- Update info:
- 7 Mar 2014 (Suspended)
- Latest info:
- 17 Sep 2013 (Updated)
- 8 Jul 2013
- Country:
- ISRAEL AND THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
- Subject:
- Residents of Safai, Majaz, Tabban, ...
Gender : both
- Period:
- 7 Apr 2014
- Distribution date:
- 8 Jul 2013
- UA No:
- 170/2013
Some 1,000 Palestinians living in the southern West Bank, nearly half of them children, are facing forced eviction; some of their buildings are already being demolished, and their movement is restricted.
The Israeli army plans to expel from their homes all the residents of eight villages in the hills south-east of Hebron, Safai, Majaz, Tabban, Fakhit, Halaweh, Mirkez, Jinba and Hillet a-Dab’a, to make way for a military training zone. They were forcibly evicted in late 1999, but an interim injunction allowed them to return to their destroyed villages after a few months. The injunction was extended and will remain valid, though it has been challenged by the army, until a hearing at the Israeli High Court of Justice on 15 July. In many similar cases, the High Court of Justice has ruled in favour of the security forces and the state rather than in accordance with the principles of international law, binding on Israel, which prohibit forced evictions and forced transfer. The residents will be rendered homeless if evicted and will lose their livelihood.
The military training zone, known as Firing Zone 918, was originally declared a closed military zone in the 1980s, but the residents were allowed to build homes on the land and use it for farming. After the evictions of 1999, they petitioned the High Court of Justice to be allowed to remain on the land. The state responded that the residents did not live in the area permanently, and tried to prove this with aerial photographs taken soon after the evictions, in effect giving evidence of the destruction wrought by the expulsions. The residents’ petitions were renewed in January and February 2013, and the state is due to submit its response ahead of the next hearing.
Like many of the 150,000 Palestinians in the 60 per cent of the West Bank designated as Area C, which is completely under Israeli control, the residents face repeated demolition of their homes, animal pens and amenities. Two primary schools and a clinic are also under demolition orders, as are solar electric panels and water cisterns.
more
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Under international humanitarian law (IHL), including the Geneva Conventions, evacuations of protected persons (such as the inhabitants of an occupied territory) are only admissible for their own protection, temporarily, and only if there is an imperative military reason for taking this extreme measure. The description of Firing Zone 918 provided by the Israeli state in its legal response, where it claims that the terrain is particularly suitable for specific live-fire training, does not meet the threshold of such an imperative necessity, and therefore, if implemented, the eviction of the residents of this area would constitute forced transfer in violation of IHL. Similarly, IHL prohibits destruction of property in occupied territory except where absolutely necessary for military operations. The military activity that does take place in the area occasionally damages the residents’ property, and arbitrarily restricts movement including access to medical treatment and the transport of water containers. The military administration of the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) issues and implements demolition orders against the residents’ property, because there are no planning provisions for Palestinian residency in the eight villages, as well as in dozens of other Palestinian villages around them. The residents’ rights to an adequate standard of living including the rights to water, to the highest attainable standard of health and to education, under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), together with their right not to be discriminated against in relation to those rights, are being violated repeatedly and in various ways.
For years Israel has pursued a policy of discriminatory house demolition, allowing scores of Israeli settlements, illegal under international law, to be built on occupied Palestinian land, while confiscating Palestinian lands, refusing building permits for Palestinians and destroying their homes. In the first half of 2013, more than 250 homes, work sheds and animal pens were destroyed in Area C, displacing at least 300 Palestinians and causing damages to many more, on the grounds that they had been built illegally; Palestinians living there face severe restrictions on building, while settlements for Israelis in the same area continue to expand and are provided with utility services and other infrastructure. International law forbids occupying powers from settling their own citizens in the territories they occupy.
