Area C

B’Tselem appeals to court after COGAT breaches Freedom of Information Law

On 19 May 2013, the Freedom of Information Unit in Israel’s Ministry of Justice published its annual report for 2012. For the first time, the report examined the enforcement of the Freedom of Information Law by government ministries and affiliated units, as well as the Unit’s own operation. The report noted that “we found one unit, the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), institutionally wanting in upholding the Freedom of Information Law – a finding that has been reinforced by court appeals and rulings against COGAT. The matter is currently under examination in an attempt to offer a fundamental solution to the problem”.

B’Tselem has encountered this self-same state of affairs. One prominent example is a request for information by B’Tselem to the Civil Administration concerning demolition orders issued and implemented by the Civil Administration and building permits it issued for Area C from 2008 to 2012. On the very same day that the request was sent, the Civil Administration’s Ombudsman confirmed that the request had been received and forwarded to the relevant Civil Administration staff, and would be addressed within the timeframe required by law.

A month later, on 24 January 2013, having received no response, B’Tselem sent Civil Administration a reminder cautioning that the 30 days’ response time allowed by the Freedom of Information Law had expired. Despite repeated reminders, the fact that B’Tselem agreed to a two-week extension of the legal response time, and a notice that B’Tselem would be forced to involve the courts if the information would not be forthcoming, the Civil Administration did not provide the requested information.

Another month passed, and on 27 February 2013, Adv. Gaby Lasky wrote to the Civil Administration on B’Tselem’s behalf cautioning that, unless the information would be provided by 5 March 2013, B’Tselem would be forced to apply to the court to realize its rights. The very same day, a reply was received from the Civil Administration to the effect that B’Tselem’s request was being processed and that a substantive answer had not yet been given due to the scope of the request. B’Tselem immediately informed the Civil Administration that it would be amenable to a two-week extension, beyond the legal timeframe.

Two weeks later, however, the information had still not been provided. Moreover, the Civil Administration had not contacted B’Tselem regarding a further extension, nor had it given a reasonable explanation for the protracted delay in providing information as required by law. B’Tselem was left no choice but to apply to the courts. On 17 March 2013, Adv. Gaby Lasky filed an appeal with the Jerusalem District Court on behalf of B’Tselem. Nearly two months later, on 9 May 2013, the Civil Administration asked the court for a ten-day stay in order to provide a preliminary response. The court approved the request, yet the Civil Administration failed to meet the new deadline. On 20 May 2013, the Civil Administration asked the court for yet another stay, until 30 May 2013. The court approved the request, saying it had no choice but to do so yet that it would be hard pressed to approve a future request.

On 27 May 2013, the Civil Administration informed the District Attorney that it was ready to divulge the information, and needed two weeks to edit it before it could be sent. On 9 June 2013, B’Tselem was provided with a partial response to the requested information. Regarding the figures that were not provided, the Civil Administration wrote that its “records do not contain a systematic breakdown of the figures. The Respondents have not yet examined whether generating these figures would require an unreasonable allocation of resources or not.” Consequently, the Civil Administration asked to dismiss B’Tselem’s appeal.

In its response, the Civil Administration did not explain why it needed six months to convey the information, nor why it had not yet calculated the cost of the resources necessary for providing the remaining figures. Accordingly, B’Tselem refused to withdraw its appeal. Judge Nava Ben Or demanded that the Civil Administration submit its elucidated position by 15 July 2013.

Suggested items

Khirbet Susiya, village under threat of demolition. Photo: Ann Pack, Activestills.org, 15 June 2012

