Submission
to
Amman NGO networking meeting for the UN World Conference Against
Racism
by
Adalah: The Legal Center for Arab Minority
Rights in Israel
5 February
2001
Introduction
Adalah,
the first Arab legal NGO focusing on Palestinian minority rights, was
established to work on issues of group discrimination faced by the Palestinian
minority. The main goal of Adalah is to achieve equal rights and minority
rights protections for Arab citizens in the field of Land and Housing Rights,
Education Rights, Language Rights, Political Rights, Women’s Rights, Prisoner’s
Rights, Culture Rights and Religious Rights.
Palestinians citizens
make up approximately 20% of the population. Arabic is their native
language, and they belong to three religious communities: Muslim, Christian and
Druze. After the 1948 war, the Arab minority remained in their homeland
and became citizens. For the next 18 years, they lived under a Military
Administration, applied only to them, despite their status as citizens.
The State never sought to integrate the Palestinian citizens, excluding them
from public life and the public sphere while practicing systematic
discrimination in many areas. Although the Declaration of the
Establishment of the State of Israel promised complete equality for all its
citizens, it refers specifically to Israel as a “Jewish State” committed to the
“ingathering of the exiles.” The tension between these two principles
helps to explain the institutional and systematic discrimination against the
Arab citizens of Israel.
Racism
exists at almost every level of society. It is expressed by individuals
and manifested in policies pursued by official institutions, and no State
institution has taken appropriate steps against the phenomenon of racism not
educated against it. A main reason for its prevalence is that these
institutions, including the government, legislature, judiciary, army and
religious bodies, consistently emphasize the State’s national-religious
character. In addition, the militaristic character of the State, due in
part to Israel’s many wars with Arab countries, greatly contributes to the sense
of isolation among Jewish Israelis. The fact that Arab citizens belong to
the “Arab nation,” considered by the State as an enemy, significantly adds to
the racist attitudes held and sentiments expressed against them. The myth
of “us” versus “them” plays a prominent role in the national consciousness of
the Jewish majority.
Numerous academic
institutions have conducted surveys on this subject, and the results are clear
that racism in Israel runs deep. One 1997 study indicated that the
curriculum taught in state Jewish schools portrays Arabs as dangerous, as
murderers and thieves. It also reflected that such discrimination is
increasing, especially among the youth. In February 1998, a study found
that nearly half of all Jewish youth believed that Arab citizens should be
deprived of at least some of their rights, and one-fifth favored depriving Arabs
of their rights because “Arabs endanger the state’s security, and therefore we
need to get rid of them.”
Arab
Members of the Knesset (MKs) are excluded from government coalitions because the
government considers them as lacking legitimacy. Almost half of the Jewish
MKs argued at the time that the Oslo Agreement was illegitimate because Arab MKs
were involved in the process. Similarly, soon after MK Azmi Bishara
announced his candidacy for Prime Minister, a bill was submitted to the Knesset
prohibiting Arab citizens from running for this office.
All
aspects of racism culminated when the al-Aqsa intifada broke out on 29 September
2000. During the first week of October, security forces killed 13
Palestinian citizens and injured hundreds more. Adalah’s investigation
indicates that there was a predetermined plan to respond violently toward any
expression of solidarity by Palestinian citizens with Palestinians in the
Occupied Territories, and that this plan was consistent with the Prime
Minister’s declaration that security forces had a green light to do whatever was
necessary. Situations such as those in Nazareth, in which police looked on
while hundreds of Jewish citizens demonstrated and tens attacked Palestinian
citizens, make it clear that this was a policy based not on fear, but on
discrimination.
As the
first Arab-run legal center addressing matters of Palestinian group rights in
Israel, we focus our efforts on a number of issues that are particularly
relevant to those addressed by the WCR, including:
Land
and Housing Rights
Land
Ownership, Housing and Development
Since
1948, Palestinian ownership of land has decreased from 93% to 7%. Israel
has enacted a series of laws in order to confiscate Arab-owned and Arab-held
land and bring it to State ownership.
The
Absentees’ Property Law defines persons who
were expelled, fled or who left the country between 1948 and 1952, as well as
their movable and immovable property, as absentee. Property belonging to
absentees was then put under the control of the Custodian for Absentees’
Property, and the State acquired control over the property.
In
addition, the World Zionist Organization-Jewish Agency (Status) Law
authorizes these bodies, formed in the early 1900s, to function as
quasi-governmental entities; emphasizes the significant and important role
played by these organizations; and reiterates the need for continued cooperation
between these entities and the State. As the internal regulations of these
bodies explicitly aim to benefit only Jews, and the State cooperates and
coordinates many of its governmental functions through them with them, the needs
of the Arab citizens are systematically disregarded. Among their other
functions, they are entrusted with the work of developing land including
building projects in existing Jewish towns and Jewish agricultural settlements,
as well as the establishment of new Jewish localities.
