16 sept 2017
Israeli State Attorney’s Office’s ‘Cyber Unit’ collaborates with social media platforms – including U.S.-based giants Facebook and Twitter – to censor users’ posts, but has no legal authority. Israel’s state attorney’s office is running a “Cyber Unit” which, in collaboration with major social media outlets, is illegally censoring user content.
Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel sent a letter [PDF] on 2 August 2017 to Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, State Attorney Shai Nitzan, and Cyber Unit director Haim Vismonsky demanding that they immediately cease the illegal operations of the state attorney’s Cyber Unit.
The unit began operation during the second half of 2015 and is responsible for “dealing with cyberspace enforcement challenges” via censorship of social media posts. This censorship – conducted in collaboration and coordination with social media outlets, including U.S.-based giants Facebook and Twitter – entails the removal of content added by users, restriction of access to certain websites, and outright blocking of users’ access to these sites.
Adalah Attorney Fady Khoury wrote in the letter that much of the unit’s censorship operations are conducted without any basis in Israeli law:
“Nothing in the law allows state authorities to censor content based solely on an administrative determination… that the content amounts to a criminal offense. Likewise, there is no explicit directive in [Israeli] law authorizing the removal of content determined to amount to a criminal offense, even by a court.”
According to the Cyber Unit’s own end-of-year 2016 report, it handled 2,241 cases of online content that were ostensibly posted in violation of the law; 1,554 of these were removed as a result of the unit’s operations.
While private bodies such as social media corporations are not subject to Israeli public law and therefore may lawfully choose to remove content in accordance with their terms of service, state agents – such as the Cyber Unit – are indeed subject to Israeli law and much of their censorship activities are therefore illegal.
According to Attorney Khoury, Cyber Unit operations are a clear violation of free speech:
“In this context, a determination by the State’s Attorney’s Office, through the Cyber Unit, that a certain expression posted on social media websites amounts to a criminal offence is tantamount to an unproven suspicion. The Cyber Unit cannot impose sanctions based solely on this suspicion, let alone severe sanctions in the form of censorship. The authorities are not allowed to demand the removal of speech that has not yet been proven to be criminal, even if it is unpleasant to their ears. All speech should enjoy a ‘presumption of legality’ (akin to the presumption of innocence) until a court of law declares it illegal… When the Cyber Unit appeals to a service provider with a request to censor content based on its suspicion that the concerned content is expression forbidden by law and without a final [judicial] ruling in the matter, this constitutes an unconstitutional violation of freedom of speech.”
Adalah also noted that Cyber Unit operations are a violation of the principle of separation of powers:
“The pretense of deciding upon the criminalization of expression, without appealing to the court or conducting any legal proceeding – and upon this basis determine censorship sanctions – impinges upon and supplants judicial authority and leads to the infringement of the principle of separation of powers. Cyber Unit clerks and administrative officials decide for themselves, within the framework of an alternative enforcement system, if a certain instance of expression ‘is incitement to violence and terror, and support of a terror organization’ or is a ‘forbidden publication towards public servants in the framework of their jobs…’ The obvious conclusion is that the state attorney is usurping judicial authority –reserved for the judicial branch – illegally and without any legal authorization.”
Adalah demands that the Israeli attorney general, state attorney, and Cyber Unit halt all internet content censorship activities using the “alternative enforcement system” operated by the state attorney’s Cyber Unit.
Twitter, Facebook regularly remove content at request of governments
According to Twitter and Facebook transparency reports, available on their websites, the respective sites remove a significant amount of content at the request of governments around the world. The reports note that the companies fulfill government requests upon finding that the post violates either their Community Standards or the requesting government’s laws, although the former does not count in the total numbers reported by Facebook. [1]
For Twitter, the total number of requests made by governments is included below. For the July-December 2016 period, the sites granted requests for the following countries (among others):
Twitter: [2] Australia: 4/15 requests were granted; Canada: 11/38; France: 1334/2431; Germany: 236/371; Israel: 12/13; Italy: 6/13; Norway: 1/2; Sweden: 0/2; UK: 65/307; US: 100/381
Facebook: [3] Australia: 2 requests were granted; Canada: 0; France: 683; Germany: 919; Israel: 661; Italy: 11; Norway: 0; Sweden: 0; UK: 177; US: 0
In the United States, there have been high profile instances of government requests to censor specific online content.
One successful attempt was in the case of recordings posted by Korryn Gaines, a woman who was shot dead by Baltimore County police officers. The killing was the culmination of an hours-long standoff between her and police, during which time Gaines had live posted a recording on Facebook. She also posted to her Instagram account a video of an earlier interaction with police. Following her killing, both of these accounts were taken offline following a request from police. While the accounts were eventually reinstated, two of the videos Gaines posted continued to be restricted for violating Facebook community standards. [4]
Not the first time
This is not the first time Adalah has revealed Israeli state agents operating without any domestic legal authority.
