17 june 2018
Under the proposed bill, photos like this would be illegal (Photo: B'Tselem)
Proposed legislation criminalizes taking photos or filming IDF soldiers on duty, setting the punishment at 5-10 years in prison; more moderate version also under consideration; deputy AG says bill won't pass legal scrutiny.
The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved on Sunday a bill proposal seeking to bar the filming and photography of IDF soldiers, which could completely change the nature of military coverage.
Deputy Attorney General Raz Nizri said during the Ministerial Committee discussion that barring the filming and photography of IDF soldiers would not pass legal scrutiny.
"We could go for a more moderate proposal, while drawing the comparison to police officers, but the problem is that it would set a minimum for punishment," Nizri said. "This means there will be no choice but to have criminal record."
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, meanwhile, welcomed the advancement of the legislation, writing on Twitter, "IDF soldiers are under attack from within by Israel haters and terror supporters who seek to humiliate, disgrace and harm them. We'll put an end to that."
Meretz leader Tamar Zandberg slammed the decision, saying "If the government wants to take care of IDF soldiers so much, perhaps it should start by handling the settlers who dismantle military vehicles, wound police officers and throw stones at soldiers."
The legislation will be brought to the Knesset for a preliminary reading on Wednesday.
The bill, sponsored by Yisrael Beytenu MK Robert Ilatov and backed by Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, targets anyone who documents IDF soldiers on duty and distributes the materials.
Under the original version of the bill, offenders could face anywhere between five and ten years in prison if the documentation is found to be "undermining the spirit of IDF soldiers and Israeli citizens" or harming state security.
"This decision aims to cover up crimes committed by Israeli soldiers against our people, and to free their hands to commit more crimes," Deputy Palestinian Information Minister Fayez Abu Aitta said.
The phrasing of the bill stops short of a blanket ban, aiming instead at "anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian organizations" which spend "entire days near Israeli soldiers waiting breathlessly for actions that can be documented in a slanted and one-sided way so that soldiers can be smeared".
Naming B'Tselem and several other left-wing groups, the bill says many of them are supported by organizations and governments with "a clear anti-Israel agenda" and that the videos are used to harm Israel and national security.
The ban would cover social networks as well as traditional media.
B'Tselem shrugged off the bill.
Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit was able to soften the legislation, setting the punishment from anywhere between two weeks and three years.
But even if a more moderate version of the bill is eventually passed into law, it would still limit media coverage in the West Bank and on Israel's borders, as the Israeli media gets photos and videos of many incidents from the Palestinians or from left-wing organizations.
Diplomatic officials expressed concern that the attempt to prevent the filming and photography of soldiers in the public sphere in the West Bank could damage to Israel's image.
"We're fighting about Israel's image as a democratic country that acts with transparency, and the initiative to prevent documentation (of soldiers) could present us in the opposite light—as a country that has something to hide," one official said.
Despite Mandleblit’s softening of the punishment stipulated in the bill will be compared to a large extent to the prohibition against disturbing police officers while performing their duties, meaning that the decision to prohibit the use of cameras would be left to the discretion of the soldier, who would be authorized to limit photographers and to remove protesters causing disruptions.
The implementation of the bill would depend to large extent on instructions received by soldiers in the field.
The vague wording in the current bill will likely have to be brought before the High Court of Justice. However, the bill may not only be applicable to left-wing organizations, which for years have sought to capture violent incidents involving the IDF in the West Bank on camera and disseminated the recordings in a negative light, which supporters of the army say stains its image.
While the bill received Lieberman’s blessing, officials in the army have yet to state their position.
MK Ilatov’s office has not rejected the possibility of widening the bill to also include Israeli journalists who regularly cover what is taking place in the various sectors, and it has not yet been made clear whether it will apply to Area A, which is controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
At the same time, right-wing activists also often use their cameras to document violent skirmishes with Israeli security forces during court-ordered evacuations of illegal outposts. It remains unclear whether they, too, would be forbidden from using recording the incidents.
The majority of photographers at B’Tselem are Palestinian volunteers who permanently carry a camera. Violent outbreaks, pursuits against terrorists, raids in villages and other IDF operation on the Gaza or Lebanese border are almost invariably filmed live by the Palestinians and foreign photographers. The footage and photographs are then transferred to Arab and international television networks.
The videos are then distributed on Facebook and other social media outlets.