The
Uprooted Villages
Arab
citizens have been evacuated from their villages and land using Regulation
125 of the British Mandatory Defence (Emergency) Regulations.
This regulation allows military commanders absolute discretion in declaring land
as a “closed area.” Once land is so declared, no one is allowed to enter
or leave the area without special permission. Many Arab citizens were
forced from their villages and have not been permitted to return since the
1950s; these affected villages are known as “uprooted villages.” The
residents of such villages are “present absentees,” and they make up
approximately a quarter of the Palestinian population. Regulation 125 has
never been used to close Jewish settlements in Israel, even where these
communities are located in dangerous areas. Moreover, Jewish settlements
adjacent to these uprooted villages have used these lands for their own
purposes.
Unrecognized
Villages
Although many of these
villages existed prior to the establishment of the State, they were declared
illegal by the National Planning and Building Law, when the lands on
which they sit were zoned as non-residential and ownership was claimed by the
State. There are tens of such villages where approximately 70,000 of
Palestinian citizens (most of them Bedouin) live. These villages are
afforded no official status: they are excluded from government maps, have no
local councils, belong to no other local governing bodies, and receive little to
no government services such as electricity, water, telephone lines, or
educational and health facilities. In fact, Article 157A of the
National Planning and Building Law prohibits national utility companies
from connecting a building to national electrical, water and telephone networks
if it lacks a building permit issued by a local authority; the residents of
these villages are unable to get such permits.
In
addition, the Government does not allow any physical infrastructure development,
thus prohibiting the building and repairing of homes and the construction of
paved roads and proper sewage facilities in these communities. The
government uses a combination of house demolitions, land confiscation, denial of
services, and restrictions of infrastructure development to drive the residents
from their homes. Official government policy is to re-locate residents to
designated concentrated areas in order to use the land for the creation and
expansion of Jewish cities and towns.
Discriminatory Practices
in Land and Housing
During
and after the war of 1948, Israel destroyed close to 450 Arab villages, none of
which have been re-built. In fact, since the establishment of Israel in
1948, the state has neither built nor supported the construction of any
Palestinian town, city or village. To the contrary, the State has
massively confiscated land belonging to Arabs who became citizens of the state
and passed laws that facilitated the State’s acquisition of Palestinian-owned
land to plan and build towns designated either for the existing Jewish majority
or for Jewish immigrants. Newly-built Jewish towns consistently receive
permits to expand their jurisdiction even when neighboring Arab towns have
larger populations. State planning authorities also practice such
discrimination: the Master Plan for the Northern Areas lists increasing the
Galilee’s Jewish population and blocking the territorial contiguity of Arab
villages and towns as a priority goal. They rarely make land available for
housing to assist in the development of Arab towns; in contrast, land is
consistently made available for the expansion of Jewish towns.
Language and Culture
Rights
Symbols of National
Identity
The
flag and the official emblem of the State represent Jewish religious and Zionist
symbols, which are not universal to all citizens. They reflect no
collective identity, nor do they address the two nationalities of the
state. As such, they clearly ignore the existence of the Palestinian
citizens, who have no state-recognized national symbols with which they can
identify.
The
Flag and Emblem Law (1949) was amended in 1997 to
require, inter alia, that all public buildings raise the flag of Israel.
As a result, all Arab public institutions such as Arab schools and local
councils must raise the flag, although the symbol in no way reflects Arab
identity and ignores the existence of Arab as equal citizens. The State
Stamp Law (1949) also requires that the State stamp, which includes these
same non-inclusive symbols, must be placed on all official documents.
Official State
Holidays
The
Law and Governance Ordinance (1948) designates all Jewish religious holy
days (Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, two days each of Succhot and Pesach, and
Shavuot) as official state holidays. The only other official state holiday
is Israel’s Independence Day, also known as al-Naqba, which is clearly not a day
of celebration for the Arab minority. Therefore, there are no official
state holidays that include all citizens. Religious holidays of the Arab
minority are ignored.
Cultural
Institutions
There
is no institute that exists to conduct academic research on or develop the
Arabic language, although the High Institution for Hebrew Language Law
(1953) establishes a special institution to do so for the Hebrew
language. This is true even though Article 82 of the Palestinian
Order-in-Council (1922) states that Arabic is an official language of the
state as well as Hebrew. Moreover, the Laws of Yad Yitzhak Ben-Zvi
and Mikve Yisrael Agricultural School give statutory recognition to
cultural and educational institutions, and define their aims, inter alia, as
developing and fulfilling Zionist goals. No law establishes or provides
such recognition to existing privately-run Arab cultural or educational
institutions. This law was challenged after a request for funds for an
Arab music festival was denied on the grounds that the festival included
Christian music. A petition was subsequently filed before the High Court;
it was denied based on the explanation that the State was not required to
support institutions that promoted Christian music.
