Area C

Palestinian village Khirbet Susiya under imminent threat of demolition and expulsion

Susiya reflects Israeli authorities’ policy throughout Area C of West Bank

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

On 4 May 2015, Justice Noam Sohlberg of Israel’s High Court of Justice (HCJ) rejected a petition for an interim order that would freeze the implementation of demolition orders issued against homes in the village of Khirbet Susiya, which lies in the southern Hebron hills in the West Bank. The village residents requested the order as part of their petition to the court against the Civil Administration’s decision to reject the master plan they had drawn up for the village. In the petition, Att. Qamar Mashraki from Israeli NGO Rabbis for Human Rights argued on behalf of the residents that their plan had been rejected for improper considerations, and that this constituted a double standard in planning and blatant discrimination against the Palestinian population.

The meaning of Justice Sohlberg’s decision is that at any moment, the Civil Administration can demolish all homes in the village. The residents, some 250-350 people depending on the season, will be left homeless in harsh desert conditions. They will be effectively expelled from their land in an act that is not only cruel but also illegal.

Israeli settlers in the area have already taken over almost 300 hectares of the villagers’ land. Past experience indicates that if the Israeli authorities succeed in expelling the villagers from Khirbet Susiya, either the settlers will directly take over the land or the authorities will take control of it an allocate it to settlers.

The state’s treatment of Khirbet Susiya and its residents illustrates its systemic use of planning laws to prevent Palestinians in Area C, which is under full Israeli control, from construction and development that meet their needs: most Palestinians in the area live in villages where the Israeli authorities have refused to draw up master plans and connect them to water and power supplies, under various pretexts. With no other choice, the residents eventually build homes without permits and subsequently live under constant threat of demolition and expulsion. This policy is intended to serve the goal, explicitly declared by Israeli officials in the past, of taking over land in the southern Hebron hills in order to formally annex it to Israel in a permanent-status agreement with the Palestinians, and annex it de facto until such a time.

In implementing this policy, Israel is acting in contradiction to its obligation to care for the needs of West Bank residents as the occupying power there. This is a grave breach of the prohibition in international humanitarian law on forced transfer of residents of an occupied territory. The prohibition permits such transfer only in exceptional cases, from which Khirbet Susiya is a far cry.

The state has been abusing the residents of Khirbet Susiya for many years: the military and the Civil Administration have repeatedly removed the residents from their homes, in which they have lived since before 1967, when Israel occupied the West Bank. The Civil Administration is responsible for all aspects of civilian life in area C and is theoretically supposed to promote the well-being of the local population. In practice, the Administration uses its planning systems, in which Palestinians are not represented, to prevent them from promoting solutions that would meet their needs, barring them from building legally and from connecting to water and power supplies. The authorities also systematically refrain from protecting the residents of Khirbet Susiya from settlers who attack them or vandalize their property, and restrict their free access to the main town in the district, Yatta.

Over the years, the villagers petitioned the HCJ several times against demolition of their homes, requesting that they be permitted to build legally. However, the Court repeatedly adopted formalistic arguments and refused to force the authorities to fulfill their obligations, which include drawing up a master plan for the village and not demolishing homes there, so that the residents can continue to live in the place in reasonable conditions.

In contrast to Israeli settlers in the West Bank, Palestinian residents there are considered “protected persons” under international humanitarian law. The violation of their rights is especially blatant given the active support provided by Israeli authorities to construction and expansion of settlements in the area, even when they are established in contravention of Israeli law.

Children in the village of Khirbet Susiya. Photo: Yoav Gross, B'Tselem, 17 Nov. 2010
Children in the village of Khirbet Susiya. Photo: Yoav Gross, B'Tselem, 17 Nov. 2010

Background (see additional details here):

The Palestinian village of Khirbet Susiya has existed in the South Hebron Hills since the 19th century. In 1983, the Israeli settlement of Susiya was established near the village, on Palestinian land that had been declared state land by Israel. Since then, the Israeli authorities have been working to force the Palestinian residents out of the area.

In 1986, they were expelled from their original village, which now functions as an archeological site run by settlers, who also live on the spot. The military expelled the residents again in 2001 – a short time after Palestinians killed Israeli Yair Har Sinai from the Susiya settlement. The residents relocated to their privately owned agricultural land.

In October 2013, after a long struggle, the Sub-Committee for Planning and Licensing of the Civil Administration’s Supreme Planning Council rejected the master plan that the residents had drawn up for Khirbet Susiya. At the same time the civil Administration announced its decision to issue final demolition orders for all structures in the village. The sub-committee cited several reasons for its decision that conveyed a patronizing, unprofessional attitude. For instance, one argument was that the number of residents – several hundred people – was too small to warrant an independent community in terms of planning. Remarkably, the sub-committee has had no problem approving tiny illegal outposts established by Israeli settlers in the West Bank. The sub-committee further argued that the plan would prevent the villagers from developing and breaking the cycle of poverty; it did not see fit to mention that the villagers' drudge-filled existence is largely due to restrictions imposed by the Civil Administration itself, including the lack of amenities. The Administration recommended that the people of Susiya make an alternative plan for a location closer to the town of Yatta, a move that would effectively transfer the residents of Susiya out of Area C and expel them from their land.