Proposed legislation criminalizes taking photos or filming IDF soldiers on duty, setting the punishment at 5-10 years in prison; more moderate version also under consideration; deputy AG says bill won't pass legal scrutiny.
The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved on Sunday a bill proposal seeking to bar the filming and photography of IDF soldiers, which could completely change the nature of military coverage.
Deputy Attorney General Raz Nizri said during the Ministerial Committee discussion that barring the filming and photography of IDF soldiers would not pass legal scrutiny.
"We could go for a more moderate proposal, while drawing the comparison to police officers, but the problem is that it would set a minimum for punishment," Nizri said. "This means there will be no choice but to have criminal record."
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, meanwhile, welcomed the advancement of the legislation, writing on Twitter, "IDF soldiers are under attack from within by Israel haters and terror supporters who seek to humiliate, disgrace and harm them. We'll put an end to that."
Meretz leader Tamar Zandberg slammed the decision, saying "If the government wants to take care of IDF soldiers so much, perhaps it should start by handling the settlers who dismantle military vehicles, wound police officers and throw stones at soldiers."
The legislation will be brought to the Knesset for a preliminary reading on Wednesday.
The bill, sponsored by Yisrael Beytenu MK Robert Ilatov and backed by Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, targets anyone who documents IDF soldiers on duty and distributes the materials.
Under the original version of the bill, offenders could face anywhere between five and ten years in prison if the documentation is found to be "undermining the spirit of IDF soldiers and Israeli citizens" or harming state security.
"This decision aims to cover up crimes committed by Israeli soldiers against our people, and to free their hands to commit more crimes," Deputy Palestinian Information Minister Fayez Abu Aitta said.
The phrasing of the bill stops short of a blanket ban, aiming instead at "anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian organizations" which spend "entire days near Israeli soldiers waiting breathlessly for actions that can be documented in a slanted and one-sided way so that soldiers can be smeared".
Naming B'Tselem and several other left-wing groups, the bill says many of them are supported by organizations and governments with "a clear anti-Israel agenda" and that the videos are used to harm Israel and national security.
The ban would cover social networks as well as traditional media.
B'Tselem shrugged off the bill.
Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit was able to soften the legislation, setting the punishment from anywhere between two weeks and three years.
But even if a more moderate version of the bill is eventually passed into law, it would still limit media coverage in the West Bank and on Israel's borders, as the Israeli media gets photos and videos of many incidents from the Palestinians or from left-wing organizations.
Diplomatic officials expressed concern that the attempt to prevent the filming and photography of soldiers in the public sphere in the West Bank could damage to Israel's image.
"We're fighting about Israel's image as a democratic country that acts with transparency, and the initiative to prevent documentation (of soldiers) could present us in the opposite light—as a country that has something to hide," one official said.
Despite Mandleblit’s softening of the punishment stipulated in the bill will be compared to a large extent to the prohibition against disturbing police officers while performing their duties, meaning that the decision to prohibit the use of cameras would be left to the discretion of the soldier, who would be authorized to limit photographers and to remove protesters causing disruptions.
The implementation of the bill would depend to large extent on instructions received by soldiers in the field.
The vague wording in the current bill will likely have to be brought before the High Court of Justice. However, the bill may not only be applicable to left-wing organizations, which for years have sought to capture violent incidents involving the IDF in the West Bank on camera and disseminated the recordings in a negative light, which supporters of the army say stains its image.
While the bill received Lieberman’s blessing, officials in the army have yet to state their position.
MK Ilatov’s office has not rejected the possibility of widening the bill to also include Israeli journalists who regularly cover what is taking place in the various sectors, and it has not yet been made clear whether it will apply to Area A, which is controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
At the same time, right-wing activists also often use their cameras to document violent skirmishes with Israeli security forces during court-ordered evacuations of illegal outposts. It remains unclear whether they, too, would be forbidden from using recording the incidents.
The majority of photographers at B’Tselem are Palestinian volunteers who permanently carry a camera. Violent outbreaks, pursuits against terrorists, raids in villages and other IDF operation on the Gaza or Lebanese border are almost invariably filmed live by the Palestinians and foreign photographers. The footage and photographs are then transferred to Arab and international television networks.
The videos are then distributed on Facebook and other social media outlets.
11 june 2018
The so-called Committee of Foreign Affairs and Security of the Israeli Knesset on Monday approved a bill to deduct the salaries paid to the families of Palestinian prisoners and martyrs from the tax revenues transferred to the Palestinian Authority (PA).
