On July 1, 2008, the “temporary” Citizenship and Entry to Israel Law (Temporary Order) was extended by another year, despite having been harshly criticized by the judges of the High Court of Justice and the Court is currently deliberating on an additional petition submitted against the law. The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) warns: The law is racist and a moral depravity, which infringes on the right to family life and to equality.
Two years ago, on 14 May 2006, the High Court of Justice ruled on petitions to cancel the Citizenship and Entry to Israel Law (Temporary Order). Six of the eleven sitting judges ruled that the law, depriving Palestinian partners of Israeli citizens and residents of acquiring legal status in Israel, was unconstitutional on grounds of infringing on the right to family life and the right to equality. Five judges ruled that the law should be repealed within a six-month period; the remaining judge, Justice Edmund Levy, refrained from ruling to cancel the law but noted that “it is uncertain whether the law will survive and stand up to judicial scrutiny in the future,” and that the State should formulate an alternative arrangement within nine months. In spite of the above, the law is still in effect and has even been extended several times.
The High Court has recently heard four new petitions against the law, submitted by the ACRI, Adalah, Hamoked – Center for the Defense of the Individual and MK Zehava Gal-on. ACRI Attorneys Sharon Avraham-Weiss, Oded Feller and Dan Yakir insist that not only does the law constitute collective punishment and disproportionate infringement on the right to family life, it also promotes a discriminatory policy which affects almost exclusively the Arab citizens of Israel, who make up virtually the entire demographic of Israeli citizens who marry Palestinians.
The Citizenship Law was first approved by the government in May 2002, and has for the past six years held a temporary status. Now, the Knesset extended it by another year, with a majority of 21 MKs to 8. Taking these recurrent extensions into account, it is no longer possible to claim that it is temporary.
In the month of July, the State will be forced to explain why the law has not yet been annulled.