In August 2016, Adalah sent a letter to Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit and Israel Airports Authority Director General Yaakov Ganot calling on them to halt the overtly illegal practices of strip searching and forcing security escorts on Arab passengers in Israel's airport. There is no Israeli law authorizing state representatives to carry out these practices.
In the context of pre-boarding security checks, Adalah wrote: “The Flight Law (Security in Civil Aviation) 1977, which deals with the security of flights and passengers and includes a list of authorized acts that may be employed in order to fulfill the purpose of the law, does not authorize Israeli airline security personnel to ask passengers to strip naked and to conduct searches or to escort them to the boarding gates.”
CLICK HERE to read Adalah's letter about the Cyber Unit's illegal operations [Hebrew] [PDF]
CLICK HERE to read the Cyber Unit's 2016 annual report [Hebrew]
[1] Twitter Transparency Report Removal Requests; Facebook Government Requests Report FAQ.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Facebook Government Requests Report.
[4] Baynard Woods, Facebook deactivated Korryn Gaines' account during standoff,police say, The Guardian, 3 August, 2016.
Related Press Releases:
Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel sent a letter [PDF] on 2 August 2017 to Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, State Attorney Shai Nitzan, and Cyber Unit director Haim Vismonsky demanding that they immediately cease the illegal operations of the state attorney’s Cyber Unit.
The unit began operation during the second half of 2015 and is responsible for “dealing with cyberspace enforcement challenges” via censorship of social media posts. This censorship – conducted in collaboration and coordination with social media outlets, including U.S.-based giants Facebook and Twitter – entails the removal of content added by users, restriction of access to certain websites, and outright blocking of users’ access to these sites.
Adalah Attorney Fady Khoury wrote in the letter that much of the unit’s censorship operations are conducted without any basis in Israeli law:
“Nothing in the law allows state authorities to censor content based solely on an administrative determination… that the content amounts to a criminal offense. Likewise, there is no explicit directive in [Israeli] law authorizing the removal of content determined to amount to a criminal offense, even by a court.”
According to the Cyber Unit’s own end-of-year 2016 report, it handled 2,241 cases of online content that were ostensibly posted in violation of the law; 1,554 of these were removed as a result of the unit’s operations.
While private bodies such as social media corporations are not subject to Israeli public law and therefore may lawfully choose to remove content in accordance with their terms of service, state agents – such as the Cyber Unit – are indeed subject to Israeli law and much of their censorship activities are therefore illegal.
According to Attorney Khoury, Cyber Unit operations are a clear violation of free speech:
“In this context, a determination by the State’s Attorney’s Office, through the Cyber Unit, that a certain expression posted on social media websites amounts to a criminal offence is tantamount to an unproven suspicion. The Cyber Unit cannot impose sanctions based solely on this suspicion, let alone severe sanctions in the form of censorship. The authorities are not allowed to demand the removal of speech that has not yet been proven to be criminal, even if it is unpleasant to their ears. All speech should enjoy a ‘presumption of legality’ (akin to the presumption of innocence) until a court of law declares it illegal… When the Cyber Unit appeals to a service provider with a request to censor content based on its suspicion that the concerned content is expression forbidden by law and without a final [judicial] ruling in the matter, this constitutes an unconstitutional violation of freedom of speech.”
Adalah also noted that Cyber Unit operations are a violation of the principle of separation of powers:
“The pretense of deciding upon the criminalization of expression, without appealing to the court or conducting any legal proceeding – and upon this basis determine censorship sanctions – impinges upon and supplants judicial authority and leads to the infringement of the principle of separation of powers. Cyber Unit clerks and administrative officials decide for themselves, within the framework of an alternative enforcement system, if a certain instance of expression ‘is incitement to violence and terror, and support of a terror organization’ or is a ‘forbidden publication towards public servants in the framework of their jobs…’ The obvious conclusion is that the state attorney is usurping judicial authority –reserved for the judicial branch – illegally and without any legal authorization.”
Adalah demands that the Israeli attorney general, state attorney, and Cyber Unit halt all internet content censorship activities using the “alternative enforcement system” operated by the state attorney’s Cyber Unit.
