6 aug 2020
Map illustrating the towns in the petition
The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, in cooperation with The Arab Center for Alternative Planning filed a petition to the Israeli Supreme Court today against an Israeli government policy discriminating against Arab communities in the “northern triangle” region in the distribution of housing, construction, and land development benefits.
The petition, according to an Adalah press release, was filed on behalf of all Arab local authorities in Wadi Ara and 74 area residents, in cooperation with the Public Committee for the Defense of Land and Housing in Wadi Ara, the petitioners' own localities, the local councils of Umm al-Fahm, Baqa al-Gharbiya, the Ara-Ar’ara, Kfar Qara, Ma'ale ‘Iron, Basmah and Jatt, and the communities of Umm al-Qatif, Misar, and Al-‘Iryan which have not received “National Priority Area” (NPA) designation that would make them eligible for development and housing benefits and land discounts from the Israel Land Authority.
Adalah Attorney Suhad Bishara filed the petition with professional planning consultation from urban planner Enaya Banna from the Arab Center for Alternative Planning.
The NPA benefits provided to those localities included in the government’s current arrangement significantly reduce their housing and new construction costs.
These benefits include reduced land lease fees at a rate of up to 51 percent, as well as subsidies from Israel’s Construction and Housing Ministry for planning and development expenses related to new residential construction on state lands.
The petitioners argued that the government’s decisions on NPA eligibility do not comply with Israeli law regulating the classification of localities, said the press release.
This law was the result of a Supreme Court ruling in 2006 on a petition filed by Adalah on behalf of the High Follow-up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel (HCJ 11163/03).
In that case, the court rejected the Israeli government’s arbitrary determination of criteria that had previously resulted in discrimination between Arab and Jewish localities on the basis of ethnicity or national belonging.
The law authorizing the Israeli government to determine national priority areas includes adherence to the principle of equality and the prohibition against discrimination, and also gives significant weight to the criterion of socio-economic ranking and the communities’ economic and social resilience.
The criteria are designed with the intention of reducing socio-economic disparities between communities, said Adalah.
Nevertheless, contrary to the clear language of the law, the Israeli government excluded Arab communities in the “northern triangle” area (Wadi Ara) from being classified as NPAs, despite their low socio-economic ranking.
Although these towns were classified as being in the "social periphery", they are not defined as NPAs because they fall within the boundaries of the Khadera sub-district which has a higher ranking.
As a result, other neighboring – significantly wealthier – localities are entitled to NPA benefits, while the poorer localities, which have filed the Supreme Court petition, are being denied these benefits.
For example, Arab communities situated in the Ma'ale ‘Iron Local Council (Musmus, Zalafa, Musheirifa, Salem, and Bayada) and the city of Umm al-Fahm – which all have low socio-economic rankings – do not enjoy the state benefits provided to the nearby wealthier Jewish localities of Givat Oz, Megiddo, Mizpe Ilan, Harish, Mevo Dotan, and Hermesh.
This state discrimination comes against the backdrop of housing shortages and dysfunctional development in the northern triangle’s Arab communities.
Along with the high population density, lack of urban planning, and shortage of available undeveloped lands, there also exists no development options that meet the needs of the population.
According to data in the petition, which was provided by The Arab Center for Alternative Planning, only 20 development tenders have been issued in the Wadi Ara area since 2010 – some 1,454 housing units – despite an estimated housing shortfall of 10,000 to 11,000.
In view of the Israeli government’s extreme violation of the law – and the concurrent violation of the principle of equality – the petitioners demanded that the Supreme Court cancel the relevant government decisions excluding the Arab communities or, alternatively, order the inclusion of Arab communities in the northern triangle amongst the list of localities designated as NPAs.
Adalah Attorney Suhad Bishara and Urban Planner Dr. Enaya Banna commented: “The Israeli government repeatedly creates mechanisms that systematically discriminate against Arab citizens.
Through manipulations of various parameters, it formulates a policy with an outcome that is clear: the weakest communities – those which should have been at the top of the government's priorities – are excluded.
It is also clear that the Israeli government has failed to abide by the Supreme Court's earlier ruling meant to put an end to this discriminatory practice.
Many additional actions must be taken to resolve the land and planning crisis in Arab communities and to promote proper development that can facilitate social and economic prosperity.”
The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, in cooperation with The Arab Center for Alternative Planning filed a petition to the Israeli Supreme Court today against an Israeli government policy discriminating against Arab communities in the “northern triangle” region in the distribution of housing, construction, and land development benefits.
