20 mar 2014
An Israeli central court in Beersheba on Wednesday rejected an appeal against a decision to demolish a Palestinian Bedouin village in the Negev, even though the structures were built after residents were forcibly moved there by Israel decades ago.
The Israeli court's decision paves the way for the planned displacement of Umm al-Heiran's 1,000 inhabitants to make way for a planned Jewish town, 50 years after the state gave the village inhabitants' the land after their original lands were confiscated.
The judge rejected an appeal filed by Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights, on behalf of residents against a court decision to demolish 33 buildings in the village.
The judge reportedly accepted the defense's argument that despite the land ownership, and the fact that Israel moved residents there but refused to ever recognize the village, the buildings themselves were still considered unlicensed and thus should be demolished.
The judge did however decide to delay the demolitions for nine months in order to give residents enough time to find new homes.
Since the original demolition order for the village was issued in 2003, villagers have been fighting a legal battle with Adalah's help to prevent the order's enforcement.
Israeli authorities originally announced plans to demolish the Arab village of Umm al-Heiran in order to create a Jewish town atop it, to be named Hiran, Adalah lawyer Suhad Bishara told AFP in December.
The Palestinian Bedouin residents of Umm al-Heiran moved to live in the village in 1956 after the state of Israel confiscated their lands in Khirbet Zabbala. However, the state never recognized the village's existence, neither providing services nor granting licenses for the buildings they constructed.
In 2002, the Israeli government prepared blueprints for a new Jewish city named Hiran to be built on the lands. The government also planned to establish a forest named Yatir on the adjacent Bedouin village of Atteir, which is also subject to demolition proceedings.
Israel refuses to recognize 35 Bedouin villages in the Negev, which collectively house nearly 90,000 people.
The Israeli state denies them access to basic services and infrastructure, such as electricity and running water, and refuses to place them under municipal jurisdiction.
Although the majority of Palestinians were expelled from their homes inside Israel during the 1948 conflict that led to the creation of the State of Israel, some Palestinians managed to remain in their villages and their descendants today make up around 20 percent of Israel's population.
The Israeli court's decision paves the way for the planned displacement of Umm al-Heiran's 1,000 inhabitants to make way for a planned Jewish town, 50 years after the state gave the village inhabitants' the land after their original lands were confiscated.
The judge rejected an appeal filed by Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights, on behalf of residents against a court decision to demolish 33 buildings in the village.
The judge reportedly accepted the defense's argument that despite the land ownership, and the fact that Israel moved residents there but refused to ever recognize the village, the buildings themselves were still considered unlicensed and thus should be demolished.
The judge did however decide to delay the demolitions for nine months in order to give residents enough time to find new homes.
Since the original demolition order for the village was issued in 2003, villagers have been fighting a legal battle with Adalah's help to prevent the order's enforcement.
Israeli authorities originally announced plans to demolish the Arab village of Umm al-Heiran in order to create a Jewish town atop it, to be named Hiran, Adalah lawyer Suhad Bishara told AFP in December.
The Palestinian Bedouin residents of Umm al-Heiran moved to live in the village in 1956 after the state of Israel confiscated their lands in Khirbet Zabbala. However, the state never recognized the village's existence, neither providing services nor granting licenses for the buildings they constructed.
In 2002, the Israeli government prepared blueprints for a new Jewish city named Hiran to be built on the lands. The government also planned to establish a forest named Yatir on the adjacent Bedouin village of Atteir, which is also subject to demolition proceedings.
Israel refuses to recognize 35 Bedouin villages in the Negev, which collectively house nearly 90,000 people.
The Israeli state denies them access to basic services and infrastructure, such as electricity and running water, and refuses to place them under municipal jurisdiction.
Although the majority of Palestinians were expelled from their homes inside Israel during the 1948 conflict that led to the creation of the State of Israel, some Palestinians managed to remain in their villages and their descendants today make up around 20 percent of Israel's population.
12 mar 2014
A picture taken on November 4, 2013 shows the Al-Rajabi building, a particularly contentious building in the West Bank city of Hebron
An Israeli court on Tuesday ruled that Jewish settlers were the lawful owners of a long-disputed building in the heart of the occupied West Bank city of Hebron.
The Supreme Court ruling brings an end to a legal dispute lasting nearly seven years, after the Palestinian Rajabi family said its four-story building had been taken over by Israeli settlers.