Twitter, Facebook regularly remove content at request of governments
According to Twitter and Facebook transparency reports, available on their websites, the respective sites remove a significant amount of content at the request of governments around the world. The reports note that the companies fulfill government requests upon finding that the post violates either their Community Standards or the requesting government’s laws, although the former does not count in the total numbers reported by Facebook. [1]
For Twitter, the total number of requests made by governments is included below. For the July-December 2016 period, the sites granted requests for the following countries (among others):
Twitter: [2] Australia: 4/15 requests were granted; Canada: 11/38; France: 1334/2431; Germany: 236/371; Israel: 12/13; Italy: 6/13; Norway: 1/2; Sweden: 0/2; UK: 65/307; US: 100/381
Facebook: [3] Australia: 2 requests were granted; Canada: 0; France: 683; Germany: 919; Israel: 661; Italy: 11; Norway: 0; Sweden: 0; UK: 177; US: 0
In the United States, there have been high profile instances of government requests to censor specific online content.
One successful attempt was in the case of recordings posted by Korryn Gaines, a woman who was shot dead by Baltimore County police officers. The killing was the culmination of an hours-long standoff between her and police, during which time Gaines had live posted a recording on Facebook. She also posted to her Instagram account a video of an earlier interaction with police. Following her killing, both of these accounts were taken offline following a request from police. While the accounts were eventually reinstated, two of the videos Gaines posted continued to be restricted for violating Facebook community standards. [4]
Not the first time
This is not the first time Adalah has revealed Israeli state agents operating without any domestic legal authority.
In August 2016, Adalah sent a letter to Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit and Israel Airports Authority Director General Yaakov Ganot calling on them to halt the overtly illegal practices of strip searching and forcing security escorts on Arab passengers in Israel's airport. There is no Israeli law authorizing state representatives to carry out these practices.
In the context of pre-boarding security checks, Adalah wrote: “The Flight Law (Security in Civil Aviation) 1977, which deals with the security of flights and passengers and includes a list of authorized acts that may be employed in order to fulfill the purpose of the law, does not authorize Israeli airline security personnel to ask passengers to strip naked and to conduct searches or to escort them to the boarding gates.”
CLICK HERE to read Adalah's letter about the Cyber Unit's illegal operations [Hebrew] [PDF]
CLICK HERE to read the Cyber Unit's 2016 annual report [Hebrew]
[1] Twitter Transparency Report Removal Requests; Facebook Government Requests Report FAQ.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Facebook Government Requests Report.
[4] Baynard Woods, Facebook deactivated Korryn Gaines' account during standoff,police say, The Guardian, 3 August, 2016.
Related Press Releases:
15 sept 2017
Israeli Shin Bet intelligence apparatus rounded up a Palestinian student who studies medicine in Jordan, Thaer Joudeh. Israeli forces questioned him and banned him for seeing his lawyer and family members just for handing over academic materials at university.
Haaretz newspaper reported on Friday that Israeli Attorney General accused Joudeh, a resident of the Negev, with handing out study materials as a contribution to a student syndicate allegedly affiliated with Hamas Movement, calling it “serious security violation”.
Both of the Israeli Supreme and Central courts criticized the indictment brought against Joudeh and refused to extend his detention until the completion of judicial procedures. He was allowed to go back to Jordan with disregard to the Shin Bet objection.
Haaretz newspaper reported on Friday that Israeli Attorney General accused Joudeh, a resident of the Negev, with handing out study materials as a contribution to a student syndicate allegedly affiliated with Hamas Movement, calling it “serious security violation”.
Both of the Israeli Supreme and Central courts criticized the indictment brought against Joudeh and refused to extend his detention until the completion of judicial procedures. He was allowed to go back to Jordan with disregard to the Shin Bet objection.
2 sept 2017
The Israeli Army’s Spokesperson Unit announced that the Head of the Central Command, Major General Roni Numa, signed a military order establishing a municipal services administration for the Jewish settlers in Hebron.
The order was signed following administrative work by the Military Advocate General, the Civil Administration, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of the Interior.
“By granting an official status to the Hebron settlers, the Israeli government is formalizing the apartheid system in the city. This step, which happened immediately following the announcement on the evacuation of the settlers who took over a house in Hebron, is another illustration of the policy of compensating the most extreme settlers for their illegal actions.”
Details:
It appears that the order does not create a new local authority or a new community within a regional authority, but rather a settler body with a certain degree of administrative power. Needless to say, this body will not include any Palestinian representation.
We are currently trying to obtain the military order and the legal opinion leading to it, in order to be able to further understand the implications of this development.
Possible implications:
1) Although the settlers already treat specific areas in the city as their own, this split in local governance formalizes the apartheid system in Hebron, with the approval of Minister of Defense Lieberman.
2) It is still unclear whether the new “municipal services administration” will have authority on infrastructure in the area, but if so, this would constitute a violation of the Hebron Protocol from 1997, according to which the responsibility and authority over infrastructure are in the hands of the Palestinians.