The petition, according to an Adalah press release, was filed on behalf of all Arab local authorities in Wadi Ara and 74 area residents, in cooperation with the Public Committee for the Defense of Land and Housing in Wadi Ara, the petitioners' own localities, the local councils of Umm al-Fahm, Baqa al-Gharbiya, the Ara-Ar’ara, Kfar Qara, Ma'ale ‘Iron, Basmah and Jatt, and the communities of Umm al-Qatif, Misar, and Al-‘Iryan which have not received “National Priority Area” (NPA) designation that would make them eligible for development and housing benefits and land discounts from the Israel Land Authority.
Adalah Attorney Suhad Bishara filed the petition with professional planning consultation from urban planner Enaya Banna from the Arab Center for Alternative Planning.
The NPA benefits provided to those localities included in the government’s current arrangement significantly reduce their housing and new construction costs.
These benefits include reduced land lease fees at a rate of up to 51 percent, as well as subsidies from Israel’s Construction and Housing Ministry for planning and development expenses related to new residential construction on state lands.
The petitioners argued that the government’s decisions on NPA eligibility do not comply with Israeli law regulating the classification of localities, said the press release.
This law was the result of a Supreme Court ruling in 2006 on a petition filed by Adalah on behalf of the High Follow-up Committee for Arab Citizens of Israel (HCJ 11163/03).
In that case, the court rejected the Israeli government’s arbitrary determination of criteria that had previously resulted in discrimination between Arab and Jewish localities on the basis of ethnicity or national belonging.
The law authorizing the Israeli government to determine national priority areas includes adherence to the principle of equality and the prohibition against discrimination, and also gives significant weight to the criterion of socio-economic ranking and the communities’ economic and social resilience.
The criteria are designed with the intention of reducing socio-economic disparities between communities, said Adalah.
Nevertheless, contrary to the clear language of the law, the Israeli government excluded Arab communities in the “northern triangle” area (Wadi Ara) from being classified as NPAs, despite their low socio-economic ranking.
Although these towns were classified as being in the "social periphery", they are not defined as NPAs because they fall within the boundaries of the Khadera sub-district which has a higher ranking.
As a result, other neighboring – significantly wealthier – localities are entitled to NPA benefits, while the poorer localities, which have filed the Supreme Court petition, are being denied these benefits.
For example, Arab communities situated in the Ma'ale ‘Iron Local Council (Musmus, Zalafa, Musheirifa, Salem, and Bayada) and the city of Umm al-Fahm – which all have low socio-economic rankings – do not enjoy the state benefits provided to the nearby wealthier Jewish localities of Givat Oz, Megiddo, Mizpe Ilan, Harish, Mevo Dotan, and Hermesh.
This state discrimination comes against the backdrop of housing shortages and dysfunctional development in the northern triangle’s Arab communities.
Along with the high population density, lack of urban planning, and shortage of available undeveloped lands, there also exists no development options that meet the needs of the population.
According to data in the petition, which was provided by The Arab Center for Alternative Planning, only 20 development tenders have been issued in the Wadi Ara area since 2010 – some 1,454 housing units – despite an estimated housing shortfall of 10,000 to 11,000.
In view of the Israeli government’s extreme violation of the law – and the concurrent violation of the principle of equality – the petitioners demanded that the Supreme Court cancel the relevant government decisions excluding the Arab communities or, alternatively, order the inclusion of Arab communities in the northern triangle amongst the list of localities designated as NPAs.
Adalah Attorney Suhad Bishara and Urban Planner Dr. Enaya Banna commented: “The Israeli government repeatedly creates mechanisms that systematically discriminate against Arab citizens.
Through manipulations of various parameters, it formulates a policy with an outcome that is clear: the weakest communities – those which should have been at the top of the government's priorities – are excluded.
It is also clear that the Israeli government has failed to abide by the Supreme Court's earlier ruling meant to put an end to this discriminatory practice.
Many additional actions must be taken to resolve the land and planning crisis in Arab communities and to promote proper development that can facilitate social and economic prosperity.”
18 june 2020
A Palestinian man who went to the Israeli High Court today to appeal a decision to demolish his house in Jerusalem's Jabal al-Mukabber neighborhood hoping to get justice from the highest court in Israel, was instead told by the court that he has until Sunday to tear down his house or he will be fined $30,000.
Abdullah Zaatra said that his brother, Yasin, appealed through his lawyer to the High Court against a decision by the Israeli municipality of West Jerusalem to demolish his house in five days for construction without permit.
