To:
Mr. Meni Mazuz
Attorney General
The Ministry of Justice
Re: The decision to revoke the residency permits of Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem
ACRI has been made aware, through media reports, that during a ministerial consultation that was held at the acting Prime Minister`s office on 18.4.06, it was decided to revoke the residency status of three members of the Palestinian parliament who are representatives of Hamas, who live in East Jerusalem (“The ministers: the residency status of Hamas parliamentarians will be revoked”, “Haaretz”, 20.4.06). We also became aware of the fact that Mr. Meni Mazuz decided to defend the decision in court in the event that a petition was submitted to challenge the decision (“Mazuz: we will defend the decision to revoke the residency status of Hamas representatives in the Supreme Court”, Haaretz, 20.4.06).
We believe that this decision is illegitimate, illegal, and unconstitutional, and that it is your responsibility to make this clear to the ministers and to abstain from providing it with any judicial support.
State authorities are entitled, and are even obligated to act against any individual who threatens state security and public safety, and Israeli law contains a number of law enforcement measures that are far less severe than the revocation of residency status to redress these issues. The authority to revoke residency status for reasons of “breach of trust”, with regard to the state, is an extreme power that has no comparable precedent in any other enlightened state. These statements that were presented before the Supreme Court by state representatives in the case of Elroi, during which the court was asked to order the Ministry of the Interior to revoke the status of Yigal Amir for reasons of “breach of trust”. The state announced to the court that it views the correct procedure to be to avoid, as a general rule, the enforcement of the authority to revoke official residency status, which it defined as a “drastic and extreme step”. The court accepted the position of the state and ruled that the criminal justice system is the means by which to condemn prohibited acts and to express reservations and revulsion of them (H.C.J. 2757/96 Elroi v. The Minister of the Interior).
The first time (and the last to the best of our knowledge), that the Minister of the Interior decided to revoke an individual`s residency status in Israel as a result of “breach of trust”, the Attorney General announced that because it was a such a “grave and far-reaching step” that nothing would be done unless the individual in question “was involved in hostile and severe actions against the security of the state” and exploited their Israeli residency status for the purpose of carrying out these actions.
The members of the Palestinian parliament are not suspected of such acts, and are certainly not suspected of abusing their residency permits for this purpose. The sole reason for the revocation of residency status and the expulsion from their homes is their membership in the Palestinian parliament as representatives of the Hamas movement.
The Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem were granted permanent residency permits as a result of the annexation of the eastern section of the city in 1967 and the imposition of Israeli law in the area. International law does not recognize Israel`s annexation of East Jerusalem and views it as occupied territory. The expulsion of residents of occupied territory is prohibited by the provisions of international law and even by Israeli law. The imposition of Israeli law on the area and the determination of the normative perception that the area is part of Jerusalem “territory of the State of Israel, upon which the law, jurisdiction, and administration of the state prevails”, led to a situation of “integration” of the area and its residents into the legal, judicial, and administrative system of the state”. Primarily the provision of residency status to Palestinian residents, whose center of life in the annexed area, endows them with the right to permanently reside in their homes and provides them with immunity from expulsion. Precisely because of this the residency permit is issued, according to statements made by the Supreme Court, by law and not by good will.
The Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem participated in the parliamentary elections in accordance with the Oslo Accords and under the authority of the State of Israel. The members of parliament, whose residency status the state wishes to revoke, were elected during an election process that was endorsed by the Israeli government. The government even defended this decision before the Supreme Court.
Now, as a result of the fact that the election results were not to the taste of the Israeli government, it was decided to revoke the residency status of East Jerusalem residents, who were elected to the Palestinian parliament. Membership in the parliament, and the political opinions of the members of parliament, cannot be cited as the cause for revoking residency status or expelling individuals from their homes.
The illegitimacy of the ministerial decision does not only relate to its impact on the Palestinian parliamentarians, but its excessive severity derives from the legitimization of appalling and racist trends that have found a place in Israeli society and among the community of public figures, and which call for the revocation of residency status for Israeli citizens and its Arab residents. Even though Jewish residents and citizens have been convicted of crimes of treason and the provision of covert information to hostile states, none of them have lost their Israeli residency status. It is therefore apparent that the utilization of this authority to revoke official residency status is being used as a means of transmitting the humiliating and discriminatory message that the status of the Arab citizens and residents of Israel is a conditional status that cannot be taken for granted.
We therefore urgently request that you instruct the acting Prime Minister and the relevant ministers to retract their decision, and to inform them that you will not defend it.
Respectfully
Adv. Oded Feller
last updated : 28/05/06