Language
Rights
Throughout the years,
Israel has marginalized the Arabic language. Arabic is perceived as being
useless and marginal, although it is the native language of 20% of the
population and the primary language spoken in the Middle East. Through its
institutions, including the government, legislature, and judicial system, Israel
has developed Hebrew to be the dominant language, although Article 82 of
the Palestinian Order-in-Council (1922) (referenced above) was retained
as a valid law after 1948. Nonetheless, government practices ignore the
official status of the Arabic language. Laws are enacted, regulations are
set, and court decisions are written only in Hebrew, without translation to
Arabic. Even when the use of Arabic is upheld in a High Court decision, it
is protected as free speech rather than as an official language.
Other
laws also emphasize the dominance of Hebrew. The Citizenship Law
(1952) requires a candidate for Israeli citizenship to have some knowledge
of Hebrew, yet does not make the same requirement for Arabic. The law
which governs the Israeli Bar Association also requires Israeli lawyers to
possess knowledge of Hebrew but not Arabic.
As
indicated above, there exists no academic institution to preserve and develop
the Arabic language, although one exists for Hebrew. Moreover, there is no
Palestinian university in Israel, and Arabic language and literature classes at
Israeli universities are taught in Hebrew rather than Arabic. Licensing
examinations in law, medicine, and accounting are offered only in Hebrew, which
is particularly problematic for Palestinians who studied overseas, yet wish to
return home to practice in their field.
Language discrimination
is also evident in media outlets. Of the two official television channels,
neither broadcasts any Arabic programming in prime time, and one broadcasts only
2.5% of its programming in Arabic.
Hate
Speech
One
obvious way in which the deep-seated racism against the Palestinian minority in
Israel is manifested is that of hate speech against this minority.
Although the legal system possesses all the necessary tools – through its laws
and ordinances – to institute criminal charges against individuals for
incitement to racism and racist speech, the Attorney General’s office rarely
uses these powers when the speech is directed against an Arab. Although
some attempt was made to enforce laws which criminalize racism or racist speech
in the wake of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination in 1996, there are
few reported cases brought against an individual for such speech. Although
Rabbi Kahana’s extremist ultra-Orthodox Kach party was outlawed from
participating in the Knesset, he was never criminally charged with incitement to
racism. His followers continue to propagate racist views against the Arab
minority, yet they remain uncharged and go unpunished.
In
addition to criminal charges, the authorities have the power to limit racist
speech and incitement through prior restraint of speech or through regulations
and ordinances that ban extremist racist speech against the minority, although
they rarely use this power. Although freedom of speech is important in
building a liberal democratic society, the Arab minority does not have access to
the majority media or to majority culture to forcefully counter the hate speech
against them in the liberal principle of “words versus words.” Further,
when Rabbi Kahana petitioned the High Court to be able to air his views on
television, Justice Barak concluded that “freedom of expression includes also
the freedom to express dangerous thoughts, irritant and deviant, that the public
averses and hates … the freedom of expression includes, in its interpretation
also the freedom to use racist speech...”
In
sharp contrast, Israel utilizes these laws and ordinances when dealing with
speech by Palestinian citizens. In 2000, the Labor Party government
mounted a campaign of prosecuting Arabs for “incitement.” The Israeli
police are investigating several Arab Knesset members – MK Mohammed Barakeh, MK
Azmi Bishara, and MK Sheik Abdulmalik Dehamshe – for comments regarding peace
and equality that they had made in rallies and other public fora. All
three have stated that they consider this to be an attempt to prevent them from
expressing their opinions, and a violation of their right to freedom of speech.
Citizenship
Citizenship laws are
based on the principle of blood relations rather than territory. National
identity is the primary factor in deciding questions involving the acquisition
of citizenship, and factors of family ties, place, territory or residency are
less important. This reflects the ideology of the State, as expressed in
the Law of Return (1950). A Jewish individual who left the country
during the 1948 war can return at any time and acquire citizenship based on the
Law of Return and the Citizenship Law (1952). Jewish
residents can become citizens immediately based on the Law of Return, as
can Jewish non-citizen spouses of Jewish citizens.