To his surprise, the Court quickly ruled on the matter and ordered Zaatra to either demolish his house with his own hand by Sunday or he will be fined $30,000 if the municipality goes ahead with the demolition.
Palestinians in occupied Jerusalem say they are forced to build without a permit because getting one is an almost impossible task in light of Israel's discriminatory building policy in the occupied city which favors Jewish construction and presence to Palestinian.
Abdullah Zaatra said that his brother, Yasin, appealed through his lawyer to the High Court against a decision by the Israeli municipality of West Jerusalem to demolish his house in five days for construction without permit.
To his surprise, the Court quickly ruled on the matter and ordered Zaatra to either demolish his house with his own hand by Sunday or he will be fined $30,000 if the municipality goes ahead with the demolition.
Palestinians in occupied Jerusalem say they are forced to build without a permit because getting one is an almost impossible task in light of Israel's discriminatory building policy in the occupied city which favors Jewish construction and presence to Palestinian.
10 june 2020
The Israeli High Court issued a decision last night striking down the Settlements Regularization Law which had allow Israel to expropriate private Palestinian land in the West Bank and to “regularize” or “legalize” the Israeli settlements built on it under Israeli domestic law.
On 6 February 2017, the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, enacted the "Settlements Regularization Law for Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]", and just two days later, Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, the Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center (JLAC), Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, and 17 Palestinian local authorities in the West Bank petitioned the Israeli High Court against the law.
"This is a significant achievement against Israel's threatened impending annexation of parts of the West Bank.
The Supreme Court decision stresses that the Knesset cannot legislate laws that violate international humanitarian law.
There exist no circumstances that justify the commission of war crimes – including the transfer of Israeli civilians to occupied Palestinian territory while stealing Palestinian land," Adalah said in a response to the court's ruling.
JLAC also said in its response that "the challenge now is to follow up on the demolition of Israeli settlement construction built on private Palestinian land and ensure that these lands are returned to their owners – an undertaking that the Israeli state and military will make all efforts to block."
On 6 February 2017, the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, enacted the "Settlements Regularization Law for Judea and Samaria [the West Bank]", and just two days later, Adalah – The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, the Jerusalem Legal Aid and Human Rights Center (JLAC), Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, and 17 Palestinian local authorities in the West Bank petitioned the Israeli High Court against the law.
"This is a significant achievement against Israel's threatened impending annexation of parts of the West Bank.
The Supreme Court decision stresses that the Knesset cannot legislate laws that violate international humanitarian law.
There exist no circumstances that justify the commission of war crimes – including the transfer of Israeli civilians to occupied Palestinian territory while stealing Palestinian land," Adalah said in a response to the court's ruling.
JLAC also said in its response that "the challenge now is to follow up on the demolition of Israeli settlement construction built on private Palestinian land and ensure that these lands are returned to their owners – an undertaking that the Israeli state and military will make all efforts to block."
11 mar 2020
|
|
A state of anxiety and fear in the families of Idris and Taha in Beit Hanina, north of Jerusalem, with the approach of a session to discuss the lawsuit filed by the occupation’s “Absentee Property Guardian", which demands the land on which their houses are built claiming that the settlers owned the land before the occupation of the city of Jerusalem.
The "Absentee Property Guardian" delivered legal notices to Taha and Idris families about 3 years ago, asking them for the land on which the houses are built, but they rejected the allegations and confirmed their ownership of the land. In addition, Jamal Idris explained that his family and the Taha family purchased the land in 2000, and they built the house and expanded on it. |
Today, it has 10 residential homes for the two families, and it houses about 50 individuals, most of them children. video
Idris added that they were surprised in 2017 by receiving judicial notices demanding the land, where they have lived for years, and a new session will be held next month in court to consider the case and make a decision.
He called on family members to support them and provide them with support from officials and human rights institutions to preserve the land and homes.
The two families affirmed that the danger of eviction and confiscation threatens the entire 8000-square meter land, where several other families live as well, and the matter will not stop with the eviction orders of only the two families.
Idris added that they were surprised in 2017 by receiving judicial notices demanding the land, where they have lived for years, and a new session will be held next month in court to consider the case and make a decision.
He called on family members to support them and provide them with support from officials and human rights institutions to preserve the land and homes.
The two families affirmed that the danger of eviction and confiscation threatens the entire 8000-square meter land, where several other families live as well, and the matter will not stop with the eviction orders of only the two families.
