In July 2005, the Knesset voted to amend an existing law and enable the Defense Minister to decree parts of Judea and Samaria as "conflict areas" - areas where the IDF is forced to take military action against terrorists. This categorization prevented Arabs in those areas who were hurt physically or monetarily by IDF activities from suing the State for damages.
Shortly afterwards, nine left-wing civil-rights groups, including Adallah and the Society for Civil Rights, filed a petition in the Supreme Court against the amendment. They claimed it violated basic tenets of humanitarian and international law, and that it impaired basic rights, in violation of the Basic Law dealing with Human Dignity and Freedom.
The Supreme Court's ruling, handed down today, left intact the fact that Arabs hurt in anti-terror activities may not apply for damages. However, it nullified the blanket assertion that all IDF activity in a given place automatically renders such activity "anti-terrorist." The Defense Minister may no longer categorize certain areas as "conflict areas" in which damage to Arab property or persons need not be compensated.
Instead, such Arabs may now apply for damages - and if they prove that the damage was caused in non-combat activity, or contrary to army-issued orders, they will be eligible for compensation.
The State continues to be exempt from paying damages for victims such as those killed in the recent accidental Beit Hanoun bombing, which was clearly an anti-terror action.
In addition, terrorists and subjects of enemy states may not apply for damages.
The decision was authored by former Supreme Court President Aharon Barak - his last decision before his retirement from the bench takes effect.
Some 550 lawsuits demanding compensation will now be resumed, based on the Supreme Court's ruling of today, and another 580 are in the process of being submitted. These involve hundreds of millions of shekels being sought in damages.
Political Reactions
MK Gideon Saar (Likud) said, "This decision turns the State of Israel into an automatic cash machine for Palestinian terrorism."
MK Benny Elon (National Union) responded sharply: "Israel has always been responsible for damages caused in non-war activities, such as car accidents and the like. But now, the Court has changed the concept of war activities and reduced their scope."
"The Knesset must quickly determine clearly how laws can be changed, and by whom," Elon said. "This situation in which the Court doesn't just merely interpret the law, but changes it, is total anarchy. This is an existential threat, and a direct blow to the public and its elected representatives. I mean, [left-wing] Meretz can drop from twelve to five Knesset seats [as it has done over the past years -ed.], and even to one seat, but the Supreme Court justices still sit there and say that they know better than anyone else what is human dignity and the like."
MK Michael Eitan (Likud), who served as Chairman of the Knesset Law Committee when the stricken-down amendment was legislated, said, "This is a very grave decision which hurts the rule of law. We are at war, and there is no country in the world that pays reparations for damage done during war."
MK Chaim Oron (Meretz) said he "welcomes the ruling," while his party colleague Zahava Gal'on said, "The Supreme Court has the right to change laws once in a while."
Shortly afterwards, nine left-wing civil-rights groups, including Adallah and the Society for Civil Rights, filed a petition in the Supreme Court against the amendment. They claimed it violated basic tenets of humanitarian and international law, and that it impaired basic rights, in violation of the Basic Law dealing with Human Dignity and Freedom.
The Supreme Court's ruling, handed down today, left intact the fact that Arabs hurt in anti-terror activities may not apply for damages. However, it nullified the blanket assertion that all IDF activity in a given place automatically renders such activity "anti-terrorist." The Defense Minister may no longer categorize certain areas as "conflict areas" in which damage to Arab property or persons need not be compensated.
Instead, such Arabs may now apply for damages - and if they prove that the damage was caused in non-combat activity, or contrary to army-issued orders, they will be eligible for compensation.
The State continues to be exempt from paying damages for victims such as those killed in the recent accidental Beit Hanoun bombing, which was clearly an anti-terror action.
In addition, terrorists and subjects of enemy states may not apply for damages.
The decision was authored by former Supreme Court President Aharon Barak - his last decision before his retirement from the bench takes effect.
Some 550 lawsuits demanding compensation will now be resumed, based on the Supreme Court's ruling of today, and another 580 are in the process of being submitted. These involve hundreds of millions of shekels being sought in damages.
Political Reactions
MK Gideon Saar (Likud) said, "This decision turns the State of Israel into an automatic cash machine for Palestinian terrorism."
MK Benny Elon (National Union) responded sharply: "Israel has always been responsible for damages caused in non-war activities, such as car accidents and the like. But now, the Court has changed the concept of war activities and reduced their scope."
"The Knesset must quickly determine clearly how laws can be changed, and by whom," Elon said. "This situation in which the Court doesn't just merely interpret the law, but changes it, is total anarchy. This is an existential threat, and a direct blow to the public and its elected representatives. I mean, [left-wing] Meretz can drop from twelve to five Knesset seats [as it has done over the past years -ed.], and even to one seat, but the Supreme Court justices still sit there and say that they know better than anyone else what is human dignity and the like."
MK Michael Eitan (Likud), who served as Chairman of the Knesset Law Committee when the stricken-down amendment was legislated, said, "This is a very grave decision which hurts the rule of law. We are at war, and there is no country in the world that pays reparations for damage done during war."
MK Chaim Oron (Meretz) said he "welcomes the ruling," while his party colleague Zahava Gal'on said, "The Supreme Court has the right to change laws once in a while."