Israeli settlements on occupied land the Palestinians want for their future state have been a major source of tensions in US-brokered peace talks relaunched last year.
The building is near a contested holy site known to Muslims as the Ibrahimi Mosque and to Jews as the Cave of the Patriarchs in a tightly-controlled Israeli enclave where many streets are off-limits to Palestinian cars.
The settlers were evacuated in 2008, and the court verdict said they would not be allowed to move back in until they get defense ministry approval.
The structure was sold in 2004 by its Palestinian owners to settlers through a "non-Jewish straw man," according to court documents.
When settlers moved into the structure in 2007 the Palestinians charged they had been tricked and said the purchase was invalid, lodging complaints with the police and petitioning the court.
Many Palestinians view the selling of property in occupied territory to Jewish settlers as a betrayal of their national cause, so such purchases are nearly always conducted in secret or through middlemen, increasing the potential for disputes.
The case was debated in the Jerusalem district court, which in 2012 ruled in favor of the Jewish organization behind the purchase.
Neria Arnon, a spokeswoman for the Hebron settlers, told AFP the decision proved the purchase was legitimate and legal.
"We're happy the court confirmed this, and are waiting for the final approval of the defense minister, to do what is necessary to enable us to settle the building," she said.
The head of the left-wing Meretz party, Zehava Galon, called on Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon to "refrain from letting the settlers in," due to the "severe security and diplomatic ramifications of such a move."
"One must keep in mind there are 500 (extremist) Israelis in Hebron making the life of 145,000 Palestinians miserable, backed up by the army and police," she said in a statement.
A spokesman for Yaalon said he was "learning the topic."
The flashpoint city of Hebron, home to nearly 200,000 Palestinians, also comprises some 80 settler homes in the centre of town housing about 700 Jews who live under Israeli army protection.
An Israeli court on Tuesday ruled that Jewish settlers were the lawful owners of a long-disputed building in the heart of the occupied West Bank city of Hebron.
The Supreme Court ruling brings an end to a legal dispute lasting nearly seven years, after the Palestinian Rajabi family said its four-story building had been taken over by Israeli settlers.
Israeli settlements on occupied land the Palestinians want for their future state have been a major source of tensions in US-brokered peace talks relaunched last year.
The building is near a contested holy site known to Muslims as the Ibrahimi Mosque and to Jews as the Cave of the Patriarchs in a tightly-controlled Israeli enclave where many streets are off-limits to Palestinian cars.
The settlers were evacuated in 2008, and the court verdict said they would not be allowed to move back in until they get defense ministry approval.
The structure was sold in 2004 by its Palestinian owners to settlers through a "non-Jewish straw man," according to court documents.
When settlers moved into the structure in 2007 the Palestinians charged they had been tricked and said the purchase was invalid, lodging complaints with the police and petitioning the court.
Many Palestinians view the selling of property in occupied territory to Jewish settlers as a betrayal of their national cause, so such purchases are nearly always conducted in secret or through middlemen, increasing the potential for disputes.
The case was debated in the Jerusalem district court, which in 2012 ruled in favor of the Jewish organization behind the purchase.
Neria Arnon, a spokeswoman for the Hebron settlers, told AFP the decision proved the purchase was legitimate and legal.
"We're happy the court confirmed this, and are waiting for the final approval of the defense minister, to do what is necessary to enable us to settle the building," she said.
The head of the left-wing Meretz party, Zehava Galon, called on Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon to "refrain from letting the settlers in," due to the "severe security and diplomatic ramifications of such a move."
"One must keep in mind there are 500 (extremist) Israelis in Hebron making the life of 145,000 Palestinians miserable, backed up by the army and police," she said in a statement.
A spokesman for Yaalon said he was "learning the topic."
The flashpoint city of Hebron, home to nearly 200,000 Palestinians, also comprises some 80 settler homes in the centre of town housing about 700 Jews who live under Israeli army protection.
10 mar 2014
Four Palestinian-owned plots near Qalqilya were retrieved to their owners after being previously seized by Israeli companies claiming their ownership to the land. Qalqilya governorate said in a statement on Monday that “brokers have long attempted to forge documents relating to ownership of the land which is adjacent to settlements and the apartheid wall.”
“Israeli settlement companies finance those brokers and are encouraged by the Israeli government which seeks in all means to seize the land in favor of the settlement projects,” added the statement.
The statement said Israeli documents and maps, recently published, indicate Israel’s desire to keep four settlement blocs (Karne, Shomron, Ma'ale Shomron and Kedumim) in addition to another bloc remained in Jerusalem district.