The South Hebron Hills

Khirbet Susiya – a village under threat of demolition

The Palestinian village of Khirbet Susiya has existed in the South Hebron Hills at least since the 1830s. Its residents have traditionally earned a living from shepherding and growing olive trees. In 1983, the Israeli settlement of Susiya was established near the village, on Palestinian land that had been declared state land by Israel. In 1986, about 25 families were living in Khirbet Susiya, in caves and structures. That year, the Civil Administration declared the village’s land an “archeological site”; the land was confiscated “for public purposes” and the Israeli military expelled its residents from their homes. Having no other option, the families relocated to other caves in the area and to flimsy wood frame shelters and tents they erected on agricultural land a few hundred meters southeast of the original village and the archeological site. The military expelled the residents again several times, most recently in July 2001, shortly after Palestinians killed Israeli Yair Har Sinai, a resident of the Susiya settlement. During the expulsion, carried out without warning, soldiers destroyed residents’ property, demolished their caves and blocked up water cisterns. In September 2001, further to a petition by the residents to Israel’s High Court of Justice (HCJ) filed by Attorney Shlomo Lecker, the HCJ issued an interim order that prohibited further destruction pending a ruling on the petition. Ancient village of Susiya, South Hebron Hills, 17 November 2010. Photo: Yoav Gross, B’Tselem. In the following years, pending a ruling, the residents had to deal with an impossible reality. On the one hand, they had to erect homes and structures for their livestock after the military destroyed their previous ones; on the other hand, the Civil Administration refused to prepare a master plan for the village that would enable its residents to build homes legally and connect to the water and power grids, and rejected residents' applications for building permits. The people of Khirbet Susiya were left no choice but to build temporary buildings and residential tents. The Civil Administration then issued demolition orders for the new structures which, they alleged, were not covered by the interim order. In June 2007, the HCJ decided to vacate the petition, without making a ruling. The Civil Administration continued to issue demolition orders for dozens of structures in Khirbet Susiya. Over the years, the residents filed further petitions in an attempt to prevent the demolitions and plan the village legally, but the justices refused to prohibit the demolition. In 2011 the Civil Administration demolished 10 residential structures in the village, six structures used for making a livelihood and four wells. Planning attempts by villagers blocked Currently about 250 people live in Khirbet Susiya on a regular basis, and some 100 others live in it for part of the year, as their livelihood is seasonal. In late 2012, Israeli NGO Rabbis for Human Rights submitted a master plan for the village to the Civil Administration, on behalf of the residents. In January 2013, the state notified the HCJ that the Civil Administration was evaluating the plan and that, until a decision was reached, demolition orders for that land would not be carried out. In October 2013 the Sub-Committee for Planning and Licensing of the Civil Administration’s Supreme Planning Council rejected the proposed master plan. Among its reasons for rejecting the plan, which together conveyed a patronizing and unprofessional approach, the Civil Administration argued that the significant scattering of the small villages – including Susiya – in the greater Yatta area results in such high expenses for the provision of education, welfare, religion and health services that the funds of the town of Yatta are insufficient to adequately provide them. This is remarkable given that the Civil Administration itself supports the legalization of dozens of tiny illegal settler outposts scattered throughout the West Bank, and has refused to connect the Palestinian village to water and power supplies. Demolition of residential tent and shack, Khirbet Susiya, South Hebron Hills, 24 November 2011. Photo: Nasser Nawaj'ah, B'Tselem. The Civil Administration representatives further argued that authorizing the plan would perpetuate the village’s existing social fabric based on clan kinship, thereby barring individuals, and especially Palestinian women, from enjoying the benefits urban life has to offer, such as social mobility skills, job opportunities and cultural and educational empowerment: The structure of urban life means meeting new people, bringing people closer to one another; it multiplies opportunities and broadens the horizons of each and every person within his family, his tribe, and society at large. Therefore, we see the current plan as yet another attempt to keep a poor, downtrodden population from advancing; from choosing between partial income and other resources; it is an attempt to prevent the Palestinian woman from breaking the cycle of poverty and depriving her of educational and professional opportunities. Similarly, by sentencing the Palestinian child to life in a small, stultified village with no means for development, the plan keeps the child from being aware of all the opportunities available to any other person. It is our recommendation that the plan be rejected out of hand. The Civil Administration recommended that the people of Susiya make an alternative plan for a location closer to the town of Yatta. As Susiya lies mere