In
contrast, the process of obtaining citizenship for Arabs or non-Jewish spouses
of Arab citizens is much more complicated. If an Arab left the country
during the 1948 war and then returns, he has to meet a complex series of
conditions under the Citizenship Law. Although this law was amended
in 1980 by the addition of Section 3(a) to ease the difficult process of
becoming a citizen, the section leaves in force the distinction between the
conditions of acquiring citizenship for Jews as compared to non-Jews. Arab
residents must go through the naturalization process as outlined in Section
5(a) of the Citizenship Law to acquire citizenship, during which the
chances are negligible. It is not considered his/her right to obtain
citizenship, but rather a privilege. Non-Jewish spouses of Arab citizens
must also meet the criteria outlined in Section 5(a), but there is little
chance to acquire citizenship. The Arab citizen must apply for family
reunification in order to obtain permanent residency status for his/her
spouse. According to the policy for granting permanent residency status
for non-citizens, a permanent residency permit will be issued only after five
years, and three months from the approval of the day of the application for
family reunification. During the waiting period, the non-citizen spouse
received no social benefits such as health care or national insurance.
Religious
Rights
Although the State
comprises Muslims, Christians, Druze and Jews, Israeli practice and laws
officially recognize only Jewish religious sites as holy places, only Jewish
holidays as state holidays and only the needs of the Jewish religious
community. This discriminatory approach is apparent in a series of laws
relating to religious matters, as well as the budget of the Ministry of
Religious Affairs.
The
Protection of Holy Sites Law (1967)
The
Protection of Holy Sites Law (1967) empowers the Minister
of Religious Affairs to list the names of the holy sites in regulations that
govern the implementation of the law. Although it does not refer to any
specific groups, the Minister of Religion instituted the Protection of Jewish
Holy Sites Regulation (1981) to declare and name solely the holy places of
the Jewish religion. The determination of holy sites is significant
because this recognition provides state funding to institutions to protect the
sanctity of these places and preserve them from damage.
The
Religious Jewish Services law (1971)
The
Religious Jewish Services law (1971) authorizes the Minister
of Religious Affairs to establish religious councils in Jewish towns, cities and
settlements. The local governing bodies co-fund 60% of the religious
councils that serve the populations in all religious matters. No law
grants Muslim or Christian leadership bodies similar statutory status, although
a religious council was established for the Arab Druze. As a result, no
funds are reserved by the state to assist in the provision of religious services
in Arab towns and villages.
The
Chief Rabbinate Law (1980)
The
Chief Rabbinate Law (1980) codifies the functions
of the Chief Rabbinate Council, enumerates rules for the Council’s election, and
provides for the election of two Chief Rabbis. There is no law granting
Arab religious bodies or leaders statutory status similar to that of the Chief
Rabbinate.
The
Budget of the Ministry of Religious Affairs
The
typical allocation of the budget of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, which is
based on the Budget Law, to the Arab Muslim, Christian and Druze
religious communities is less than 2% of the total. The remaining 98% is
dedicated solely to the Jewish religious community.
Social, Economic and
Employment Rights
Discriminatory Standards
and Criterion
One of
the most discriminatory criteria in place against Palestinian citizens is the
requirement of military service for obtaining governmental preferences and
benefits. Although most Jewish Israelis go into the army, most Arab
citizens do not and are not required to do so. As a result, about 90% of
the Arabs are excluded from receiving substantial benefits including greater
housing loans, partial exemptions from fees in state-run occupational training
courses, and preferences in public employment, educational loans and on-campus
housing. The benefits in the Absorption of Former Soldiers Law
(1994) include grants for completing high school, university and
professional courses, as well as additional awards for housing loans, the
purchase of apartments and the start-up of new businesses. In addition to
the benefits enumerated in this law, governmental offices seek to provide
additional benefits to former soldiers above and beyond what is legislated –
benefits from which Palestinians are excluded.
Another
area which reflects the discriminatory criteria is that of the re-definition of
the “national priority areas” in Israel. Every few years, the government
sets a plan designating “national priority areas” to which numerous grants, tax
incentives for industry, educational programs, and other benefits and
preferences are provided; the goal of the program is to support socially and
economically weak localities. Although Palestinian localities are amongst
the lowest socio-economic levels in Israel, merely a handful of Arab towns have
ever been defined as such.
Additionally, Arab
municipalities and local councils receive a small share of the total State
budget allocations to local governing authorities in Israel. A report by
the Ministry of the Interior confirmed that these municipalities receive a
fraction of the funds allocated per resident in comparison with the Jewish
settlements in the Occupied Territories and in the development towns.
Discrimination in
Employment
Although the Equal Opportunity Law prohibits
discrimination based on race, national origin, and other suspect classes, this
law is not effective in protecting the rights of Palestinian citizens from
discrimination in employment. Few Arab citizens are employed in government
offices. National identity is usually the reason for excluding Palestinian
workers from these public service positions, although it is often masked by
“neutral” criteria such as the requirement for military service. Such
requirements are often totally irrelevant for the requirements of the
position.