Governor of Qalqilya, Rafe’ Rawajbeh, stressed that ‘the government will not spare an effort to retrieve the lands by all means’, saying the land is the essence of the main conflict issues with Israel.
“Israeli settlement companies finance those brokers and are encouraged by the Israeli government which seeks in all means to seize the land in favor of the settlement projects,” added the statement.
The statement said Israeli documents and maps, recently published, indicate Israel’s desire to keep four settlement blocs (Karne, Shomron, Ma'ale Shomron and Kedumim) in addition to another bloc remained in Jerusalem district.
Governor of Qalqilya, Rafe’ Rawajbeh, stressed that ‘the government will not spare an effort to retrieve the lands by all means’, saying the land is the essence of the main conflict issues with Israel.
2 mar 2014
Israeli occupation forces (IOF) evicted a Palestinian farmer from his land in Beit Ummar village, north of al-Khalil, on Saturday. Mohammed Awad, the coordinator of the popular resistance committee in Beit Ummar, said that the soldiers forced Mohammed Salibi and his sons out of their land that is adjacent to Beit Ayin settlement.
He told Quds Press that the soldiers threatened to arrest all those present on the land including a Brazilian man and an American woman who were documenting the incident and tried to assist Salibi.
Awad pointed out that Salibi had obtained an Israeli court order allowing him to work in his land without intervention from the Israeli soldiers or settlers.
He told Quds Press that the soldiers threatened to arrest all those present on the land including a Brazilian man and an American woman who were documenting the incident and tried to assist Salibi.
Awad pointed out that Salibi had obtained an Israeli court order allowing him to work in his land without intervention from the Israeli soldiers or settlers.
1 mar 2013
Israeli forces on Saturday prevented Palestinian farmers in the Hebron district from accessing their privately owned land, local popular committee spokespeople said.
Nidal al-Haddar, a spokesman for the popular committee in the southern Hebron district, told Ma'an that Palestinian farmers were sent home at gunpoint when they attempted to reach their lands in the Umm al-Arayis east of Yatta.
International solidarity activists, including Israelis, were also sent away from the land, al-Haddar said.
Land owner Issa Jabarin told Ma'an that settlers from the illegal Mitzpe Yair outpost had occupied his land in the area since 2000.
Israeli courts ordered the evacuation of settlers, "but Israeli authorities have not implemented the orders," Jabarin said.
Separately, in Beit Ummar north of Hebron, Israeli forces sent home a farmer and his family as they were tending to their lands, a local popular committee spokesman said.
Muhammad Ayyad Awad told Ma'an that Muhammad Abd al-Hamid Jabir Sleibi and his family were working on their land when Israeli troops arrived and threatened to detain them if they refused to leave the area.
International solidarity activists were sent away as well, Awad said.
Sleibi told Ma'an that he has an Israeli court order allowing him to tend to his land.
A spokeswoman for the Israeli army said she was unfamiliar with the incidents.
The internationally recognized Palestinian territories of which the West Bank and East Jerusalem form a part have been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.
Nidal al-Haddar, a spokesman for the popular committee in the southern Hebron district, told Ma'an that Palestinian farmers were sent home at gunpoint when they attempted to reach their lands in the Umm al-Arayis east of Yatta.
International solidarity activists, including Israelis, were also sent away from the land, al-Haddar said.
Land owner Issa Jabarin told Ma'an that settlers from the illegal Mitzpe Yair outpost had occupied his land in the area since 2000.
Israeli courts ordered the evacuation of settlers, "but Israeli authorities have not implemented the orders," Jabarin said.
Separately, in Beit Ummar north of Hebron, Israeli forces sent home a farmer and his family as they were tending to their lands, a local popular committee spokesman said.
Muhammad Ayyad Awad told Ma'an that Muhammad Abd al-Hamid Jabir Sleibi and his family were working on their land when Israeli troops arrived and threatened to detain them if they refused to leave the area.
International solidarity activists were sent away as well, Awad said.
Sleibi told Ma'an that he has an Israeli court order allowing him to tend to his land.
A spokeswoman for the Israeli army said she was unfamiliar with the incidents.
The internationally recognized Palestinian territories of which the West Bank and East Jerusalem form a part have been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.
Four Israeli trailers were removed from a Palestinian man's privately owned land in a Bethlehem-area village on Thursday, a popular committee spokesman said.