3) We can assume that the establishment of the “municipal services administration” will lead to the handling of budgets directly by the settlers, rather than by the Civil Administration, something which is also likely to result in less transparency in fund allocation.
The order was signed following administrative work by the Military Advocate General, the Civil Administration, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of the Interior.
“By granting an official status to the Hebron settlers, the Israeli government is formalizing the apartheid system in the city. This step, which happened immediately following the announcement on the evacuation of the settlers who took over a house in Hebron, is another illustration of the policy of compensating the most extreme settlers for their illegal actions.”
Details:
It appears that the order does not create a new local authority or a new community within a regional authority, but rather a settler body with a certain degree of administrative power. Needless to say, this body will not include any Palestinian representation.
We are currently trying to obtain the military order and the legal opinion leading to it, in order to be able to further understand the implications of this development.
Possible implications:
1) Although the settlers already treat specific areas in the city as their own, this split in local governance formalizes the apartheid system in Hebron, with the approval of Minister of Defense Lieberman.
2) It is still unclear whether the new “municipal services administration” will have authority on infrastructure in the area, but if so, this would constitute a violation of the Hebron Protocol from 1997, according to which the responsibility and authority over infrastructure are in the hands of the Palestinians.
3) We can assume that the establishment of the “municipal services administration” will lead to the handling of budgets directly by the settlers, rather than by the Civil Administration, something which is also likely to result in less transparency in fund allocation.
28 aug 2017
The Hebron Reconstruction Committee managed to achieve an Israeli High Court ruling evicting Israeli colonists, illegally occupying “Abu Rajab” home, in the southern part of the West Bank, after the family proved its legal ownership of the property.
The court also asked the prosecution to ensure the eviction of the colonist, to which the prosecutor’s office responded that they needed a week to “negotiate with the settlers,” and if no agreement is reached, they “will be evicted by force at a later date.”
Resident Hazem Abu Rajab Tamimi, one of the owners of the property, said the Israeli ruling consists of 35 pages, adding that the family lawyers were not informed about its contents until they demanded a copy.
“The ruling is a very positive development,” he said, “We hope that the illegal colonists will be removed from our home as soon as possible,” he added.
Following the ruling, the colonists illegally occupying the property, assaulted a 55-year-old woman from Abu Rajab family, causing minor cuts and bruises, before local medics moved to a clinic.
Abu Rajab stated that, since the colonists occupied the first and second floors of the building, they have been constantly harassing the family, but it remained steadfast and determined to stay here, and regain their lawful ownership of their own home.
“For more than three weeks, the colonists have been trying to keep us out of our own home, but we will never leave; we will not abandon it for them to occupy,” he said.
The court also asked the prosecution to ensure the eviction of the colonist, to which the prosecutor’s office responded that they needed a week to “negotiate with the settlers,” and if no agreement is reached, they “will be evicted by force at a later date.”
Resident Hazem Abu Rajab Tamimi, one of the owners of the property, said the Israeli ruling consists of 35 pages, adding that the family lawyers were not informed about its contents until they demanded a copy.
“The ruling is a very positive development,” he said, “We hope that the illegal colonists will be removed from our home as soon as possible,” he added.
Following the ruling, the colonists illegally occupying the property, assaulted a 55-year-old woman from Abu Rajab family, causing minor cuts and bruises, before local medics moved to a clinic.
Abu Rajab stated that, since the colonists occupied the first and second floors of the building, they have been constantly harassing the family, but it remained steadfast and determined to stay here, and regain their lawful ownership of their own home.
“For more than three weeks, the colonists have been trying to keep us out of our own home, but we will never leave; we will not abandon it for them to occupy,” he said.
The Israeli occupation has revoked the citizenship of thousands of Palestinians (known as Israeli-Arabs) in southern region of Al-Naqab (Negev) in the past two years, Israeli daily Haaretz revealed Friday, according to Days of Palestine.
The newspaper said that the Israeli Interior Ministry has changed the status of these Israeli-Arabs from “citizens” to “inhabitants,” which has led to the forfeiture of many of their basic rights.
Reacting to the report, Talab abu-Arar, an Israeli Arab MK, demanded that the ministry reverse the racial move.
According to Abu-Arar, the citizenships were secretly stripped by the ministry’s office in the city of Beersheba, when the Israeli-Arab residents applied to renew their national ID cards or passports.
In a statement, Juma Zbarga, an Israeli-Arab MK from the Joint Arab List coalition, asserted: “We will not sit idly by in the face of attempts to gradually expel us from our homeland… and delegitimize our existence.”
“The revocation of our citizenship makes us vulnerable to abuse and restricts our freedom of movement,” he added, pointing out that non-citizens lack the right to vote or run in general elections.
