Following Adalah's Intervention: Regional Planning and Building Council Cancels Motion for Demolition Order of the Home of Arab Citizen of Israel

On 2 June 2004, the Northern District Planning and Building Committee (NDPBC) rescinded its motion for demolition order without conviction of the home of Mr. Hussein Sawaed, an Arab citizen of Israel.

Mr. Sawaed's house is located near Shafa'amr in the north of Israel. The house was built in 1959, prior to the enactment of the Planning and Building Law - 1965, and the Sawaed family has resided in it since 1972. In 1991, the NDPBC filed a criminal indictment against Mr. Sawaed before the Acre Magistrate Court charging him with illegal building and using agricultural land for residential use in violation of the Planning and Building Law – 1965. During the course of the trial, the indictment was amended and the charge of illegal building was cancelled, as the statute of limitations had expired. After trial, on 9 February 1999, the Magistrate Court decided that Mr. Sawaed was guilty of the charge of using agricultural land for residential purposes. The Court also ruled that Mr. Sawaed could remain in his home for three years and attempt to obtain a permit for residential use. However, the Court also informed the NDPBC that it could file a motion requesting the demolition of Mr. Sawaed's home (although he was not convicted of the offense of illegal building) under Article 212 of the Planning and Building Law – the “Request for Demolition Order Without Conviction” procedure. On 11 October 1999, the NDPBC filed this Article 212 motion. Adalah began representing Mr. Sawaed at this time.

In early 2000, Adalah submitted preliminary arguments to cancel the NDPBC's Article 212 motion, contending that the charge violates Mr. Sawaed's right to property and unreasonably prevents him from getting a permit for residential use of the house. On 19 December 2002, Adalah filed supplemental arguments in the case. By filing the Article 212 motion a few months after the Court's decision in 1999, Adalah argued that the NDPBC did not act in good faith, and that the motion should be cancelled as it was filed too late - 40 years after the home was built.

On 30 January 2003, the Magistrate Court decided that: (1) Three years has passed since the 1999 Court ruling on the case and thus, Mr. Sawaed is not permitted to use the house for residential purposes as he did not obtain a permit. Thus, the arguments relating to the violation of property rights and bad faith were rejected; and (2) the late filing of the Article 212 motion – 40 years after the house was built – is an issue for trial.

During the 17 May 2004 hearing, the NDPBC argued that it is not actually known whether or not Mr. Sawaed's home was built without a building permit, and therefore a demolition order must be issued, as Mr. Sawaed and his family continue to reside in their home despite the aforementioned 1999 ruling. Adalah attorney Suhad Bishara contended that the NDPBC is obligated to prove that an offense of illegal building did indeed occur, as a pre-condition of issuing the requested demolition order.

Furthermore, Adalah contended that there is no cause for issuing a demolition order, since the land upon which the home is built is private land, and the home of Mr. Sawaed does not create any nuisance or obstacle to development or to any vital public interest. Adalah further argued that filing the motion to issue a demolition order without a conviction, based on the 1999 Court ruling which prohibited residential use, demonstrates a lack of good faith on the part of the NDPBC, and was aimed at pressuring Mr. Sawaed and his family into leaving their home and land.

Following the hearing, the NDPBC filed a motion to rescind its “Request for Demolition Order Without Conviction”, which was accepted by the Court.