Ahmad Salah, a spokesman for a local popular committee, told Ma'an that Muhammad Abdullah Sbeih had received an Israeli court ruling that the trailers -- planted by an Israeli man who runs a nearby settler outpost -- must be removed from his land in the village of al-Khadr.
The trailers were installed by settlers four years ago in Sbeih's field in the Ein al-Qassis area, Salah said.
Sbeih had received an earlier ruling from an Israeli court that the trailers must be removed, but the settlers had refused to implement the decision, Salah said.
When Sbeih complained again, the settlers were forced to remove the trailers after they failed to submit any deeds to prove ownership.
However, settlers merely moved the trailers to another privately owned field in al-Khadr, belonging to Khadr Ali Abu Ghalyoun, Salah added.
He said the trailers were installed by the Jewish extremist Hananel Shear-Yashuv -- known as Hananiya -- who runs the illegal settler outpost of Sde Boaz, which sits on eight dunams (two acres) of Palestinian land nearby.
The Israeli news site Haaretz reported in March 2013 that Israel had issued demolition orders for the trailers, quoting a state attorney as saying the four trailers were to be demolished "within a short time-range."
More than 500,000 Israeli settlers live in settlements across the West Bank and East Jerusalem, in contravention of international law.
The international community regards all settlements built on occupied Palestinian land to be illegal, while the Israel government distinguishes between the more than 100 state-sponsored settlements and dozens of unauthorized outposts.
The internationally recognized Palestinian territories of which the West Bank and East Jerusalem form a part have been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.
Ahmad Salah, a spokesman for a local popular committee, told Ma'an that Muhammad Abdullah Sbeih had received an Israeli court ruling that the trailers -- planted by an Israeli man who runs a nearby settler outpost -- must be removed from his land in the village of al-Khadr.
The trailers were installed by settlers four years ago in Sbeih's field in the Ein al-Qassis area, Salah said.
Sbeih had received an earlier ruling from an Israeli court that the trailers must be removed, but the settlers had refused to implement the decision, Salah said.
When Sbeih complained again, the settlers were forced to remove the trailers after they failed to submit any deeds to prove ownership.
However, settlers merely moved the trailers to another privately owned field in al-Khadr, belonging to Khadr Ali Abu Ghalyoun, Salah added.
He said the trailers were installed by the Jewish extremist Hananel Shear-Yashuv -- known as Hananiya -- who runs the illegal settler outpost of Sde Boaz, which sits on eight dunams (two acres) of Palestinian land nearby.
The Israeli news site Haaretz reported in March 2013 that Israel had issued demolition orders for the trailers, quoting a state attorney as saying the four trailers were to be demolished "within a short time-range."
More than 500,000 Israeli settlers live in settlements across the West Bank and East Jerusalem, in contravention of international law.
The international community regards all settlements built on occupied Palestinian land to be illegal, while the Israel government distinguishes between the more than 100 state-sponsored settlements and dozens of unauthorized outposts.
The internationally recognized Palestinian territories of which the West Bank and East Jerusalem form a part have been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.
19 feb 2014
The Israeli supreme court in occupied Jerusalem declined a petition filed by a Palestinian family from Al-Khalil city about their ownership of a 300-dunum land taken by force by Jewish settlers. According to Haaretz newspaper on Wednesday, the court justified its rejection by saying that the Palestinian-owned land had been seized long ago, so it would be impossible now to compel the Israeli army and its civil administration to take action against the settlers in question.
In another incident, the same newspaper said that Israeli minister of housing Uri Ariel prepared a plan to build a residential outpost consisting of 2,250 housing units in Ein Karem neighborhood in occupied Jerusalem.
It added that the ministry of housing intends to transfer the ownership of the Palestinian lands, which the project will be built on, to the Israeli government.
It noted that the Israel land authority would market for the building of these units.
In another incident, the same newspaper said that Israeli minister of housing Uri Ariel prepared a plan to build a residential outpost consisting of 2,250 housing units in Ein Karem neighborhood in occupied Jerusalem.
It added that the ministry of housing intends to transfer the ownership of the Palestinian lands, which the project will be built on, to the Israeli government.
It noted that the Israel land authority would market for the building of these units.
17 feb 2014
The Ayyad family, who owns Cliff Hotel located in Abu Dis to the southeast of Jerusalem, managed on Sunday to stop the construction of a stretch in the segregation wall near the hotel, which if completed would have rendered that property under Israeli control, according to Wadi Hilweh Information Center. The center said the Ayyad family had to go to court to stop the construction after the army placed large cement blocks near the hotel to build the section of wall left unfinished when the family contested the route in court.