Describing the move as “contrary to Israeli law itself,” Zbarga added: “Our citizenship is derived from our presence in our homeland and our history — it does not depend on the whim of a few rogue officials.”
The newspaper said that the Israeli Interior Ministry has changed the status of these Israeli-Arabs from “citizens” to “inhabitants,” which has led to the forfeiture of many of their basic rights.
Reacting to the report, Talab abu-Arar, an Israeli Arab MK, demanded that the ministry reverse the racial move.
According to Abu-Arar, the citizenships were secretly stripped by the ministry’s office in the city of Beersheba, when the Israeli-Arab residents applied to renew their national ID cards or passports.
In a statement, Juma Zbarga, an Israeli-Arab MK from the Joint Arab List coalition, asserted: “We will not sit idly by in the face of attempts to gradually expel us from our homeland… and delegitimize our existence.”
“The revocation of our citizenship makes us vulnerable to abuse and restricts our freedom of movement,” he added, pointing out that non-citizens lack the right to vote or run in general elections.
Describing the move as “contrary to Israeli law itself,” Zbarga added: “Our citizenship is derived from our presence in our homeland and our history — it does not depend on the whim of a few rogue officials.”
23 aug 2017
A senior United Nations (UN) political affairs official Tuesday evening voiced concerns over recent developments that “undermine efforts to end the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including Israel's move to amend a law to cement its control over East Jerusalem.”
“Jerusalem is a final status issue that must be resolved through negotiations between the parties,” Assistant-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Miroslav Jenèa told the Security Council during his briefing on the situation in the Middle East.
He said that if approved, the proposed amendment to the “Basic Law: Jerusalem the Capital of Israel” would further cement Israeli control over occupied East Jerusalem and would limit the ability of both sides to reach a negotiated solution that is in line with UN resolutions and prior agreements.
“Any move which could impact demographics in the city is extremely worrisome and could spark violence,” he said.
Earlier last month, Israeli Knesset backed a bill that aims to make it more difficult to give up sections of occupied Jerusalem in a future peace deal.
The basic law was requiring the consent of at least 61 MKs, a majority in the 120-member Knesset, for handing over sovereign control of any part of Jerusalem to Palestinians.
However, the bill would raise that to an 80-MK minimum, or fully two-thirds of the Knesset, a threshold that likely makes it all but impossible for a future Israeli government to obtain the Knesset’s approval for withdrawing from occupied Jerusalem.
“Jerusalem is a final status issue that must be resolved through negotiations between the parties,” Assistant-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Miroslav Jenèa told the Security Council during his briefing on the situation in the Middle East.
He said that if approved, the proposed amendment to the “Basic Law: Jerusalem the Capital of Israel” would further cement Israeli control over occupied East Jerusalem and would limit the ability of both sides to reach a negotiated solution that is in line with UN resolutions and prior agreements.
“Any move which could impact demographics in the city is extremely worrisome and could spark violence,” he said.
Earlier last month, Israeli Knesset backed a bill that aims to make it more difficult to give up sections of occupied Jerusalem in a future peace deal.
The basic law was requiring the consent of at least 61 MKs, a majority in the 120-member Knesset, for handing over sovereign control of any part of Jerusalem to Palestinians.
However, the bill would raise that to an 80-MK minimum, or fully two-thirds of the Knesset, a threshold that likely makes it all but impossible for a future Israeli government to obtain the Knesset’s approval for withdrawing from occupied Jerusalem.
22 aug 2017
A Palestinian rides on a donkey with a settlement in the background
The Israeli government is defending the legality of the outpost “Regularization law” at the Israeli Supreme Court, and says that the expropriation of Palestinian-owned land would benefit Palestinians because they would receive financial compensation for it, reportedly describing Palestinian laws prohibiting the sale of land to Israelis as “racist.”
The hearing came in response to two petitions filed by human rights groups to the court demanding to strike down the law, which would pave the way for the retroactive legalization of dozens of illegal Israeli settler outposts.
The Regularization law, passed by the Israeli parliament in February, states that any settlements built in the occupied West Bank “in good faith” — without knowledge that the land upon which it was built was privately owned by Palestinians — could be officially recognized by Israel pending minimal proof of governmental support in its establishment and some form of compensation to the Palestinian landowners.
Israeli NGO Peace Now said, in a statement on Monday, that in response to the petitions — one of which was submitted by Peace Now and fellow rights groups Yesh Din and ACRI — the government justified the law by saying that the Palestinian landowners would receive monetary compensation.