kilometers from Yatta, which is in Area A, the recommendation effectively means transferring the residents of Susiya out of Area C. In February 2014, Israeli NGO Rabbis for Human Rights petitioned the HCJ, arguing that the Sub-Committee for Planning and Licensing had made an unreasonable decision in rejecting the master plan. The petitioners requested that the HCJ issue an interim order preventing the authorities from demolishing the village pending a ruling on the petition. In late March 2015, the state submitted its response, requesting the court reject the petition, claiming there was no justification for intervening in a justified decision by the planning institutions to reject the plan. In their response, the representatives of the state noted that the villagers have continued to build structures illegally. In early May 2015, Justice Sohlberg struck the residents’ request on the grounds that illegal construction had continued in the village after the petition was filed, actions that he termed “taking the law into their own hands”. Justice Sohlberg added that “the Court has noted the willingness of the authorities in the area to work towards examining promotion of an alternative planning cluster”. Talks between the state and Khirbet Susiya then began, and were underway until suspended by the state. On 1 August 2016, at a court session of Israel’s High Court of Justice (HCJ), counsel for the state said the talks were halted because the new Minister of Defense had yet to formulate his position on the matter. The HCJ gave the state two weeks to formulate its position. Justices Naor, Barak-Erez and Hayut declined to issue orders that the state not demolish the homes of Susiya residents pending formulation of the position. The residents were thus left in a state of uncertainty as to their future and at the mercy of Israeli authorities. Since the residents of Khirbet Susiya filed their last petition in 2014, the state has announced its intention to demolish several structures built in the village after the petition was filed – including structures renovated after they were damaged in a storm and a medical clinic that serves the entire village. On 1 February 2018, the President of the Supreme Court decided that the state could demolish seven structures in the village, which serve 42 people – about half of them children, and some of them ill persons – immediately. The state has been required to submit its position on the village’s master plan by 7 May 2018. Palestinian resident of the village of Susiya, South Hebron Hills, 15 June 2012. Photo: Anne Paq, Activestills.org. Settler takeover of Susiya land During 2001 and 2002, Israeli settlers established a number of illegal outposts on some of the land that in the past had served the Palestinian residents. Furthermore, since the demolition of Khirbet Susiya in 2001, settlers from Susiya and its outposts have prevented continuous access by villagers to about 300 hectares of land around the settlement, including 23 water cisterns. Access was prevented by use of threats and violence, including vandalizing pastures, fields, trees and cisterns, and harassing shepherds. The settlers exploit the inability of the Palestinian residents to reach their land in order to take over some of it. In the summer of 2010 they cultivated about 40 hectares, which is approximately 15 percent of the land area to which they denied Palestinians access. When police files were opened in response to complaints lodged by the Palestinians for this damage, most were closed without effect. Based on follow-ups Rabbis for Human Rights have carried out since 2007, nearly all 126 complaints to the police in Hebron made by Khirbet Susiya residents - alleging attacks, threats, incursions and damage to property by settlers - were closed without filing any charges; three complaints are still being investigated. From 2004 through 2012, B’Tselem monitored 15 complaints to the police regarding settler violence against Khirbet Susiya residents, including physical assault, setting fire to tent dwellings and belongings, threats, cutting down olive trees, stealing crops and other property damage. In 12 of the 15 cases, the investigation was closed on grounds of insufficient evidence or offender unknown. In August 2010, 55 of the village’s Rabbis for Human Rights filed an HCJ petition on behalf of the residents, seeking to be allowed, inter alia, daily access to their land. In response to the petition, the state notified the HCJ in October 2010 that the military and the Civil Administration intended to map the ownership of land in the area and then, accordingly, instruct the forces in the field as to how to deal with the need to allow access to the agricultural plots. Up until mid-May 2013, the military had issued only four orders, barring settler access to an area of 41.7 hectares – only about 13 percent of the land to which Palestinian residents had been denied access – and, in practice, reversed only one incursion by settlers, removing them from a plot the size of about one-third of one hectare (3.5 dunams). The prevention of access to some 87 percent of the area continues. On 2 February 2014 the HCJ vacated the residents’ petition on prevention of access and incursions made into their lands, on the grounds that the petition is non-specific and encompasses separate concerns of ten different families. In their ruling, the justices did address the military commander’s obligation to safeguard personal property and prevent incursions, yet refrained from ruling on the matter. They recommended that each family file an independent petition.