The family says Israel wants to build the wall around the hotel to incorporate it into the Jerusalem side and eventually take it over for settlement purposes.
It tried several attempts to take over the hotel claiming at one point that it was absentee property because the owners live in the West Bank.
The family says the Israeli High Court has not yet ruled on the route and therefore the unfinished section cannot be completed before then.
The hotel is currently used as a border police base after Israel took it over on security claims.
The family is trying to regain control of the hotel, which suffered extensive damage after it was taken over by the border police.
The family says Israel wants to build the wall around the hotel to incorporate it into the Jerusalem side and eventually take it over for settlement purposes.
It tried several attempts to take over the hotel claiming at one point that it was absentee property because the owners live in the West Bank.
The family says the Israeli High Court has not yet ruled on the route and therefore the unfinished section cannot be completed before then.
The hotel is currently used as a border police base after Israel took it over on security claims.
The family is trying to regain control of the hotel, which suffered extensive damage after it was taken over by the border police.
16 feb 2014
Anticipating a negative decision by the Israeli Supreme Court, Israeli authorities on Sunday started to build a section of its separation wall around a hotel in East Jerusalem.
Locals told Ma’an that bulldozers escorted by large numbers of Israeli troops arrived in the morning and started to erect a wall made of huge T-shaped concrete blocks around the Cliff Hotel.
The hotel will be separated from the East Jerusalem Palestinian town of Abu Dis to be eventually confiscated under Israel’s law of absentee property.
The Cliff Hotel is a four-floor building 50 meters from the Palestinian parliament in Abu Dis.
Its original owners are members of the Ayad family, have been waging a legal battle to stop construction of the stretch of the separation wall around the hotel. All the owners hold Palestinian identity cards.
Since 1996, the Israeli authorities have been trying to confiscate the hotel and take control of it for several reasons, says lawyer Bassam Bahar who has been defending Palestinian lands in Abu Dis.
He highlighted that the Israelis claimed the hotel belonged to a Jewish family and would be annexed under absentee property law. Sometimes, they cite security pretexts to confiscate the hotel, he added.
The lawyer highlighted that the Israeli authorities started construction work around the Cliff Sunday morning because they anticipate the Supreme Court to rule against an alternative route. He added that the Israeli attorney general had decided that the hotel was not an absentee property.
Locals told Ma’an that bulldozers escorted by large numbers of Israeli troops arrived in the morning and started to erect a wall made of huge T-shaped concrete blocks around the Cliff Hotel.
The hotel will be separated from the East Jerusalem Palestinian town of Abu Dis to be eventually confiscated under Israel’s law of absentee property.
The Cliff Hotel is a four-floor building 50 meters from the Palestinian parliament in Abu Dis.
Its original owners are members of the Ayad family, have been waging a legal battle to stop construction of the stretch of the separation wall around the hotel. All the owners hold Palestinian identity cards.
Since 1996, the Israeli authorities have been trying to confiscate the hotel and take control of it for several reasons, says lawyer Bassam Bahar who has been defending Palestinian lands in Abu Dis.
He highlighted that the Israelis claimed the hotel belonged to a Jewish family and would be annexed under absentee property law. Sometimes, they cite security pretexts to confiscate the hotel, he added.
The lawyer highlighted that the Israeli authorities started construction work around the Cliff Sunday morning because they anticipate the Supreme Court to rule against an alternative route. He added that the Israeli attorney general had decided that the hotel was not an absentee property.
4 feb 2014
By Charlie Hoyle
Israel's Supreme Court on Monday ordered the Israeli state to justify the route of the separation wall in Beit Jala's Cremisan valley in an apparent indication that the proposed land seizure could be canceled.
Fifty-eight landowners, together with the Salesian convent and monastery, have battled for eight years against a 2006 Israeli military order to build the separation wall around Beit Jala and the illegal Gilo settlement.
On Monday, Israel's Supreme Court issued a preliminary order giving the Israeli state until April 10 to justify why it could not alter the proposed route of the wall, which as planned would split the Salesian community, annex the Cremisan valley to Israel and seize land from local Beit Jala residents.
The court ordered that all construction on the separation wall be halted until the Israeli state responds to the request.
