|
Following an order nisi issued by the Supreme Court of Israel on a petition filed by Adalah and petitions submitted by other human rights organizations against the expansion of the scope of the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law and the extension of its applicability, the state presented its response to the court on Sunday, 3 August 2008.
In its response, the state claimed that the position of the General Security Services (GSS or the Shabak) is that employing sweeping individual examination of family reunifications, without conducting preliminary screenings according to “risk profiles” (specifications determined by the State of Israel for deciding who poses a security threat to the state), is impracticable and ineffective, and will not substantially diminish the definite risk to human life. The state also claimed that the procedures currently stipulated in the law are not sweeping, but are based on “risk profiles”, and that the Supreme Court should dismiss the petition as the court resolved the issue when it ruled on it two years ago, and there is therefore no need to reconsider the constitutionality of the law.
According to the law, Palestinians who marry Israeli citizens can obtain no legal status in Israel, and therefore the law prevents the citizens of the state, and in practice Arab citizens of Israel, from exercising their right to family life in their own country. In March 2007, the Knesset approved an additional extension to the law. The Knesset also expanded the text of the law to include citizens of states defined by Israel as “enemy states” – Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran – as well as anyone living in an area in which operations are taking place that threaten the security of Israel and its citizens, according to the Israeli security services dictates. In the beginning of July 2008, the government decided to add the Gaza Strip to this list. While the law is defined as a “temporary order,” it has been extended eight times since it was first enacted in 2003. On 1 July 2008, the Knesset approved the extension of the law for another year until July 2009, by a majority vote of 21 to 8.
In its response to the state, Adalah argued that Israel is dealing with Palestinians living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) and the citizens of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran as potential terrorists. “This classification is racist, and was made purely on the basis of the ethnic origin of residents and citizens of Arab and Islamic countries. There is no other country in the world that deprives people from exercising the right to family life based on national or ethnic affiliation, as Israel does,” Adalah emphasized.
Adalah Attorneys Hassan Jabareen and Sawsan Zaher argued in response that the amendment to the Citizenship law creates three hierarchical tracks of naturalization in the State of Israel. The first, highest track, is for Jewish people, who can gain citizenship immediately and automatically under the Law of Return – 1950. The second track is for foreigners to whom the graduated procedure applies, allowing them to obtain Israeli residency or citizenship status over a four-year period from the date of submitting the application. The third, lowest track, is for Palestinian residents of the OPT, and nationals of Iran, Iraq, Syria or Lebanon, who are banned from receiving legal status in Israel. “The creation of these three ethnically-based tracks as a result of the amended Citizenship and Entry into Law stand in contradiction of the principle of equality of all citizens and residents, and of prior rulings of the Israel Supreme Court.”
Adalah will shortly submit an expert opinion to the Supreme Court written by international organizations and legal experts, which confirms that international law prohibits any country from precluding the entry of non-citizens solely on the basis of their ethnicity and nationality. In addition, this opinion will review the laws of other countries and will show how courts in various countries have prohibited the imposition of restrictions on the reunification of spouses because of their ethnic or national belonging.
The government first imposed the ban on family reunification in May 2002, and the Knesset approved the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law in July 2003. Following the law’s enactment, Adalah and other human rights organizations, including the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, petitioned the Supreme Court to revoke the law. In 2006, the Supreme Court rejected the petitions, but the majority of the justices found that the law violated constitutional rights. Since the Supreme Court’s decision, the Knesset has twice extended the law. The last extension was passed despite petitions pending before the Supreme Court, including a new petition filed by Adalah in May 2007, demanding the annulment of the law. In the petition, Adalah argued that the legislator did not respect the ruling of the majority of the Supreme Court justices and misinterpreted it as allowing the continuation of the violation of constitutional rights. In June 2008, the Supreme Court issued an order nisi obliging the state to explain its decision not to rescind the law.
H.C. 830/07, Adalah v. The Minister of the Interior, et al.
The State's Response (Hebrew)
|