The Hebrew TV channel 7 reported that the committee ratified the bill in the second and third readings and cancelled the item which provides the government flexibility in deciding whether or not to deduct the payments.
The bill stipulates that Israel's Minister of Finance cut the monthly salaries paid by the PA to the families of martyrs and prisoners from the tax revenues Israel allegedly hands over to the PA.
According to the bill's proposal, the PA transfers 7% of its budget, estimated at 1.1 billion shekels ($ 300 million), financed largely by US and European aid, to pay salaries for the families of Palestinian prisoners and martyrs involved in anti-occupation attacks.
Except for MK for Meretz party Issawi Frej, the other members of the Committee of Foreign Affairs and Security voted in favor of a new bill to deduct funds from the tax revenues paid to the PA to compensate the farmers of the Israeli settlements neighboring the Gaza Strip for the damages caused in their lands by fires sparked by burning kites sent from the coastal enclave.
The Hebrew TV channel 7 reported that the committee ratified the bill in the second and third readings and cancelled the item which provides the government flexibility in deciding whether or not to deduct the payments.
The bill stipulates that Israel's Minister of Finance cut the monthly salaries paid by the PA to the families of martyrs and prisoners from the tax revenues Israel allegedly hands over to the PA.
According to the bill's proposal, the PA transfers 7% of its budget, estimated at 1.1 billion shekels ($ 300 million), financed largely by US and European aid, to pay salaries for the families of Palestinian prisoners and martyrs involved in anti-occupation attacks.
Except for MK for Meretz party Issawi Frej, the other members of the Committee of Foreign Affairs and Security voted in favor of a new bill to deduct funds from the tax revenues paid to the PA to compensate the farmers of the Israeli settlements neighboring the Gaza Strip for the damages caused in their lands by fires sparked by burning kites sent from the coastal enclave.
Netanyahu boasted on Sunday that Israel was the only Mideast country that 'welcomes gays,' yet only last week his own coalition thwarted a law supporting LGBT rights; bill's initiator, Zionist Union MK Stav Shaffir, slams 'hypocrite' lawmakers who failed to back her proposal after promising to do so.
The plenum was short of merely three votes last Wednesday to approve the same-sex civil union bill in a preliminary reading, allowing gay couples to be joined together by civil marriage. The bill was initiated by Knesset Member Stav Shaffir of the Zionist Union.
The vote was held two days before a record number of 250,000 people from all over the world flooded Tel Aviv's streets celebrating the Gay Pride Parade.
Although lawmakers of Likud and other coalition factions had expressed support for the bill, they lined up with the coalition discipline at the expense of the LGBT community's rights.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu boasted Sunday, during his speech at the opening of the American Jewish Committee (AJC) conference, that Israel was the only country in the Middle East that accepted the LGBT community.
"I am very proud that we have a very, very bright, and rising star in our party, Amir Ohana, but there are others in other parties,” he said, in reference to Likud’s first openly gay lawmaker who is raising his twin children with his partner.
"(Israel) is the only state in the Middle East in which homosexuals walk freely in Tel Aviv's streets and are being represented in the Knesset," Netanyahu stated.
The prime minister chose not to mention, however, that the coalition rejected last week the same-sex civil union bill in its preliminary reading, with 38 MKs backing it and 41 opposing.
Kulanu MK Yifat Shasha-Biton, chairwoman of the Special Committee for the Rights of the Child, told Ynet she voted against the bill due to coalition discipline. "I'm all in favor for a person to live according to his belief and (sexual) inclination," she said.
"However, I (also) believe in practicality and do my best to be realistic and choose my battles. I hope that someday (the bill) will be backed by the majority in the Knesset as well as among the citizens," she explained.
Likud MK Amir Ohana, who is openly gay, did not attend the vote since he was a broad, but wrote a post on Facebook denying the rumors implying he had voted against the bill.
"I don't really know how to deal with lies, but I see a few of them of going around," Ohana said. "I'm in Paris, attending a conference about the war on terror. The rumor that is going around that I voted against the same-sex civil union bill is a lie.
"I've never voted against any bill concerning the LGBT community since my first day in the Knesset, even when it was the coalition's obligatory stance," Ohana added.
"I've been voting in favor of bills concerning the LGBT community and against the coalition's stance for over a year, since my coalition rebellion," he elaborated.
