and strengthening bonds between peoples and cultures and believe that archaeological sites cannot constitute proof of precedence Conclusion | 39 or ownership by any one nation, ethnic group or religion over a given place. Yesh Din – Volunteers for Human Rights is an Israeli NGO that defends the human rights of Palestinians living in the West Bank under Israeli military rule.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary of Legal Proceedings with Which Yesh Din Assisted, 2006-2016 Photo by Eddie Gerald/Getty Images
    Summary of legal proceedings with which Yesh Din assisted, 2006-2016 Eddie Gerald/Getty Images Photo by Position Paper, September 2016 Yesh Din Volunteers for Human Rights A. BACKGROUND One of the key aspects of Israel’s control over the West Bank is its effort towards the control of land. This effort takes place mostly in Area C, which is under full Israeli control, and it is partly manifested in the thriving settlement enterprise which Israel has established in this area. According to international humanitarian law, the establishment of Israeli communities inside the OPT– settlements and outposts alike – is forbidden. Yet, despite this prohibition, Israel began building settlements in the West Bank almost immediately following its occupation of the area. Over the years of occupation, successive Israeli governments have initiated, approved, planned and funded settlements in the West Bank, and have instituted a system of benefits and financial incentives to encourage Israeli citizens to relocate to these settlements. Twenty- four local and regional Israeli councils are currently active in the West Bank. These councils govern 126 settlements, where approximately 385,900 Israeli citizens live.1 In the 1990s, as a result of international pressure and obligations, the official building of new settlements stopped. At the same time, in order to sustain the West Bank settlement enterprise, beginning in the mid-1990s, settlements began being established without official support from the State of Israel, but with help and involvement (both directly and indirectly) from public bodies and authorities representing the State. These settlements were referred to as “unauthorized outposts”.2 There are currently 100 unauthorized outposts in the West Bank, all in Area C, with an estimated population of 10,000.3 Eighty of the unauthorized outposts were either partially or completely built on privately owned Palestinian land.4 The jurisdiction areas of many settlements are much larger than the area they actually use.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel Defense Forces Judea and Samaria Area Office of the Military Legal Advisor P.O
    Israel Defense Forces Judea and Samaria Area Office of the Military Legal Advisor P.O. Box 5, Beit-El 90631 Phone: 02-9977071/711 Fax: 02-9977326 221/50-690170____________ 13 Marchesvan 5768 11 November 2008 To: "HaMoked: Center for Defence of the Individual" Adv. Yadin Elam (By fax: 03-6244130) Re: Passage from Judea and Samaria to the Gaza Strip – Mrs. _______ Mahram ID No. ___________ Ref: your letter 235 dated 5 November 2008 1. The subject of your letter referenced herein is the application by your client, Mrs. _______ Mahram (ID No. ________), for a permit to travel from Judea and Samaria, through the territories of the State of Israel, to the Gaza Strip, where her husband resides. 2. Your letter claimed that Civil Administration personnel required your client to undertake permanent relocation to Gaza as a compulsory precondition to the approval of her application. You claim that the said requirement is unacceptable, unreasonable and illegal. Our response to your said letter is detailed below. We seek to set the record straight and specify the policy in effect in this regard. Passage of Judea and Samaria Residents to the Gaza Strip: 3. As is well known, since September 2000, Palestinian terrorist organizations have been waging an armed conflict against the State of Israel. Following the IDF's withdrawal from the Gaza strip in September 2005, these organizations have been endeavoring to transfer terrorist infrastructures to the Judea and Samaria Area, and strengthen those which exist there already; the State of Israel is fighting against these attempts, inter alia, by separating Judea and Samaria from the Gaza Strip.
    [Show full text]