Road to nowhere

Nitsana Darshan-Leitner
Opinion/JPost
04 January '10

Last week's High Court ruling opening part of Route 443 to Palestinian traffic has set off a firestorm of criticism in Israeli political circles. In a 38-page decision, the court ruled that by keeping Palestinians off the road, which winds through post-1967 lands on the northwest approach to Jerusalem, the army unfairly discriminated against local Palestinians who should be allowed to use it, fostering among them a "sense of inequality and even associations of improper motives."

The court ordered the army to find "another solution" that would avoid the "sense of discrimination" that the closure entails. While the ruling may at first sound both reasonable and fair, it is in practicality neither and will result in the deaths of additional Israelis.

FIRST, THE history. The IDF's security concerns are far from theoretical. Beginning with the second intifada in 2000, Palestinian terrorists found in 443 an easy target for shootings and other deadly attacks. In just eight months, from December 2000 to August 2001, six Israelis were murdered, and many more wounded, on that very road. The villagers who would use the road today are those who knowingly harbored these terrorists and provided them with an easy escape route. This is why the road was closed to Palestinian traffic in the first place.

Although the Palestinians have failed to mount deadly attacks on 443 since the road was closed to them in 2002, it is not for lack of trying. In the last few years, the IDF has recorded hundreds of violent attacks, from throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails to shootings, along Route 443. Just last month, the army defused a massive roadside bomb along the road. Even with the closure, 443 remains one of the most vulnerable highways to terror.

Second, the road itself. Route 443 is no side street. It is one of the two major arteries connecting Jerusalem with the rest of the country. For many of the more than 100,000 residents living along the stretch from Modi'in to the northern neighborhoods of Jerusalem, it is the only way to get to and from work each day. Although a small part of the road goes through post-1967 territory, the people who use the road are not "settlers," but ordinary Israelis, Arabs and Jews, living their lives.

(Read full article)

The writer is the director of Shurat Hadin - Israel Law Center.
.

LEADING ISRAELI LAWYER: HIGH COURT IS ANTI-SEMITIC

JERUSALEM -- A leading trial lawyer asserted that Israel's High Court has embarked on an anti-Semitic policy of selective law enforcement that stipulates the immediate demolition of all unlicensed Jewish homes.

Leading attorney Yoram Sheftel accused Israel's High Court of selective law enforcement in decisions to order police to demolish unlicensed Jewish homes but to refuse to order the demolition of unlicensed Arab homes. "The selective law enforcement that discriminates against Jews is racist and anti-Semitic," Sheftel said on Aug. 3 outside a Jewish home slated for imminent demolition in the Netiv Avot neighborhood in the Gush Etzion bloc of Jewish communities.

Sheftel said that more than a decade ago the High Court rejected a petition by mayors of both the cities of Ramle and Lod in central Israel to destroy over a thousand homes built illegally by Arabs. Apart from a few houses, Sheftel said, they remain standing today. Sheftel said that the High Court ruled that although all the homes were built illegally, without proper licensing, the court could not order the police to carry out the demolition task.

"The police know their capabilities and it is not the obligation of the High Court to dictate to the police how to do its job," the High Court decision said. Sheftel said the police force is an autonomous body and the High Court's decision not to interfere with police enforcement is based on political considerations."

"The [left-wing] informers petition the High Court which enforces the law selectively based on political considerations," Sheftel said. "The police fear Arab pogroms and therefore desist from destroying Arab neighborhoods."

Last year, Sheftel had responded to a petition by the left-wing Peace Now organization to the High Court to destroy the home of Moodi and Tamar Bibi built in the Netiv Avot neighborhood of the Jewish community of Elazar in Gush Etzion. The High Court accepted the petition and Defense Minister Ehud Barak ordered the home demolished until the end of August. Palestinians said the Bibi home is built on private land but the attorneys for the family disputed this and asserted that the home is built on unclaimed State land.

"Selective law enforcement is political and this is the basis for this abomination," Sheftel said. "The fate of this house will not be saved by the courts, but by 10,000 people who will show up on the appointed day."

The High Court also recently accepted a petition by Peace Now to destroy all 20 homes in the Netiv Avot neighborhood. The court ordered the defense minister to present a demolition schedule within 90 days.

Rabbi Yaakov Meidan, a leading educator in Gush Etzion, said that the government should take into account the contribution to the security of the State by those who own the homes slated for destruction. "In the early days of the State, the Kibbutzim were sacred because of the many Israeli army officers who lived in them," Meidan said. "These families all serve the State in high ranking positions in the military. If one house is destroyed, it puts the whole future of Gush Etzion in jeopardy."

Meidan said that hundreds of people must prevent the destruction of the home. He called for a non-violent struggle which would effectively separate and incapacitate the police forces. "It will not work to barricade ourselves in the home but we must move among the police," Meidan said. "There is no hope for those who cooperate in the destruction of homes.
.