In February 2014, 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 Court rejected the request for an interim order filed as part of the petition, and the village now faces immediate demolition.

The Israeli authorities’ policy towards the residents of Khirbet Susiya starkly contrasts their generous planning policy towards Israeli settlers in the area. The settlers of Susiya and its outposts enjoy full provision of services and infrastructure and are in no danger of their homes being demolished – despite the fact that the outposts are illegal under Israel law and in the settlement itself, according to figures published by settler organization Regavim, 23 homes were built on privately-owned Palestinian land.

Suggested items

Residents of Khirbet al-Markez in Masafer Yatta. Photo by Oren Ziv, activestills

The South Hebron Hills

Masafer Yatta communities Israel is trying to drive out

In the early 1980s, the Israeli military declared an area of about 30,000 dunams [3,000 hectares] in the South Hebron Hills known as Masafer Yatta a restricted military zone, and dubbed it 'Firing Zone 918'. At the time, dozens of Palestinian families had been living in the area for years, since before Israel occupied the West Bank in 1967. They lived in 12 small villages, in natural or man-made caves, some all year round and others only seasonally, and made a living as farmers and shepherds. After their home was declared a closed military zone, the families continued to lead their lives mostly undisturbed. Although the military reached various arrangements with them that ostensibly limited their access to the land, these arrangements were barely implemented. The residents continued to work their land and graze their flocks without any major interference. However, in October and November 1999, the military expelled all 700 or so residents of these communities on the official grounds that they were “illegally living in a firing zone”. This flimsy argument blatantly ignored the fact that the families had been living in the area for many years, with the full knowledge of Israeli authorities. Following the expulsion, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) and Attorney Shlomo Lecker filed petitions to the High Court of Justice (HCJ) on behalf of 200 families from Masafer Yatta. In March 2000, the HCJ issued an interim injunction permitting the villagers to return to their homes and cultivate their land pending a ruling in the case. The court encouraged the parties to hold an arbitration process, which was led by the former head of the Civil Administration, Brigadier General (res.) Dov Zadka. During the arbitration, Israel offered to move the villagers to a different, far smaller area south of the town of Yatta. The villagers rejected the offer and the process ended in early 2005. The villagers’ petitions remained open for years and it was only on 19 July 2012, after repeatedly requesting deferrals, that Israel submitted its updated position to the HCJ. In its statement, the state announced its intention to demolish eight of the 12 communities inside the firing zone, which were home to more than 1,000 people at the time (Khirbet al-Fakhit, hirbet al-Halawah, Khirbet al-Majaz, Khirbet al-Markez, Khirbet a-Safai al-Foqa, Khirbet a-Safai a-Tahta, Khirbet a-Taban, Khirbet Jenbah, Khirbet Khilet a-Dabe'). The state declared that it would allow the residents to continue working their land inside the firing zone on weekends, on Jewish holidays and in two non-consecutive months a year. In view of that statement, the HCJ dismissed the petitions, yet allowed the families to file new petitions to address the state's position. In January 2013, ACRI and Att. Lecker filed new petitions on behalf of the residents. Again, the HCJ issued an interim injunction forbidding the state to expel the residents. In the last hearing in these petitions, on 10 August 2020, the state repeated the claim it had made over the years, that the petitioners had not been permanent residents of the area when it was declared a “firing zone”, and therefore had no right to continue living in their homes. It further argued that the communities were taking advantage of the interim injunction: people not included in the injunction were moving into the area and residents were building without permits. The state again proposed a “compromise” that would allow residents to live in their homes for two months a year with prior coordination, or on weekends and Jewish holidays when the military does not train in the area. The petitioners rejected the proposal. While the interim injunction, which remained in place over the years, prohibited Israel from expelling the residents, the lengthy proceedings effectively put their lives on hold for more than 20 years. They continued to dwell in their homes and work their land, while living under constant threat of demolition, expulsion and dispossession. At the same time, Israel denied them any possibility of construction or development. Faced with no other choice, residents built homes without permits, as well as infrastructure to serve their daily needs, such as power and water systems. The Civil Administration responded by issuing demolition orders and in some cases, demolished the structures and confiscated the infrastructure. Since 2006, B'Tselem has documented the demolition of 66 residential structures in these communities, which were home to 553 people, 175 of them minors. It has also documented the demolition of 32 non-residential structures in these communities since early 2012. In early May 2022, the HCJ rejected the petitions, after accepting each and every one of the state’s arguments. Cherry-picking facts and relying on an absurd legal interpretation, the court made it clear there was no crime it would not find a way to sanction. The justices held that the petitions must be rejected outright, as they were filed many years after the firing zone was declared and as the petitioners came to court “with absolutely unclean hands”, having built structures without permits over the years. The justices also held that regarding the matter itself, the petition should be rejected as, in their opinion, the military commander has the power to declare closed military zones in the occupied territory that supersedes the provisions of international law. Finally, the justices held that the petitioners were not “permanent residents” of the area before it was declared a firing zone and rejected the petition. In doing so, they allowed the state to immediately expel the residents and destroy their communities. The State of Israel cites formal arguments such as “living in a firing zone” and “violating planning and building laws” to justify its policy in Masafer Yatta. These are false claims, meant to conceal Israel’s aspirations to take over the land for its own purposes and use it to benefit the Jewish population only.

1 January 2013

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