"One can criticize me and say I have to deal with more LGBT-related matters (even if it's like fighting windmills in light of this coalition), one can demand that I be a better gay, just stop lying," Ohana implored.
Ynet turned to a few other coalition members who had voted against the bill and had shown support of the LGBT community on a number of occasions, but they chose not to comment on the matter.
The bill's initiator, MK Shaffir, told Ynet: "This was the closest fight we've had over a bill (concerning the LGBT community).
"(The same-sex civil union) bill could have made same-sex marriage in Israel a reality—something that is already supposed to be a given. Almost all of the Western world's countries have joined over the past few years to the list of countries enabling same-sex unions," Shaffir explained.
"Israel is officially signaling the world something completely different. The Ministry of Tourism wanted to spend NIS 12 million last year to promote gay tourism in Israel, but when it comes to voting, things suddenly look completely different, and other MKs who publicly stated they would vote in favor of the bill surprisingly vanished from the plenum (when the time to vote came)," she lashed out.
"I don't recall the ten amendments including coalition discipline. What is this? Is this a law coming from the sky? MKs go to the Knesset to promote their policies. The bill's biggest opponents are the Bayit Yehudi's members and not the members of the ultra-Orthodox parties," she lamented.
"One of the most infuriating things is that during the vote the Kulanu's MKs who promised to back the bill and protect the equality and the democracy (voted against the bill-ed)," Shffir decried.
"Kulanu has promised the public a lot. Certain MKs said loud and clear, on television, that they would support same-sex marriage. Several Likud's MKs also vowed they would vote in favor of any bill concerning promoting the LGBT community," the Zionist Union MK recalled.
"We heard those promises made in public, but in the moment of truth those MKs who display a liberal facade, just ran away," she opined.
"Kulanu MK Meirav Ben-Ari promised to vote in favor of the bill as well as MK Roy Folkman (but they didn't-ed). I would expect MK Orly Levy and Likud's MK Sharren Haskel to also back the bill (however it didn't happen-ed)," she concluded.
When Shaffir was asked whether those MKs who had not backed the bill were hypocrites, she said "absolutely."
"I think people have to realize that when they go into politics they do it in order to keep their promises. They work for the public, not for (Bayit Yehudi MK) Bezalel Smotrich or (United Torah Judaism MK) Yaakov Litzman "
MK Meirav Ben-Ari said in response that she didn't back the bill, but she didn't offset for an MK's absence either. "That's why the vote was so close. I'm sure it's a matter of time until the bill passes.
"While other MKs are busy with a legislation that achieves nothing, I'm constantly busy transferring budgets to promote education, welfare and health among others in the LGBT community," Ben-Ari added.
The plenum was short of merely three votes last Wednesday to approve the same-sex civil union bill in a preliminary reading, allowing gay couples to be joined together by civil marriage. The bill was initiated by Knesset Member Stav Shaffir of the Zionist Union.
The vote was held two days before a record number of 250,000 people from all over the world flooded Tel Aviv's streets celebrating the Gay Pride Parade.
Although lawmakers of Likud and other coalition factions had expressed support for the bill, they lined up with the coalition discipline at the expense of the LGBT community's rights.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu boasted Sunday, during his speech at the opening of the American Jewish Committee (AJC) conference, that Israel was the only country in the Middle East that accepted the LGBT community.
"I am very proud that we have a very, very bright, and rising star in our party, Amir Ohana, but there are others in other parties,” he said, in reference to Likud’s first openly gay lawmaker who is raising his twin children with his partner.
"(Israel) is the only state in the Middle East in which homosexuals walk freely in Tel Aviv's streets and are being represented in the Knesset," Netanyahu stated.
The prime minister chose not to mention, however, that the coalition rejected last week the same-sex civil union bill in its preliminary reading, with 38 MKs backing it and 41 opposing.
Kulanu MK Yifat Shasha-Biton, chairwoman of the Special Committee for the Rights of the Child, told Ynet she voted against the bill due to coalition discipline. "I'm all in favor for a person to live according to his belief and (sexual) inclination," she said.
"However, I (also) believe in practicality and do my best to be realistic and choose my battles. I hope that someday (the bill) will be backed by the majority in the Knesset as well as among the citizens," she explained.
Likud MK Amir Ohana, who is openly gay, did not attend the vote since he was a broad, but wrote a post on Facebook denying the rumors implying he had voted against the bill.
