Likud MKs seek to block further outpost destruction

By TOVAH LAZAROFF, LAHAV HARKOV AND JOANNA PARASZC, JPOST

Likud ministers and parliamentarians want to block any future plans the IDF might have to demolish illegal settlement and outpost construction on private Palestinian property in the West Bank.

In the aftermath of the demolition of three unauthorized homes at the Migron outpost in September, politicians are particularly concerned about a number of High Court decisions and state statements to the court regarding pending settler housing demolitions in the next half-year.

At the Likud ministerial committee on Sunday, the Minister of Culture and Sports Limor Livnat proposed the creation of a committee of independent, professional experts to examine alternative options that would avoid demolitions and allow for the authorization of such homes.

“Our job is not to be bulldozers and to destroy,” she said.

Livnat said she had calculated that possibly as many as 160 homes could be removed, and that this was unacceptable.

The families that live there are law-abiding, she said. “It can’t be that the homes of some 1,000 people will be destroyed and that they will find themselves without a roof over their heads,” Livnat added.

In particular, Livnat focused on the Ulpana neighborhood of Beit El, which she said was created 15-years ago with initial government support and grants. But the two other high risk places are the Migron and Givat Assaf outposts.

Livnat said that it was not clear that land which was designated by the state as private Palestinian property truly deserved that designation and that this needed to be checked by a committee of experts.

In some cases, no one has claimed the land and in other cases, ownership cannot be documented, she said. In cases where Palestinian ownership has been proved, it is possible to grant compensation rather than returning the property, she said.

Since Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu took office in 2009, the state has spoken of authorizing illegal construction on state land, but has firmly stated that it intends to demolish such Jewish building on private Palestinian property.

Still, according to Diaspora Affairs Minister Yuli Edelstein who supported Livnat’s proposition, the prime minister appeared receptive to her words.

According to Livnat’s office government secretary Tzvi Hauser has been tasked with exploring the issue.

But MK Yariv Levin (Likud) is not waiting for the government. He is already working on a bill that would offer an alternative to home demolitions on private Palestinian land by offering, instead, compensation to the Palestinian owners.

“The current situation in Judea and Samaria is intolerable,” Levin said on Sunday. “The judiciary is being used as a tool to promote the extreme left’s political goals, such as harming settlers.”

Levin said “We cannot accept a policy in which we don’t build, illegal Arab construction is not dealt with, and Jewish homes are destroyed.”

“The Prime Minister does not have a mandate from the public or Likud MKs for this behavior,” he added.

Levin plans to propose a bill that will allow the state to compensate Palestinians with claims to land on which settler homes have been built. The complainants will receive funds or alternative land, and will not be able to demand that homes be destroyed.

“There is plenty of illegal Arab construction, but in those cases the courts do not enforce the law, because they say that it’s not a priority, or that it’s a political and diplomatic matter,” the Likud MK explained. “Yet, when it comes to settlers, the courts are very involved. This is a cynical use of the judicial system.”

Levin said his bill will “break the cycle of house destruction. This removes the government’s excuse by solving the problem of court destruction orders.”

“The government must stop hiding behind court rulings as if they were inarguable, given by God at Mount Sinai,” the Likud MK added. “There should be preference for Jewish settlement, or at least equality.”

Levin said that, in his opinion, “any method is acceptable, as long as the result is additional construction [in the West Bank].”

“If my bill is passed, we will be able to see who stands behind his ideology when it is tested, and who really wants to govern without being dragged behind judges,” Levin concluded.

Attorney Michael Sfard of human rights organization Yesh Din slammed the proposed bill as “racist” and said that it is unconstitutional, because it violates Israel’s Basic Laws.

Sfard noted that Levin’s bill apparently is restricted to Palestinian landowners and private Palestinian land in the West Bank, and that Palestinians could not use the law to claim Jewish-owned private land.

According to Sfard, the proposed bill would constitute a violation of property rights and the right to freedom of expression, two of the Israeli legal system’s basic values.

Those values are enshrined in the Basic Laws: Human Dignity and Liberty, which states that “there shall be no violation of the property of a person.” Notably, Section 8 of the same Basic Law also contains a ‘limiting clause’ restricting Knesset from legislating laws that contradict it, which makes Levin’s proposed bill potentially problematic. If Knesset passes the bill, and Levin’s proposals become law, Sfard says that rights groups are therefore likely to petition the High Court of Justice to annul it.

Sfard also noted that the Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, is currently debating such a petition against the Nakba Law, which argues that the law violates constitutional rights enshrined in the Basic Laws.

Attorney Limor Yehuda, director of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel’s Human Rights in the Occupied Territories department, said that apart from potentially violating the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty, Levin’s proposed bill is problematic because according to international law, the West Bank is considered occupied territory over which Israel has no authority.

The proposed bill amounts to confiscation of lands in occupied territory, Yehuda argues, an act that is illegal under international law.

However, Israel’s position is that the Fourth Geneva Convention, the basis for the argument of some members of the international community as to the illegality of Israel’s settlements, is not applicable in Judea and Samaria.

Instead, the High Court of Justice has ruled that, among other criteria, settlements cannot be built on private Palestinian land but only on public land following an investigation to confirm that no private rights to the land exist; or on land purchased by Israelis and recorded in the Land Register.