"If you look at where we started from when we entered the court with little hope for anything and now we have the situation where they have to justify the wall, it looks very promising," Anica Heinlein, an advocacy officer for the Society of St. Yves, which represents the nuns, told Ma'an.
The Israeli Supreme Court set a new hearing for July 30 to discuss the answer of the Israeli state and responses to it by Beit Jala residents.
St. Yves lawyer Zvi Avni said they are still some way from a final decision but the ruling shows that the Supreme Court found the case "convincing" and therefore asked the state to present its reasons for not abolishing the confiscation orders and not considering a route which would be less harmful to Beit Jala residents.
"The burden of proof is on them (the Israeli state) to say why they want to put this wall here and not on the other side (of the valley)," Avni told Ma'an.
International interest and the presence of church representatives and foreign diplomats at previous hearings has put pressure on the court, Avni said, which could explain the delay until July in issuing a ruling.
But also key to the potential success of the case was the testimony of former Israeli generals from the Council of Peace and Security who argued that the suggested route of the wall was unnecessary in security terms, Avni said.
The generals dismissed the Israeli state attorney's argument that the route of the wall was vital to prevent "terrorist" attacks on Gilo, such as shooting incidents in the past, and argued that an alternative route for the wall below the settlement would cause much less harm to Beit Jala residents while serving Israeli security needs.
They argued that the proposed route was about land confiscation and would in fact increase insecurity in the area due to the presence of Israeli soldiers at security gates, Avni said.
"We have always said that the real intention is to take over these lands," Avni told Ma'an. "If its so dangerous as you claim then why do you want to expand this neighborhood (Gilo)?"
Avni says it is premature to say how important the court decision is but that he doesn't expect any "new surprises" from Israel.
"We still have to see but there is a better chance that the community will stay with its lands," the lawyer said.
If the route of the wall goes ahead it will divide the Salesian religious community on either side and turn a place which once provided refuge to local residents into an "army camp," the lawyer says.
The wall would also annex the very last green spaces available to the local community and take away land farmed for generations in steep green plateaus.
The latest ruling, while not final, is certainly a good sign the Israeli court will rule in favor of local residents and the Salesian community to change the route of the wall, Anica Heinlein says.
"We went there with little hope, there was never no hope, and now it looks like we could win."
Israel's Supreme Court on Monday ordered the Israeli state to justify the route of the separation wall in Beit Jala's Cremisan valley in an apparent indication that the proposed land seizure could be canceled.
Fifty-eight landowners, together with the Salesian convent and monastery, have battled for eight years against a 2006 Israeli military order to build the separation wall around Beit Jala and the illegal Gilo settlement.
On Monday, Israel's Supreme Court issued a preliminary order giving the Israeli state until April 10 to justify why it could not alter the proposed route of the wall, which as planned would split the Salesian community, annex the Cremisan valley to Israel and seize land from local Beit Jala residents.
The court ordered that all construction on the separation wall be halted until the Israeli state responds to the request.
"If you look at where we started from when we entered the court with little hope for anything and now we have the situation where they have to justify the wall, it looks very promising," Anica Heinlein, an advocacy officer for the Society of St. Yves, which represents the nuns, told Ma'an.
The Israeli Supreme Court set a new hearing for July 30 to discuss the answer of the Israeli state and responses to it by Beit Jala residents.
St. Yves lawyer Zvi Avni said they are still some way from a final decision but the ruling shows that the Supreme Court found the case "convincing" and therefore asked the state to present its reasons for not abolishing the confiscation orders and not considering a route which would be less harmful to Beit Jala residents.
"The burden of proof is on them (the Israeli state) to say why they want to put this wall here and not on the other side (of the valley)," Avni told Ma'an.
International interest and the presence of church representatives and foreign diplomats at previous hearings has put pressure on the court, Avni said, which could explain the delay until July in issuing a ruling.
But also key to the potential success of the case was the testimony of former Israeli generals from the Council of Peace and Security who argued that the suggested route of the wall was unnecessary in security terms, Avni said.
The generals dismissed the Israeli state attorney's argument that the route of the wall was vital to prevent "terrorist" attacks on Gilo, such as shooting incidents in the past, and argued that an alternative route for the wall below the settlement would cause much less harm to Beit Jala residents while serving Israeli security needs.
They argued that the proposed route was about land confiscation and would in fact increase insecurity in the area due to the presence of Israeli soldiers at security gates, Avni said.