19 August 2012

Bedouin community in firing zone, near Route 578 (Derech Alon). Photo: Keren Manor / activestills.org, 8 Feb. '11

The Jordan Valley

The Jordan Valley

The Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea span some 160,000 hectares, comprising almost 30% of the West Bank. In 2016, approximately 65,000 Palestinians and 11,000 settlers lived there. Almost 90% of this region has been designated Area C, the West Bank land which remains under full Israeli control, and constitutes nearly 40% of all Area C. The remaining 10% of the region is home to Palestinian communities, including the city of Jericho, which have been designated Area A or B. As these communities are surrounded by Area C land, they are cut off from each other. The Jordan Valley is a fertile strip of land that runs along the West Bank, east of the central highlands. Sparsely populated, it has many open, undeveloped areas. As such, this area is the largest land reserve for future development of the West Bank. It could serve to create urban centers; develop advanced agriculture for export; develop energy project and industry. Instead, however, Israel exploits almost all of the Jordan Valley and the northern Dead Sea for its own needs and bars Palestinians from entering or using about 85% of the area: be it for construction, laying infrastructure, shepherding or farming. The legal grounds cited for this sweeping ban vary. So much so that, in some cases, the same land has been given several different designations. Almost 50% of the area are defined as “state land” – more than half of which were already designated as such under Jordanian rule, before Israel occupied the area in 1967; about 46% of area have been declared closed military zones, including the municipal jurisdictions of Israeli settlements and 11 firing zones; some 20% of the area have been declared nature reserves; and other areas have been allocated to settlements’ regional councils. Israel compels Palestinians to remain within the narrow confines of their communities and prevents virtually all Palestinian construction in Area C. The Civil Administration – the branch of the Israeli military designated to handle civil matters in Area C – issues almost no building permits, whatever the purpose: be it for housing, agricultural construction, public buildings or infrastructure. Left with no other choice, Palestinians undertake construction without permits. The CA then issues – and sometimes carries out – demolition orders for these structures. Even when orders are issued but not executed, residents live their lives in a constant state of uncertainty. B’Tselem has monitored demolitions carried out over the years, counting at least 698 Palestinian residential units demolished by the CA in the Jordan Valley from the January 2006 through September 2017. The demolished structures were home to at least 2,948 Palestinians, at least 1,334 of whom were minors. Of these, 783 Palestinians (including 386 minors) had their homes demolished at least twice. From January 2012 to through September 2017, the CA also demolished at least 806 non-residential units, including agricultural structures. The ban on Palestinian construction and development in the Jordan Valley takes a particularly harsh toll on the roughly 10,000 residents of more than 50 Palestinian communities in Area C that Israel is attempting by various means to drive from their homes and land. The authorities deny these communities any possibility whatsoever of lawful construction to meet the needs of their population, and refuse to connect them to water and power supplies. These communities rely on the scant rainfall in the area, which they collect in cisterns and supplement by purchasing water from private vendors who transport water in tankers. Although the water provided by the vendors costs many times as much as the water supplied through the local pipeline, it is often unfit for drinking as it is transported in unsanitary conditions. The residents of these communities use only about 20 liters of water per person a day overall, for all needs. This falls far short of the 100 liters per person per day that is the minimum recommended by the World Health Organization. In recent years, and especially since early 2013, the Israeli military has periodically ordered communities located in areas Israel declared firing zones to temporarily vacate their homes. The official reason given is that the military needs to train in these particular areas, which make up about 45% of the Jordan Valley (73,600 hectares). Time and again, residents have been served military orders requiring them to vacate their homes for various periods of time, ranging from several hours to two whole days. Should they refuse to comply, the orders threaten forced removal, expropriation of their livestock, and retroactive fines covering the costs of the removal. In some cases documented by B’Tselem, notice of the evacuation was only conveyed to the residents verbally, with no written order presented. From January 2013 through September 2017, the military compelled various communities throughout the Jordan Valley to vacate their homes 140 times. Some were subjected to temporary displacement several times, in some cases with only a week’s respite between times. The repeated upheaval has greatly disrupted the lives of these communities. The frequent displacements take a toll on residents’ income and livelihood, and also inspire much fear and uncertainty. Every such removal means leaving homes and property behind and involves expending considerable effort. Families must gather mattresses, blankets and sustenance (food and water) for themselves and for their livestock, before setting out with their children and flocks to seek shelter elsewhere. Sometimes, the flocks cannot be brought along and the residents have no choice but to leave them behind, hoping they will not come to harm. In some instances, families were forced out of their homes in mid-winter and had to seek shelter from the elements in harsh weather. After some removals, residents returned to find their cultivated fields damaged by the military training. Moreover, various Israeli authorities – including the CA, the military and the Israel Nature and Parks Authority – actively harass residents by confiscating essential equipment over and over again. Examples include confiscation of tankers used to transport water, pipelines carrying water from springs, tractors and other farming equipment, and solar panels that provide a bare minimum of electricity. All these measures are adopted with a view to making the residents of Palestinian communities in the Jordan Valley leave their land and homes and to thwart Palestinian development in the region. The overall goal of this policy is to tighten Israel’s grip over the Jordan Valley and further the de-facto annexation of this area to Israel’s sovereign territory, while exploiting its resources. Driving out or expelling residents of an occupied territory from their homes and land is considered forcible transfer of protected persons, which constitutes a war crime. This holds true whether the force used to achieve the transfer is direct or indirect, whether it takes a physical or administrative form, and also whether it achieved through brute force or by creating intolerable living conditions that leave residents no alternative but to leave. All those complicit in committing this crime – including the prime minister, the defense minister, the chief military commander who signs the orders and the judges who lend their seal of approval – bear personal liability for its execution.

18 May 2011

Agriculture

The Hidden Agenda

The report reveals that as far back as the 1970s, Israel planned to annex Ma’ale Adummim. To do this, it expropriated over the years tens of thousands of dunams of Palestinian land and expelled hundreds of Beduin who were living there. Implementation of plans to expand the settlement will destroy north-south territorial contiguity in the West Bank and impede realization of the Palestinians’ right to self-determination.

1 December 2009