House demolitions are generally carried out without warning of the date and without any consultation, giving no opportunity for Palestinians to salvage their possessions or find at least basic shelter elsewhere. The UN has estimated that some 4,800 demolition orders are pending, many of which are in Area C of the West Bank. In Area C, Israel has complete control over planning and construction and the approximately 150,000 Palestinians living there lack representation at all levels of the Israeli military planning system. Not only are there no Palestinian representatives on the planning institutions, but even the ability of Palestinian residents to submit objections to eviction and demolition orders are very limited. Palestinians, especially villagers in marginal areas such as the hills to the south-east of Hebron and the Jordan Valley, have suffered particular pressure. In a “closed military zone” there is effectively no possibility for Palestinian construction and development. These demolitions amount to forced evictions. This places Israel in breach of its obligations under international human rights law, including the ICESCR, which it ratified in 1991, enshrining the right to adequate housing for everybody and prohibiting forced evictions, defined by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in General Comment 7 as “the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection”.
The situation is compounded by the fact that, under Israeli military law, evicted families are not entitled to alternative housing or compensation, thereby violating their right to effective remedy, meaning many would face homelessness and destitution were it not for relatives, friends and charities.
Name: Residents of Safai, Majaz, Tabban, Fakhit, Halaweh, Mirkez, Jinba and Hillet a-Dab’a
Gender m/f: both
UA: 170/13 Index: MDE 15/011/2013 Issue Date: 3 July 2013
- Update info:
- 7 Mar 2014 (Suspended)
- Latest info:
- 17 Sep 2013 (Updated)
- 8 Jul 2013
- Country:
- ISRAEL AND THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
- Subject:
- Residents of Safai, Majaz, Tabban, ...
Gender : both
- Period:
- 7 Apr 2014
- Distribution date:
- 17 Sep 2013
- UA No:
- 170/2013
Some 1,000 Palestinians living in the south of the occupied West Bank, nearly half of them children, are still facing forced eviction by the Israeli army; the Israeli High Court of Justice did not rule in favour of their rights.
The Israeli army plans to expel and forcibly evict from their homes all the residents of eight villages situated in the hills south-east of Hebron, in the southern West Bank, to make way for a military training zone, Firing Zone 918. The villages are Safai, Majaz, Tabban, Fakhit, Halaweh, Mirkez, Jinba and Hillet al-Dhaba’a. If the evictions go ahead they have the potential to violate a range of residents’ rights including adequate housing, water, sanitation, health and education.
In its response to the villagers’ petitions to the Israeli High Court of Justice, the state insisted on the legality and necessity of the evictions, arguing that the evictions do not constitute forced transfer according to the Fourth Geneva Convention. Its rationale was that the villagers are not actually resident in the villages, but rather use the land on an occasional basis only, and that the villages were established in contravention of a military order after the military zone was declared in the area in 1980. This is contradicted by the villagers’ own accounts and academic research documenting local habitation and cultivation for many decades. The state attorneys also argued that the military had the right to confiscate private property for training needs, which are of “high military importance”, but chose only to restrict access by permitting occasional agricultural activities in the area. The High Court of Justice decided on 2 September 2013 that the state and the villagers should enter mediation to reach a solution. The petitioners agreed to the mediation and the state has until 7 October to decide whether to do so as well. Previous efforts at mediation which took place 10 years ago came to no result, as the Israeli authorities offered a different tract of land, only a fraction of the size of the area on which they live and work now, and this was inadequate for the villagers’ needs.
more
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Under international humanitarian law (IHL), including the Geneva Conventions, evacuation of protected persons (such as the inhabitants of an occupied territory) is prohibited, unless undertaken for their own protection, or if there is an imperative military reason for taking this extreme measure. Even then, such evacuations must be temporary, and the residents returned to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area have ceased. The description of Firing Zone 918 provided by the Israeli state in its legal response, where it claims that “Firing Zone 918 constitutes a very important area for IDF exercises and has no substitute identical in nature” does not make the case that the threshold of “imperative military reason” has been met. Therefore, if implemented, the eviction of the residents of this area would constitute forced transfer in violation of IHL. Similarly, IHL prohibits destruction of property in occupied territory except where absolutely necessary for military operations. The military activity that does take place in the area occasionally damages the residents’ property, and arbitrarily restricts movement including access to medical treatment and the transport of water containers. The military administration of the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) issues and implements demolition orders against the residents’ property, because there are no planning provisions for Palestinian residency in the eight villages, as well as in dozens of other Palestinian villages around them. The residents’ rights to an adequate standard of living including the rights to adequate housing, water and sanitation, to the highest attainable standard of health and to education, under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), together with their right not to be discriminated against in relation to those rights, are being violated repeatedly and in various ways.
