Major legal victory for Hevron's Jewish community

Key Hevron buildings to remain in Jewish hands after Supreme Court rejects petition demanding
evacuation of Jews from two properties.

Arutz Sheva Staff,

Moving to "Beit Rachel"
Moving to "Beit Rachel"
Credit: TPS/Shlomo Levinger

Supreme Court Justices Noam Solberg, Yosef Elron and Dafna Barak Erez rejected the petition of several Palestinian Arabs who demanded the evacuation of the Jews living in Beit Rachel and Beit Leah in Hevron.

The petitioners, whose family owned the two properties, claimed that the police had to evacuate the settlers who invaded their properties, according to the "new invasion procedure."

The petitioners also claimed that contrary to the claim of Eladon Lajkarat (Talmon) Ltd., the property was not sold to it and therefore is still owned by the family.

In the ruling, the Supreme Court justices ruled that they did not address the question of whether the property had been legally sold, focusing solely on whether the security forces had to evacuate the settlers from the property.

The ruling clarified that the petitioners did not prove that they were the ones who actually held the property prior to the settlers' entry into the area, and therefore the decision of the security officials not to evacuate the property was justified.

"The very existence of this ambiguity is sufficient to justify the police's decision to withdraw its hands without intervening and to assist in the evacuation of the properties," the court wrote. "It is not within its function within the framework of the procedure aimed at 'restoring the situation to its former state,' to investigate these complicated questions, where it was not proven who was the owner of the assets - in law or in practice - whether it is considered 'an invasion.' In such matters, refraining from doing anything is preferable. The security forces have taken the necessary administrative evidence and decided that in this situation the elements needed to provide assistance in removing an invasion have not been proven. Therefore, it is possible that the provision of the assistance requested by the petitioners will serve a party that does not legally own the land and that an 'invasion' did not take place, "wrote Judge Solberg.

MK Ofer Kassif (Hadash) slammed the Supreme Court's ruling, saying that "the Supreme Court of Justice today served as a rubber stamp for the Israeli apartheid policy in violation of international law. The houses in Sur Baher were built in Areas A and B with a permit and in accordance with every law, and their destruction meant throwing families into the street. This is another step taken by the Israeli government toward the vision of purifying the land of the Palestinian people, a racist settler vision that exacts a high blood price, mainly from the Palestinian people but also from the Israeli public."




top