"We have always said that the real intention is to take over these lands," Avni told Ma'an. "If its so dangerous as you claim then why do you want to expand this neighborhood (Gilo)?"
Avni says it is premature to say how important the court decision is but that he doesn't expect any "new surprises" from Israel.
"We still have to see but there is a better chance that the community will stay with its lands," the lawyer said.
If the route of the wall goes ahead it will divide the Salesian religious community on either side and turn a place which once provided refuge to local residents into an "army camp," the lawyer says.
The wall would also annex the very last green spaces available to the local community and take away land farmed for generations in steep green plateaus.
The latest ruling, while not final, is certainly a good sign the Israeli court will rule in favor of local residents and the Salesian community to change the route of the wall, Anica Heinlein says.
"We went there with little hope, there was never no hope, and now it looks like we could win."
27 jan 2014
The Israeli supreme court rejected on Sunday an appeal filed by Palestinian citizens against the construction of a six-lane highway that would bisect their village of Beit Safafa in the south of occupied Jerusalem. The Israeli municipal council in occupied Jerusalem started in late 2012 to build this highway, the construction of which has rapidly advanced since then.
The Jerusalem district court had rejected in February a petition filed by residents of Beit Safafa against the road, which would split their village into two separate areas.
Consequently, the residents, later, had to file an appeal with the supreme court, which ruled in June that the Israeli municipal council must find a solution to the transportation problems that would arise from the building of this road.
The residents asked the supreme court to order the municipal council to either stop building the road, or to find other solutions in order to lessen the resulting harm, such as building bridges over the village's stretch of the highway in order to keep their area intact.
On Sunday, the residents were told that their appeal was declined and no solutions would be found to minimize the adverse impacts of the road on their lives.
If the road was finished, Beit Safafa residents would suffer heightened noise and pollution in addition to being cut off from basic services.
The road would cut off many families from the center of the village, forcing them to drive or walk a long way to visit their relatives or reach essential locations such as the mosque, grocery store and kindergarten.
The highway would connect the West Bank settlements of Gush Etzion in Bethlehem and southern Jerusalem to Israel's highway network.
The Jerusalem district court had rejected in February a petition filed by residents of Beit Safafa against the road, which would split their village into two separate areas.
Consequently, the residents, later, had to file an appeal with the supreme court, which ruled in June that the Israeli municipal council must find a solution to the transportation problems that would arise from the building of this road.
The residents asked the supreme court to order the municipal council to either stop building the road, or to find other solutions in order to lessen the resulting harm, such as building bridges over the village's stretch of the highway in order to keep their area intact.
On Sunday, the residents were told that their appeal was declined and no solutions would be found to minimize the adverse impacts of the road on their lives.
If the road was finished, Beit Safafa residents would suffer heightened noise and pollution in addition to being cut off from basic services.
The road would cut off many families from the center of the village, forcing them to drive or walk a long way to visit their relatives or reach essential locations such as the mosque, grocery store and kindergarten.
The highway would connect the West Bank settlements of Gush Etzion in Bethlehem and southern Jerusalem to Israel's highway network.
14 jan 2014
Last month Israelis Military Central Command signed a new law which states that Palestinians have been prohibited from challenging military court decisions to confiscate their property.
They can still appeal through the Supreme Court, but the process is cumbersome and costly Haaretz reports.
The Supreme Court is consistent with long-standing government policy the Israeli Military has stated.
Israeli commander bans Palestinians from objecting to confiscation of property
Commander of the Israeli central command Nitzan Alon has issued a military order banning Palestinians’ objection to his confiscation orders of their property. The Israeli radio said on Monday that the decision bans Palestinians from appealing against confiscation orders at West Bank military courts.
It added that the military orders in the West Bank allow Israeli army commanders to confiscate property of Palestinians on suspicion of being used for security or homicide purposes.
They can still appeal through the Supreme Court, but the process is cumbersome and costly Haaretz reports.
The Supreme Court is consistent with long-standing government policy the Israeli Military has stated.
Israeli commander bans Palestinians from objecting to confiscation of property
Commander of the Israeli central command Nitzan Alon has issued a military order banning Palestinians’ objection to his confiscation orders of their property. The Israeli radio said on Monday that the decision bans Palestinians from appealing against confiscation orders at West Bank military courts.
It added that the military orders in the West Bank allow Israeli army commanders to confiscate property of Palestinians on suspicion of being used for security or homicide purposes.
Page: 2 - 1