"I don't really know how to deal with lies, but I see a few of them of going around," Ohana said. "I'm in Paris, attending a conference about the war on terror. The rumor that is going around that I voted against the same-sex civil union bill is a lie.
"I've never voted against any bill concerning the LGBT community since my first day in the Knesset, even when it was the coalition's obligatory stance," Ohana added.
"I've been voting in favor of bills concerning the LGBT community and against the coalition's stance for over a year, since my coalition rebellion," he elaborated.
"One can criticize me and say I have to deal with more LGBT-related matters (even if it's like fighting windmills in light of this coalition), one can demand that I be a better gay, just stop lying," Ohana implored.
Ynet turned to a few other coalition members who had voted against the bill and had shown support of the LGBT community on a number of occasions, but they chose not to comment on the matter.
The bill's initiator, MK Shaffir, told Ynet: "This was the closest fight we've had over a bill (concerning the LGBT community).
"(The same-sex civil union) bill could have made same-sex marriage in Israel a reality—something that is already supposed to be a given. Almost all of the Western world's countries have joined over the past few years to the list of countries enabling same-sex unions," Shaffir explained.
"Israel is officially signaling the world something completely different. The Ministry of Tourism wanted to spend NIS 12 million last year to promote gay tourism in Israel, but when it comes to voting, things suddenly look completely different, and other MKs who publicly stated they would vote in favor of the bill surprisingly vanished from the plenum (when the time to vote came)," she lashed out.
"I don't recall the ten amendments including coalition discipline. What is this? Is this a law coming from the sky? MKs go to the Knesset to promote their policies. The bill's biggest opponents are the Bayit Yehudi's members and not the members of the ultra-Orthodox parties," she lamented.
"One of the most infuriating things is that during the vote the Kulanu's MKs who promised to back the bill and protect the equality and the democracy (voted against the bill-ed)," Shffir decried.
"Kulanu has promised the public a lot. Certain MKs said loud and clear, on television, that they would support same-sex marriage. Several Likud's MKs also vowed they would vote in favor of any bill concerning promoting the LGBT community," the Zionist Union MK recalled.
"We heard those promises made in public, but in the moment of truth those MKs who display a liberal facade, just ran away," she opined.
"Kulanu MK Meirav Ben-Ari promised to vote in favor of the bill as well as MK Roy Folkman (but they didn't-ed). I would expect MK Orly Levy and Likud's MK Sharren Haskel to also back the bill (however it didn't happen-ed)," she concluded.
When Shaffir was asked whether those MKs who had not backed the bill were hypocrites, she said "absolutely."
"I think people have to realize that when they go into politics they do it in order to keep their promises. They work for the public, not for (Bayit Yehudi MK) Bezalel Smotrich or (United Torah Judaism MK) Yaakov Litzman "
MK Meirav Ben-Ari said in response that she didn't back the bill, but she didn't offset for an MK's absence either. "That's why the vote was so close. I'm sure it's a matter of time until the bill passes.
"While other MKs are busy with a legislation that achieves nothing, I'm constantly busy transferring budgets to promote education, welfare and health among others in the LGBT community," Ben-Ari added.
9 june 2018
Israeli forces demolish a home in Kobar village, August 16, 2018. Photo credit: Bahaa Nasr for WAFA.
POSTED BY: COREY SHERMAN JUNE 8, 2018
Even if Palestinians fulfill the appeal requirements put in place by military order 1797, Israeli authorities maintain complete authority to proceed with demolition.
Two Jerusalem legal aid organizations will petition the Israeli Supreme Court to overturn a new military order which makes it possible for Israeli forces to demolish Palestinian homes in Area C within 96 hours after delivering demolition orders.
The petition follows a formal letter the Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center (JLAC) and the St. Yves Society sent to the Israeli defense ministry on June 4, 2018 in which they argue that the military order “blatantly violates…international law and contravenes existing local legislation.”
The Coordinator of Government Activities in the Occupied Territories (COGAT) issued military order 1797 on April 17, 2018. COGAT, under the direct control of the Israeli defense ministry, runs civil affairs in the occupied West Bank. Order 1797 will go into effect on June 19, 2018.
Under the order, COGAT excuses itself from informing Palestinian homeowners directly that their homes are slated for demolition. JLAC and St. Yves explain in a joint press release that Israeli authorities only require demolition orders be placed “next to” relevant structures 96 hours before Israeli forces arrive to execute demolitions.
