MK Bezalel Smotrich
MK Bezalel SmotrichFlash90

Just prior to an event scheduled in the town of Amona Sunday afternoon remembering the Gaza Disengagement – and highlighting the town’s own precarious position – Jewish Home MK Bezalel Smotrich spoke with Arutz Sheva regarding the planned demolition of the town and other Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.

Amona, a town of some 40 families in Samaria north of Jerusalem, is slated for demolition later this year, following a ruling by the Supreme Court.

Portions of the nearby town of Ofra, as well as the Netiv Ha’avot neighborhood of Elazar in Gush Etzion in Judea, also face demolition orders following similar Supreme Court decisions.

Smotrich slammed the court’s interference in what said were “political issues,” calling upon the government to pass a law normalizing the legal status of such communities.

“Anyone who thought that it was possible to craft some kind of judicial solution [for Amona], and then go back with it to the Supreme Court and receive their approval – well, last week’s ruling against the Netiv Ha’avot [neighborhood] has made us all understand [the reality].”

“Bear in mind that in the case of Amona the case is particularly difficult since the court made a final ruling ordering [the town’s] destruction,” added Smotrich, “the [judicial] solution [some have suggested] using the Absentee Property law is far from being ready, and certainly would not be ready in time given the timetable set by the Supreme Court; we have no choice but to pass the law [normalizing the towns].”

“I’ve been pushing hard for such a law going back to my time in the Regavim organization, saying that this is not only a necessary move but the ideal solution, and not just because the Supreme Court has blocked other possible solutions. This is a political issue… and in a democratic state political questions and state policy are decided by the Knesset by elected representatives of the public, not by the Supreme Court.”

“The law overrides Supreme Court rulings,” Smotrich noted, “so this is the only way to prevent this utterly needless destruction.”

While some have warned the court would disqualify such a law – or its application to retroactively legalize Amona following the court’s rulings – Smotrich dismissed the concerns, saying that the Knesset remains the ultimate arbiter of such questions.

“If the court will invalidate the law, we can legislate a clause overcoming the court’s objections. Remember that we are a democracy, so the legislature has the final word.”

The Jewish Home MK blasted the government’s failure to pass such legislation, warning that the destruction of the three communities could presage a larger wave of demolitions – and possibly lead to his party’s exit from the coalition.

“I don’t see how we can remain in a government that demolishes Amona, along with nine houses in Ofra and the homes in Netiv Ha’avot. And there are hundreds, possibly thousands more homes in a similar situation [in other towns] that are just waiting for some appeal [by Arabs claiming ownership] that will lead to a ruling [ordering their demolition].”

“No one in the coalition can hide behind the Supreme court on this. It’s in our hands and we can and must prevent this destruction. It’s hard for me to a right-wing coalition survive this ‘disengagement,’” Smotrich said, referencing the 2005 Gaza Disengagement. “We can prevent this, and we have the ability, we have the obligation to do so.”

Amona was built in 1995 on an uninhabited hilltop overlooking Ofra; it was supported by the Ministry of Housing and Construction,. But Amona’s existence was challenged by the leftist organizationsPeace Now and Yesh Din who claimed that the land was owned by private Palestinian Arabs -- although they never produced any actual claimants.

The Minhal Ezrachi (Civil Administration), the legal authority in Judea and Samaria, which is not subject to Israeli law since sovereignty over the area has not been officially decided, and the Prosecutor’s Office (Praklitut) – the State -- agreed and asked the High Court of Justice (HCJ) to order the community destroyed.

As a matter of procedure, the HCJ does not examine or evaluate evidence and does not decide issues of land ownership. They rely only on what the State (the Minhal and Praklitut) presents. As long as the State affirmed that Jews built illegally on “private Palestinian land,” and demanded that the homes in Amona, and elsewhere be destroyed, the HCJ was bound to enforce that decision. Although lacking due process, that is the law in Israel.

The question of land ownership, however, has not been determined by a court, and Arab claimants have not presented any valid proof which entitles them to the land. Although misrepresented as a judicial decision about the substance of the claim, it is not. (For a detailed article on the subject, including the above information and more, click here.)