In Area C, Israel has complete control over planning and construction and the approximately 150,000 Palestinians living there lack representation at all levels of the Israeli military planning system. Not only are there no Palestinian representatives on the planning institutions, but even the ability of Palestinian residents to submit objections to eviction and demolition orders are very limited. Palestinians, especially villagers in marginal areas such as the hills to the south-east of Hebron and the Jordan Valley, have suffered particular pressure. In a “closed military zone” there is effectively no possibility for Palestinian construction and development, and many existing structures are at risk of being demolished on the grounds that they had been built illegally. The discriminatory policy means that Palestinians living there face severe restrictions on building, while settlements for Israelis in the same area continue to expand and are provided with utility services and other infrastructure. International law forbids occupying powers from settling their own civilians in the territories they occupy.
The lack of genuine consultation to explore all alternatives with the affected communities to date and the failure to provide alternative accommodation for those who need it means that these demolitions amount to forced evictions. This places Israel in breach of its obligations under international human rights law, including the ICESCR, which it ratified in 1991, enshrining the right to adequate housing for everybody and prohibiting forced evictions, defined by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in General Comment 7 as “the permanent or temporary removal against their will of individuals, families and/or communities from the homes and/or land which they occupy, without the provision of and access to, appropriate forms of legal or other protection”. Mediation such as that suggested by the High Court of Justice in the case of the villages in Firing Zone 918 can potentially amount to genuine consultation if it is conducted according to international standards and not prejudiced by existing unlawful orders and policies. Genuine consultation requires the provision of full, accurate and timely information, meaningful engagement by the authorities and serious consideration of alternative proposals by affected communities.
The situation is compounded by the fact that, under Israeli military law, evicted families are not entitled to alternative housing or any compensation, thereby violating their right to effective remedy, meaning many would face homelessness and destitution were it not for relatives, friends and charities.
Name: Residents of Safai, Majaz, Tabban, Fakhit, Halaweh, Mirkez, Jinba and Hillet al-Dhaba’a
Gender m/f: both
Further information on UA: 170/13 Index: MDE 15/013/2013 Issue Date: 11 September 2013
- Update info:
- 7 Mar 2014 (Suspended)
- Latest info:
- 17 Sep 2013 (Updated)
- 8 Jul 2013
- Country:
- ISRAEL AND THE OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORIES/PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
- Subject:
- Residents of Safai, Majaz, Tabban, Fakhit, Halaweh, Mirkez, Jinba and Hillet al-Dhaba’a
Gender: both
- Period:
- 7 Apr 2014
- Distribution date:
- 7 Mar 2014
- UA No:
- 170/2013
The mediation period between Palestinian villagers and the Israeli state was extended until 25 April.
On 2 September 2013 the High Court of Justice suggested that the Palestinian villagers who are threatened with forced eviction and the Israeli state go into mediation. The High Court of Justice did not rule against the forced eviction of all the residents of eight villages situated in the hills south-east of Hebron, in the southern West Bank, to make way for a military training zone, Firing Zone 918, and there are no guarantees that the mediation process will lead to a resolution that does not violate the rights of the villagers.
The villagers agreed to the process immediately and the Ministry of Defence agreed on 21 October 2013. Both sides agreed to the appointment of Yitzhak Zamir, retired Supreme Court Judge and former Attorney General, as mediator. The mediation period was initially set for four months but that was extended. Meetings have been held regularly between representatives of the villagers and the State Attorney's Office, who was targeted in the UA Update of 11 September 2013. The State Attorney has mentioned that the letters he received from Amnesty International activists "left an impression".
The villagers' lawyer has said to Amnesty International that the process is "interesting". The lawyer also said that the current situation, which allows the villagers to remain in their homes while the mediation is ongoing, is more positive than the High Court of Justice potentially ruling that the army’s plans could go ahead. The lawyer attributes this relatively positive situation to the conjunction of local and international pressure, to which Amnesty International contributed.
No further action is required from the UA network. Amnesty International will continue to monitor the case. Many thanks to all who sent appeals.
This is the second update of UA 170/13. Further information: http://amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE15/013/2013/en