“The government even went as far as to claim that the Palestinian landowners whose land was stolen by Israeli citizens actually benefit from the law, since they actually want to sell their lands, but can’t do so due to Palestinian laws,” Peace Now said, adding that the response also claimed that the illegal settlements in the West Bank “are a national interest that justifies confiscation of private lands.”
Israel also claimed, according to Ma’an, that Palestinian laws that prohibit selling land to Israelis were “racist,” ACRI said in a statement.
According to ACRI, the Israeli state’s response argued that the parliament, or Knesset, can impose law in the occupied territory to address “problems faced by Israelis” and that settlers were considered a “local population.”
The state of Israel responded to arguments that imposing laws in the occupied territory was unjustified, due to the fact that Palestinians in the West Bank cannot vote for the Knesset, saying the issue was “irrelevant, since Palestinians also do not vote for the Military Commander who is enacting laws in the West Bank,” ACRI reported.
The rights groups had argued in the petition that the law was not just a contravention of international law but unconstitutional for Israel, as it “clearly violates the basic law: human dignity and liberty, while forcing authorities to expropriate rights of land ownership and usage from Palestinians for an unlimited time period.”
“The government attempts to present Israeli citizens, who are directly involved in land theft of Palestinians, as deserving a reward for their participation in the thievery,” Peace Now said.
“Additionally, the law violates international humanitarian law, the laws of occupation and other international conventions signed by Israel, which oblige the state of Israel to protect the rights of residents of the occupied territory and forbid the expropriation of their property for any use by an immediate security need,” the petitioners said.
“Up until today, Israeli laws in the West Bank applied only to Israeli citizens on a personal basis. Passing the law is a clear act of applying sovereignty and thereby it is an act of illegal annexation.”
ACRI wrote that the Israeli state’s response “completely ignores the extent of the continuous unlawful violations of rights of Palestinian landowners caused by illegal takeovers of their land for settlement purposes. It expresses Israeli policies to retroactively legalize illegal Israeli construction in the West Bank in contravention to Israeli law as well as International Humanitarian Law, while rewarding the perpetrators who had illegally taken over land not belonging to them.”
Since the occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, in 1967, between 500,000 and 600,000 Israelis have moved into Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, in violation of international law.
The estimated 196 government recognized Israeli settlements scattered across the Palestinian territory are all considered illegal under international law.
While members of the international community have rested the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the discontinuation of illegal Israeli settlements and the establishment of a two-state solution, Israeli leaders have instead shifted further to the right, with more than 50 percent of the ministers in the current Israeli government publicly stating their opposition to a Palestinian state.
The Israeli government is defending the legality of the outpost “Regularization law” at the Israeli Supreme Court, and says that the expropriation of Palestinian-owned land would benefit Palestinians because they would receive financial compensation for it, reportedly describing Palestinian laws prohibiting the sale of land to Israelis as “racist.”
The hearing came in response to two petitions filed by human rights groups to the court demanding to strike down the law, which would pave the way for the retroactive legalization of dozens of illegal Israeli settler outposts.
The Regularization law, passed by the Israeli parliament in February, states that any settlements built in the occupied West Bank “in good faith” — without knowledge that the land upon which it was built was privately owned by Palestinians — could be officially recognized by Israel pending minimal proof of governmental support in its establishment and some form of compensation to the Palestinian landowners.
Israeli NGO Peace Now said, in a statement on Monday, that in response to the petitions — one of which was submitted by Peace Now and fellow rights groups Yesh Din and ACRI — the government justified the law by saying that the Palestinian landowners would receive monetary compensation.
“The government even went as far as to claim that the Palestinian landowners whose land was stolen by Israeli citizens actually benefit from the law, since they actually want to sell their lands, but can’t do so due to Palestinian laws,” Peace Now said, adding that the response also claimed that the illegal settlements in the West Bank “are a national interest that justifies confiscation of private lands.”
Israel also claimed, according to Ma’an, that Palestinian laws that prohibit selling land to Israelis were “racist,” ACRI said in a statement.
According to ACRI, the Israeli state’s response argued that the parliament, or Knesset, can impose law in the occupied territory to address “problems faced by Israelis” and that settlers were considered a “local population.”
The state of Israel responded to arguments that imposing laws in the occupied territory was unjustified, due to the fact that Palestinians in the West Bank cannot vote for the Knesset, saying the issue was “irrelevant, since Palestinians also do not vote for the Military Commander who is enacting laws in the West Bank,” ACRI reported.
The rights groups had argued in the petition that the law was not just a contravention of international law but unconstitutional for Israel, as it “clearly violates the basic law: human dignity and liberty, while forcing authorities to expropriate rights of land ownership and usage from Palestinians for an unlimited time period.”
“The government attempts to present Israeli citizens, who are directly involved in land theft of Palestinians, as deserving a reward for their participation in the thievery,” Peace Now said.
