Haaretz High Court gives Israel six months to evacuate illegal West Bank outposts Judges say its no longer possible to trust the commitments the state gives on the matter. By Chaim Levinson | Nov. 19, 2013 | 6:13 AM The High Court of Justice on Monday gave the state six months to evacuate houses built on private Palestinian land in three illegal West Bank outposts. Court President Asher Grunis and Justice Miriam Naor leveled unprecedented criticism against the state, writing that it was no longer possible to rely on the state’s commitments on such matters. The houses to be evacuated stand in the illegal outposts of Givat Assaf, Mitzpe Yitzhar and Ma’aleh Rehavam. Peace Now filed a petition in 2007 to evacuate homes in six illegal outposts: the above-named three along with Ramat Gilad, Givat Haro’eh and Mitzpe Lachish. In 2003 all these outposts had received “delineation orders” - an administrative order delineating their area and allowing the state to evacuate the entire outpost at any time. The Peace Now petition asked the court to order the state to implement the evacuation orders. In a biting ruling written by Grunis, the justices ordered the state to evacuate all structures on private Palestinian property within six months and to inform the court of the progress in the legalization of the remaining buildings. It may be impossible to legalize the construction in the other outposts, such as in Givat Haro’eh - which means the saga will continue. Grunis: “The state’s conduct concerning everything related to the structures located on land that is not private is also unacceptable. At first the state claimed for some two years that the political echelon had not made a decision in principle whether it intended to legalize the construction or not. After a long time, the political echelon decided to examine the possibility of regularizing the construction in the outposts where it possible to do so; in other words, in the outposts where it became clear that they were on state land. Nonetheless, even after reaching the decision, the legalization processes are moving slowly and all this while the state continues and extends the validity of the delineation orders concerning the same outposts. “We are of the opinion that the time has come to order the state to meet its commitments and carry them out,” Grunis wrote. “In light of the great amount of time that has passed from when the petition was filed and from the time the state committed itself to evacuate the buildings, the importance of the public interest in the rule of law and keeping commitments has risen.” Deputy Supreme Court President Naor joined in Grunis’ opinion and added two blunt sentences of her own: “I regret that we have arrived at this point. I regret that it is no longer possible to trust the commitments the state gives through its lawyers to the court.” Naor said that in the future the court might have to consider requiring that the state give some sort of guarantee that it will carry out the court’s orders, “and that is a shame,” she said. The High Court also ordered the state to pay the petitioners NIS 25,000 in legal costs. Court: State deceived settlers, too Over the last decade, the state changed its position time after time until it finally notified the High Court in March 2011 that all the buildings constructed on privately owned land would be removed, and all structures built on state owned property would be legalized. The state did not meet this commitment either. The main illegal outpost on private Palestinian lands is Givat Assaf, in which some 30 families live. The Al-Watan company, which is controlled by the cooperative settlement organization Amana, bought a plot there and another two partial plots. As a result, the state asked to examine the possibility of legalizing the outpost. The state also committed itself to evacuating a house in Mitzpe Yitzhar, a commitment that was never carried out. Grunis also criticized how the state treats the settlers. In 2011 the state reached an agreement with the settlers at Ramat Gilad that it would act to legalize part of the outpost. In return the settlers evacuated some of the buildings. Later the state reversed itself and violated its commitment to the settlers. “The state shows inappropriate behavior toward the residents with whom it reached an agreement,” wrote Grunis.
Posted on: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 06:33:13 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015