ACRI submitted a petition to the Supreme Court this week to demand the revocation of the orders that prohibit the movement of thousands or residents, and limits them only to territory within the area of the city of Nablus. The petition, that is directed against the commander of IDF forces in Judea and Samaria, was submitted by ACRI Attorney Limor Yehuda.
The petition relates to the IDF orders that in effect, prohibit, by law the freedom of movement of tens of thousands of human beings, and delineate their place of residence and their daily lives. These instructions were issued in the absence of a specific military order, without any specific cause, with no examination of individual cases, with no investigation, no supervision and with no estimated time frame. According to these orders that have been consistently issued over the last six months (as a continuation of previous orders that expanded over extended periods) and whose enforcement has become far more stringent over the last few months, the residents of the city, who fall within a specific age range which changes periodically, have been prohibited from leaving the city’‘s boundaries. The delineated area includes the city of Nablus, three refugee camps, and 15 villages that are adjacent to the city, within which over 200,000 people live. In the last period the prohibition has applied to individuals between the ages of 16-30 (and sometimes 15-30). The prohibition always applies to adolescent males and men, and sometimes even to adolescent females and women of this age group.
The denial of freedom of movement to thousands of people, explains Attorney Yehuda in the petition, results in a growing violation of the rights of the population: people lose their place of work, which cuts off the source of income for thousands of families, as the people who are primarily affected by the orders represent the area’‘s workforce. Schoolchildren and students are also severely impacted, as they are unable to reach their educational institutions. In addition to the personal suffering endured by individual residents and their family members, whose movements have been restricted, the petition states, the limits on freedom of movement also cause a breakdown and destruction of the civilian population’‘s fabric of life, and severe disruptions to educational institutions, and health and social welfare services which find it extremely difficult to continue functioning. Thus, emphasizes Attorney Yehuda, the orders even undermine the ability of the area’‘s population to survive financially and socially.
Attorney Yehuda further emphasizes in the petition that the “orders under discussion are absolutely illegal, contravene the philosophical foundations of our legal system, and a black flag flies hovers over them”. She also notes that from the responses she has received from the army it has become apparent that the army is not denying this representation of the issue from a factual perspective. According to the army, the orders relating to the prohibition on the freedom of movement were issued under the auspices of the declared closure (sealing) of Area A’‘, that was singed by the IDF Commander in December 2001, nearly five years ago, and that has still not been cancelled. According to the army’‘s operational system, the petition states, it is enough for an individual to be associated with a group which is perceived as a “dangerous group” (that is defined by his/her association with an ethnic-national group, or according to age), in order for it to be permissible to deny them freedom of movement, and to restrict him/her for an unlimited time period to the confines of one city.
Attorney Yehuda further states that the position of the army is that is acceptable to deny freedom of movement to an individual, even in cases where there is no hint of any evidence or suspicion against a particular individual that he/she has been involved in any activity that threatens security. The issue at stake is the arbitrary infringement of the lives of thousands of people on the basis of sweeping definitions and with no individual checking. By issuing these orders, she adds, the area’‘s military commander is in severe breach of his obligation, according to international humanitarian law, to ensure the safety, lifestyle and public order of the population of protected persons. The orders also contradict the principle that prohibits collective punishment, which is a basic tenet of the War Laws and the principles of warfare. The orders are severely unreasonable and disproportionate. Moreover, it is not only that the measures are illegal, but also that is highly doubtful that they contribute anything to the level of general security, and such a contribution, to the extent that in fact exists is dwarfed in relation to its greater contribution to a rising level of hatred and motivation to carry out terror attacks and undermine the Israel’‘s populace’‘s level of security.
In light of the severe violation of the residents of the city of Nablus and its environs, ACRI asks that the Supreme Court set the earliest possible date for the hearing, which has been set for the month of December (13.12.06) almost three months from the date of the petition’‘s submission.
last updated : 18/10/06