“Additionally, the law violates international humanitarian law, the laws of occupation and other international conventions signed by Israel, which oblige the state of Israel to protect the rights of residents of the occupied territory and forbid the expropriation of their property for any use by an immediate security need,” the petitioners said.
“Up until today, Israeli laws in the West Bank applied only to Israeli citizens on a personal basis. Passing the law is a clear act of applying sovereignty and thereby it is an act of illegal annexation.”
ACRI wrote that the Israeli state’s response “completely ignores the extent of the continuous unlawful violations of rights of Palestinian landowners caused by illegal takeovers of their land for settlement purposes. It expresses Israeli policies to retroactively legalize illegal Israeli construction in the West Bank in contravention to Israeli law as well as International Humanitarian Law, while rewarding the perpetrators who had illegally taken over land not belonging to them.”
Since the occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, in 1967, between 500,000 and 600,000 Israelis have moved into Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, in violation of international law.
The estimated 196 government recognized Israeli settlements scattered across the Palestinian territory are all considered illegal under international law.
While members of the international community have rested the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the discontinuation of illegal Israeli settlements and the establishment of a two-state solution, Israeli leaders have instead shifted further to the right, with more than 50 percent of the ministers in the current Israeli government publicly stating their opposition to a Palestinian state.
An Israeli court ordered Tuesday the eviction of the Shamasna family from their home in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in occupied Jerusalem.
Earlier on Monday, the court had refused an appeal submitted by the family against the eviction order which was issued several years ago.
Speaking to the PIC reporter, Mohamed Shamasna expressed concern that the family house could be evicted at any moment.
For his part, Hatem Abdel-Qader, a member of Fatah movement's Revolutionary Council, considered the eviction order as a political decision par excellence which only serves Israeli settlers.
Israelis have claimed that Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood was once the site of a 19th century Jewish community. Many families in the neighborhood have been embroiled in legal disputes for decades, as various Israeli settlers have attempted to claim ownership over their homes.
According to the Israeli law, Jewish Israelis are permitted to claim ownership over property believed to have been owned by Jews before 1948 during Ottoman or British rule. However, such a law does not exist for the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees who were displaced from their lands and homes during and after the establishment of the state of Israel.
Earlier on Monday, the court had refused an appeal submitted by the family against the eviction order which was issued several years ago.
Speaking to the PIC reporter, Mohamed Shamasna expressed concern that the family house could be evicted at any moment.
For his part, Hatem Abdel-Qader, a member of Fatah movement's Revolutionary Council, considered the eviction order as a political decision par excellence which only serves Israeli settlers.
Israelis have claimed that Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood was once the site of a 19th century Jewish community. Many families in the neighborhood have been embroiled in legal disputes for decades, as various Israeli settlers have attempted to claim ownership over their homes.
According to the Israeli law, Jewish Israelis are permitted to claim ownership over property believed to have been owned by Jews before 1948 during Ottoman or British rule. However, such a law does not exist for the hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees who were displaced from their lands and homes during and after the establishment of the state of Israel.
19 aug 2017
Israeli authorities released a 19-year-old Israeli terrorist from administrative detention — an Israeli policy of imprisonment without charge or trial — on Friday, after he was detained in June for allegedly attacking Palestinian communities.
The Hebrew language version of Haaretz reported that the Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, released Elia Nativ, a resident of the Yitzhar colony in the occupied West Bank district of Nablus, from administrative detention after some two months, in a rare case in which the policy was used against a Jewish Israeli.
The policy of administrative detention is almost exclusively used against Palestinians, with 450 Palestinians held under the policy as of July, according to prisoners’ rights group Addameer.
Haaretz had previously reported that Nativ was suspected of vandalizing Palestinian properties, including setting fire to Palestinian cars in the villages of Huwwara and Burin, located nearby the Yitzhar settlement, and puncturing tires of vehicles parked near diplomatic offices and international agencies, including the United Nations in Jerusalem.
Another Israeli was also reportedly detained over similar charges, but was not held under administrative detention, Ma’an reports.
According to Haaretz, the Shin Bet believes that Nativ is a member of an extremist Jewish group called “Foundation of the Revolt,” which reportedly operates out of the illegal Israeli outpost of Baladim. However, in recent weeks the residents of the outpost were removed, causing most of the extremists to move to the Yitzhar settlement.
Amiram Ben-Uliel, who was charged with murdering three members of the Dawabsha family in the Nablus-area village of Douma after setting their house on fire two years ago, was also part of this extremist movement, according to Haaretz.