If a homeowner does catch wind of an impending demolition, he or she must present an approved master plan and building permit to appeal the demolition. Israel’s discriminatory housing policies in the West Bank ensure that this is an almost impossible requirement for the 300,000 Palestinians living in Area C, 60 percent of the West Bank, to fulfill.
According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), between 2010 and 2014, for example, Israel approved 1.5 percent of building applications in Area C. Israeli authorities, however, routinely approve of settlement master plans and even halt demolitions of settler outposts citing the existence of master plans, JLAC and St. Yves point out. Indeed, since 2017 Israeli officials have approved nearly 14,000 settlement units in the West Bank.
In addition to having to produce an approved master building plan within four days, Palestinian residents of Area C attempting to forestall demolition must prove that construction on their home or home addition has been completed for six months or that the structure has been inhabited for thirty days.
By requiring that Palestinians produce so many documents in such a short period of time, this military order “virtually strips the affected residents of the right to due process and the capacity to challenge the demolition orders through legal avenues, by requiring that objections to the demolition order be accompanied with a valid building permit,” JLAC and St. Yves wrote in their press release. Moreover, COGAT remains the sole arbiter of these appeals. Put differently, even if Palestinians fulfill the appeal requirements put in place by military order 1797, COGAT empowers itself to proceed with demolition anyway.
St. Yves and JLAC emphasize that this new military order violates international law, including Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which defines forcible transfer of occupied populations as a crime against humanity. The order also violates Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations, which requires that an occupying power respect the laws in the country that it occupies. In this case, that means the Jordanian Planning and Construction Law, which allows residents to retroactively legalize home constructions in the face of a demolition order stemming from illegal construction.
One area that may be acutely impacted by this new military order is the E1 corridor, which sits between the Jerusalem municipality’s borders and the settlement of Ma’ale Adumim. For years, Israeli politicians have proposed incorporating this area, which is in Area C, into the Jerusalem municipality.
Such developments are key to maintaining what Israel euphemistically calls a “demographic balance” in Jerusalem, i.e. restricting the Palestinian population to 30 percent of the city’s total population. Palestinian presence in Jerusalem today likely constitutes at least 40 percent of the city’s population.
The Palestinian Authority condemned military order 1797 when it was first announced. “This illegal development would generate more crimes against Palestinian rights of access to a safe and stable living environment and would worsen the already dire conditions of 393,000 Palestinian citizens,” the government said in a statement issued by the Prime Minister’s Office.
Corey Sherman is a teacher in Washington D.C. and a contributing editor to aicnews.org.
POSTED BY: COREY SHERMAN JUNE 8, 2018
Even if Palestinians fulfill the appeal requirements put in place by military order 1797, Israeli authorities maintain complete authority to proceed with demolition.
Two Jerusalem legal aid organizations will petition the Israeli Supreme Court to overturn a new military order which makes it possible for Israeli forces to demolish Palestinian homes in Area C within 96 hours after delivering demolition orders.
The petition follows a formal letter the Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center (JLAC) and the St. Yves Society sent to the Israeli defense ministry on June 4, 2018 in which they argue that the military order “blatantly violates…international law and contravenes existing local legislation.”
The Coordinator of Government Activities in the Occupied Territories (COGAT) issued military order 1797 on April 17, 2018. COGAT, under the direct control of the Israeli defense ministry, runs civil affairs in the occupied West Bank. Order 1797 will go into effect on June 19, 2018.
Under the order, COGAT excuses itself from informing Palestinian homeowners directly that their homes are slated for demolition. JLAC and St. Yves explain in a joint press release that Israeli authorities only require demolition orders be placed “next to” relevant structures 96 hours before Israeli forces arrive to execute demolitions.
If a homeowner does catch wind of an impending demolition, he or she must present an approved master plan and building permit to appeal the demolition. Israel’s discriminatory housing policies in the West Bank ensure that this is an almost impossible requirement for the 300,000 Palestinians living in Area C, 60 percent of the West Bank, to fulfill.
According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), between 2010 and 2014, for example, Israel approved 1.5 percent of building applications in Area C. Israeli authorities, however, routinely approve of settlement master plans and even halt demolitions of settler outposts citing the existence of master plans, JLAC and St. Yves point out. Indeed, since 2017 Israeli officials have approved nearly 14,000 settlement units in the West Bank.
In addition to having to produce an approved master building plan within four days, Palestinian residents of Area C attempting to forestall demolition must prove that construction on their home or home addition has been completed for six months or that the structure has been inhabited for thirty days.
