Israel’s Supreme Court Rejects Request to Suspend Implementation of Laws Aimed at Shutting Down UNRWA Operations

Today, 29 January 2025, Israel’s Supreme Court rejected a request for an interim injunction filed by Adalah along with its petition challenging two laws aimed at shutting down the operations of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). The petition was filed on 16 January 2025 by Adalah on behalf of ten Palestinian refugees who will be severely affected by the laws, together with Gisha – The Legal Center for the Freedom of Movement. The petition argues that these laws violate basic human rights and Israel’s obligations under international law, and that their implementation will lead to catastrophic humanitarian consequences.

CLICK HERE to read the decision [in Hebrew]
CLICK HERE to read more about the petition

CLICK HERE to read an Unofficial translation by Adalah of excerpts from the State’s response to the petition

The decision came after the State and the Knesset submitted their responses to the request for an interim injunction, in which they insisted on the immediate implementation of the laws, set to come into effect tomorrow, 30 January, while disregarding the catastrophic humanitarian consequences. In their response, the authorities dismissed substantial flaws in the solutions put forward by the Jerusalem Municipality, which were clearly detailed in the petition. For instance, concerning education, the Municipality proposed to construct portable classrooms within approximately eight months—an inadequate interim measure that falls far short of providing a viable or sufficient alternative to the essential educational services currently provided by UNRWA.

Regarding healthcare, the respondents claim that, “The medical services provided by UNRWA to eligible individuals are, in most cases, beyond what is included in the health basket to which Israeli citizens are entitled under the National Health Insurance Law.” At the same time, the respondents failed to present any response to critical healthcare services, such as the provision of medication without co-payment, which are part of the services provided by UNRWA and have no equivalent in the Israeli healthcare system. Additionally, they made no reference to social and food security, which are key components of UNRWA’s assistance to Palestinian refugees.

Regarding UNRWA services in the West Bank, Israel denies its obligations as an occupying power, relying on the Oslo Accords to claim that “responsibility for these fields in the West Bank has been delegated to the Palestinian Authority”. The respondents contend that UNRWA’s health services are “limited” compared to those of the Palestinian Authority, asserting that “there is no absolute need for these services and there are alternatives.” This claim overlooks the reality that for hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees, UNRWA clinics provide critical, life-saving medical care. Additionally, the respondents have acknowledged that UNRWA will no longer be able to import medical supplies and medicines through Israel as it did previously.

The respondents also stated that, in accordance with the anti-UNRWA laws, no humanitarian aid is expected to enter Gaza from the agency after 30 January 2025. They estimate a reduction of around 100 aid trucks per day, while asserting that other organizations will be capable of meeting the quota set in the ceasefire deal. This move is poised to exacerbate the already dire humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Adalah’s Legal Director, Dr. Suhad Bishara:

“With the rejection of the petitioners’ request for an interim injunction, a destructive process will begin tomorrow with the enforcement of these laws. The respondents have made it abundantly clear that no  alternatives to UNRWA’s vital aid network in the occupied territory have been identified. The so-called solutions for occupied East Jerusalem are grossly inadequate and will severely disrupt access to critical services. It is deeply troubling that the court failed to issue the interim injunction, which would have maintained the status quo that has been in place for 75 years. The implementation of these laws will cause immense harm to 2.5 million Palestinian refugees and represent a flagrant violation of international law and Israel’s binding international legal obligations.”