An upwards of some 600,000 Israeli settlers reside in occupied Palestinian territory in violation of international law. The international community has repeatedly called their presence and rising population the main impediment to potential peace in the region.
The UN reported earlier this month that after a three-year decline of settler attacks on Palestinians, the first half of 2017 showed a major increase in such attacks, with 89 incidents being documented so far this year.
“On a monthly average, this represents an increase of 88 percent compared with 2016,” the UN said. The attacks during this time period have led to the deaths of three Palestinians.
Israeli media has reported that the Shin Bet has also warned the Israeli government over the alarming trend and has “called on the government to adopt urgent measures to prevent further deterioration,” according to the UN.
Palestinian activists and rights groups have long accused Israel of fostering a “culture of impunity” for Israeli settlers and soldiers committing violent acts against Palestinians.
Israeli authorities served indictments in only 8.2 percent of cases of Israeli settlers committing anti-Palestinian crimes in the occupied West Bank in the past three years, according to Israeli NGO Yesh Din.
Meanwhile, Palestinians allegedly or actually committing any attacks on Israelis are often shot dead at the scene, in what rights groups have deemed “extrajudicial executions,” or face long prison sentences.
The Hebrew language version of Haaretz reported that the Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency, released Elia Nativ, a resident of the Yitzhar colony in the occupied West Bank district of Nablus, from administrative detention after some two months, in a rare case in which the policy was used against a Jewish Israeli.
The policy of administrative detention is almost exclusively used against Palestinians, with 450 Palestinians held under the policy as of July, according to prisoners’ rights group Addameer.
Haaretz had previously reported that Nativ was suspected of vandalizing Palestinian properties, including setting fire to Palestinian cars in the villages of Huwwara and Burin, located nearby the Yitzhar settlement, and puncturing tires of vehicles parked near diplomatic offices and international agencies, including the United Nations in Jerusalem.
Another Israeli was also reportedly detained over similar charges, but was not held under administrative detention, Ma’an reports.
According to Haaretz, the Shin Bet believes that Nativ is a member of an extremist Jewish group called “Foundation of the Revolt,” which reportedly operates out of the illegal Israeli outpost of Baladim. However, in recent weeks the residents of the outpost were removed, causing most of the extremists to move to the Yitzhar settlement.
Amiram Ben-Uliel, who was charged with murdering three members of the Dawabsha family in the Nablus-area village of Douma after setting their house on fire two years ago, was also part of this extremist movement, according to Haaretz.
An upwards of some 600,000 Israeli settlers reside in occupied Palestinian territory in violation of international law. The international community has repeatedly called their presence and rising population the main impediment to potential peace in the region.
The UN reported earlier this month that after a three-year decline of settler attacks on Palestinians, the first half of 2017 showed a major increase in such attacks, with 89 incidents being documented so far this year.
“On a monthly average, this represents an increase of 88 percent compared with 2016,” the UN said. The attacks during this time period have led to the deaths of three Palestinians.
Israeli media has reported that the Shin Bet has also warned the Israeli government over the alarming trend and has “called on the government to adopt urgent measures to prevent further deterioration,” according to the UN.
Palestinian activists and rights groups have long accused Israel of fostering a “culture of impunity” for Israeli settlers and soldiers committing violent acts against Palestinians.
Israeli authorities served indictments in only 8.2 percent of cases of Israeli settlers committing anti-Palestinian crimes in the occupied West Bank in the past three years, according to Israeli NGO Yesh Din.
Meanwhile, Palestinians allegedly or actually committing any attacks on Israelis are often shot dead at the scene, in what rights groups have deemed “extrajudicial executions,” or face long prison sentences.
3 aug 2017
Israeli Supreme Court on Thursday refused an appeal against home-demolition orders issued as punitive measures against the families of the three martyrs who carried out an anti-occupation attack in Occupied Jerusalem six weeks ago.
The attack led to the death of an Israeli female soldier as well as all of the three attackers.
Israeli channel seven said that the court partially accepted the appeal and decided not to raze the lower floors of the three youths’ homes as not being used for housing purposes.
The three slain young men: Bara Saleh, Adel Ankoush and Usama Atta, from Deir Abu Mishal town near Ramallah, carried out stabbing and shooting attacks against Israeli targets at Bab al-Amoud gate in Occupied Jerusalem.
The attack led to the death of an Israeli female soldier as well as all of the three attackers.
Israeli channel seven said that the court partially accepted the appeal and decided not to raze the lower floors of the three youths’ homes as not being used for housing purposes.
The three slain young men: Bara Saleh, Adel Ankoush and Usama Atta, from Deir Abu Mishal town near Ramallah, carried out stabbing and shooting attacks against Israeli targets at Bab al-Amoud gate in Occupied Jerusalem.