By requiring that Palestinians produce so many documents in such a short period of time, this military order “virtually strips the affected residents of the right to due process and the capacity to challenge the demolition orders through legal avenues, by requiring that objections to the demolition order be accompanied with a valid building permit,” JLAC and St. Yves wrote in their press release. Moreover, COGAT remains the sole arbiter of these appeals. Put differently, even if Palestinians fulfill the appeal requirements put in place by military order 1797, COGAT empowers itself to proceed with demolition anyway.
St. Yves and JLAC emphasize that this new military order violates international law, including Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which defines forcible transfer of occupied populations as a crime against humanity. The order also violates Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations, which requires that an occupying power respect the laws in the country that it occupies. In this case, that means the Jordanian Planning and Construction Law, which allows residents to retroactively legalize home constructions in the face of a demolition order stemming from illegal construction.
One area that may be acutely impacted by this new military order is the E1 corridor, which sits between the Jerusalem municipality’s borders and the settlement of Ma’ale Adumim. For years, Israeli politicians have proposed incorporating this area, which is in Area C, into the Jerusalem municipality.
Such developments are key to maintaining what Israel euphemistically calls a “demographic balance” in Jerusalem, i.e. restricting the Palestinian population to 30 percent of the city’s total population. Palestinian presence in Jerusalem today likely constitutes at least 40 percent of the city’s population.
The Palestinian Authority condemned military order 1797 when it was first announced. “This illegal development would generate more crimes against Palestinian rights of access to a safe and stable living environment and would worsen the already dire conditions of 393,000 Palestinian citizens,” the government said in a statement issued by the Prime Minister’s Office.
Corey Sherman is a teacher in Washington D.C. and a contributing editor to aicnews.org.
29 may 2018
A bill that would limit Palestinian access to the high court of justice passed its first reading in the Knesset on Monday night.
The bill would send many of Palestinian cases, particularly with regard to land ownership and demolitions in Area C of the West Bank, to Israeli district courts.
According to The Jerusalem Post, Israeli right-wing politicians hope the legislation will sharply reduce the high number of West Bank land cases that left-wing non-governmental groups and Palestinians file to the high court.
The bill would send many of Palestinian cases, particularly with regard to land ownership and demolitions in Area C of the West Bank, to Israeli district courts.
According to The Jerusalem Post, Israeli right-wing politicians hope the legislation will sharply reduce the high number of West Bank land cases that left-wing non-governmental groups and Palestinians file to the high court.
26 may 2018
The Palestinian Journalist Syndicate (PCJ) released a statement on Saturday condemning the proposal of a new bill in the Israeli Knesset that would criminalize the photographing or recording of Israeli soldiers while on duty.
The bill was proposed on Thursday, with the support of right-wing Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, and, if passed, those found in violation of the law could face a prison sentence of up to five years.
The PCJ called the proposed bill “racist,” saying that it “severely attacks the profession of the press and legitimizes the criminal practices committed by the Israeli occupation army against the Palestinian people.”
The group said, according to Ma’an, that the law would “grant legitimacy to the Israeli occupation to commit more crimes,” and is an attempt by the Israeli government to “escape punishment and international justice.”
“The core of the law is to mislead justice and provide a formal cover for further crimes,” the group said.
In the statement, the group called on the United Nations (UN) and other international institutions “concerned with the freedom of press work to express their opinion and exert pressure on the occupying entity to comply with its laws in accordance with international laws and conventions, and to protect the freedom of press work and the role of fundamental journalists in uncovering and documenting the truth.”
The bill was proposed on Thursday, with the support of right-wing Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, and, if passed, those found in violation of the law could face a prison sentence of up to five years.
The PCJ called the proposed bill “racist,” saying that it “severely attacks the profession of the press and legitimizes the criminal practices committed by the Israeli occupation army against the Palestinian people.”
The group said, according to Ma’an, that the law would “grant legitimacy to the Israeli occupation to commit more crimes,” and is an attempt by the Israeli government to “escape punishment and international justice.”
“The core of the law is to mislead justice and provide a formal cover for further crimes,” the group said.
In the statement, the group called on the United Nations (UN) and other international institutions “concerned with the freedom of press work to express their opinion and exert pressure on the occupying entity to comply with its laws in accordance with international laws and conventions, and to protect the freedom of press work and the role of fundamental journalists in uncovering and documenting the truth.”
