Appeal (H)On 5 September 2004, Adalah filed an appeal to the Northern District Planning and Building Committee (NDPBC), in accordance with Article 152 of the Planning and Building Law – 1965, on behalf of Mr. 'Adel Sawaed and his wife, Ms. 'Itaf Sawaed, Arab citizens of Israel, against a decision of the Misgav Local Planning and Building Committee (MLPBC) from 4 August 2004. In its decision, the MLPBC refused to grant the Sawaed family a building permit for their private land in Kamoun.
Mr. and Ms. Sawaed and their four children live in Kamoun, a town located in the Galilee, where Mr. Sawaed and other members of the Sawaed family own a plot of land referred to as Plot 1, Block 18850. In the early 1980s, Kamoun was established as a Jewish town and became part of the Misgav Regional Council. According to the town's structural map no. 4389/G, the plot, which is a piece of land within Kamoun, is designated for residential use. Although the MLPBC issued building permits for the surrounding plots of land without any obstacles, it refused to issue a building permit for the Sawaeds on their privately-owned land.
In 1997, the Sawaed family submitted a request for a building permit to construct a new home on their land. From this time until August 2004, the MLPBC refused to examine the permit request, and asked the Sawaed family to prepare many amendments to their request. They were also asked to obtain the Israel Lands Administration's (ILA) consent for the permit, as 0.5m2 of a total of 1,800m2 of the plot covered by the request falls under the ILA’s authority.
On 4 August 2004, after seven years of delay, the MLPBC rejected the Sawaed family's request for a building permit. In its decision, the MLPBC claimed that the ILA and Kamoun's town committee had objected to the request. Among the reasons given for the rejection was that an error had been made when the designation of the land was altered from agricultural to residential, as the drafters of the town’s structural map had not been aware that it was privately owned. The MLPBC further alleged that the structural plan had created a piece of land in shared ownership, but had neglected to re-divide the land, and as a result issuing a building permit would preclude the exploitation of the resultant surplus of jointly-owned land. The decision also stated that plan 217/BM/G, which does not apply to the Sawaed's privately-owned land, altered the roads in the town and invalidated a stretch of road running through the Sawaeds' plot, and that it is therefore without road access and public service infrastructure. At the end of the decision, the MLPBC stated that it would be preferable to relocate the Sawaed family to the village of Kamanah, because their continued residence in Kamoun would create "social problems."
In the appeal, Adalah attorney Suhad Bishara argued that the Sawaed family had tried their utmost over the course of seven years to obtain a building permit. Given its alleged reasonings, it has become apparent that the MLPBC had procrastinated during these years over its decision regarding the permit, in order to prevent the Sawaed family from building a new home in Kamoun. Adalah further contended that, because the MLPBC had not previously mentioned the reasons cited in their decision of 4 August 2004, they had acted improperly.
Adalah added that the MLPBC's decision is arbitrary, not based in the relevant facts or on objective considerations, was drawn up with an inappropriate objective, and is in breach of the Planning and Building Law. Adalah also emphasized that the MLPBC lacks the authority to make this decision, and that it violated the objectors' basic rights, and discriminated against them on the basis of national and/or religious belonging.