Yariv Levine, Vice President of the Israeli Bar Association, severely criticized the wording of the proposed Expulsion/Compensation Bill passed yesterday in the Knesset Law Committee. Levine said the law “grossly tramples on human and civil rights.”
The law was passed by a 10-7 margin. Had MK Avraham Ravitz (Degel HaTorah) voted against it, as he implied he would, and had Arab MK Azmi Bishara abstained, as he did previously, the law would not have passed.
The financial aspects of the bill were passed by the Knesset Finance Committee last week, after Arab MK Muhammed Barakeh changed his abstention plans and voted in favor of it. The bill will be presented to the full Knesset this Wednesday for its final readings, where it is expected to pass easily.
Levine explained that numerous provisions of the proposed law contradict basic legal norms generally applied by the Israeli legal establishment. He cited provisions enabling the imprisoning of adults along with minors, and allowing for the seizure of property without appropriate compensation and without accounting for damages incurred by pain and suffering. He added that the law treats Israeli residents slated for expulsion as second-class citizens.
According to Levine, if the expulsion bill had been proposed in contexts other than that of expelling Jews from Gaza and Samaria, the legal establishment would not maintain silence.
Levine’s concern regarding the dangers the law portends to future legal precedent has prompted him to write to Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz: “I told him that he’s been applying a double-standard when, on the one hand, he determines that the redemption of land by the Jewish National Fund violates the right to property and civil rights, because you have to allow Arabs to purchase such property; and also preserves the rights of absentee land holders [regarding Arabs who have abandoned their property in Jerusalem]. But in relation to the rights of other citizens, the residents of Gush Katif and northern Samaria, suddenly there are no property rights, no human rights, no civil rights, no nothing.”
Levine adds that cooperation between the attorney general and leading figures of the legal establishment in drafting the law shows that the system’s agenda is unsuitable from a Zionist perspective, because instead of serving the State of Israel, it has become beholden to other interests. "Even from a legal standpoint, their agenda is untenable because the law grossly tramples on human and civil rights. What’s happening to this group of people can serve as a precedent to be applied to other groups tomorrow," Levine emphasized.
In Levine’s opinion, the public must seize upon every opportunity to challenge the law, including petitions to Israel’s High Court of Justice: “I admit that I have limited hopes in the High Court, but I wouldn’t be surprised if certain provisions of the law that are so grossly absurd and stringent would be overturned by the High Court.”
The proposed law shows how much the legal system is in need of drastic change, Levine continues: “It starts with the procedures for making judicial appointments, and it ends within the corridors of the Justice Ministry where 'an air of opinions' is circulating that I think are far removed from the public consensus and the standards that the Israeli legal system has been built on for years, which guarantees the rights of everyone - including, yes, the rights of those who committed the 'sin of settling the land.’”
“I expect the attorney general to get up and act, and express a definitive opinion against those provisions in the law that I cited, without undermining the essential legal question of whether this law has a suitable purpose, whether there’s a place for such an undertaking in form or in principle. The right thing to do is to act on all fronts and to take any possible measure with the hope that intelligence, common sense, and the spirit of the people will be able to overturn this matter,” Levine concluded.
The law was passed by a 10-7 margin. Had MK Avraham Ravitz (Degel HaTorah) voted against it, as he implied he would, and had Arab MK Azmi Bishara abstained, as he did previously, the law would not have passed.
The financial aspects of the bill were passed by the Knesset Finance Committee last week, after Arab MK Muhammed Barakeh changed his abstention plans and voted in favor of it. The bill will be presented to the full Knesset this Wednesday for its final readings, where it is expected to pass easily.
Levine explained that numerous provisions of the proposed law contradict basic legal norms generally applied by the Israeli legal establishment. He cited provisions enabling the imprisoning of adults along with minors, and allowing for the seizure of property without appropriate compensation and without accounting for damages incurred by pain and suffering. He added that the law treats Israeli residents slated for expulsion as second-class citizens.
According to Levine, if the expulsion bill had been proposed in contexts other than that of expelling Jews from Gaza and Samaria, the legal establishment would not maintain silence.
Levine’s concern regarding the dangers the law portends to future legal precedent has prompted him to write to Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz: “I told him that he’s been applying a double-standard when, on the one hand, he determines that the redemption of land by the Jewish National Fund violates the right to property and civil rights, because you have to allow Arabs to purchase such property; and also preserves the rights of absentee land holders [regarding Arabs who have abandoned their property in Jerusalem]. But in relation to the rights of other citizens, the residents of Gush Katif and northern Samaria, suddenly there are no property rights, no human rights, no civil rights, no nothing.”
Levine adds that cooperation between the attorney general and leading figures of the legal establishment in drafting the law shows that the system’s agenda is unsuitable from a Zionist perspective, because instead of serving the State of Israel, it has become beholden to other interests. "Even from a legal standpoint, their agenda is untenable because the law grossly tramples on human and civil rights. What’s happening to this group of people can serve as a precedent to be applied to other groups tomorrow," Levine emphasized.
In Levine’s opinion, the public must seize upon every opportunity to challenge the law, including petitions to Israel’s High Court of Justice: “I admit that I have limited hopes in the High Court, but I wouldn’t be surprised if certain provisions of the law that are so grossly absurd and stringent would be overturned by the High Court.”
The proposed law shows how much the legal system is in need of drastic change, Levine continues: “It starts with the procedures for making judicial appointments, and it ends within the corridors of the Justice Ministry where 'an air of opinions' is circulating that I think are far removed from the public consensus and the standards that the Israeli legal system has been built on for years, which guarantees the rights of everyone - including, yes, the rights of those who committed the 'sin of settling the land.’”
“I expect the attorney general to get up and act, and express a definitive opinion against those provisions in the law that I cited, without undermining the essential legal question of whether this law has a suitable purpose, whether there’s a place for such an undertaking in form or in principle. The right thing to do is to act on all fronts and to take any possible measure with the hope that intelligence, common sense, and the spirit of the people will be able to overturn this matter,” Levine concluded.