Article 74 December 1996, Issue No.18
December 1996, Issue No.18 (15)
In the first week of December, Israel informed the Palestinian delegation that for technical reasons it would not attend the next round of talks of the Quadripartite Committee on 1967 Displaced Persons scheduled to be held in Gaza on Sunday, 8 and Monday, 9 December 1996. A statement by the three other delegations (Egypt, Jordan, PLO/PA) called on Israel to resume its participation in the next round of talks (UPI, FoFognet/McGill University, Montreal, Canada).
In late November 1996, PLO and PA officials announced that the PLO will boycott most multilateral peace talks to protest Israel’s delay in implementing PLO-Israel interim agreements signed last year. According to Jamil Tarifi, PA Minister of Civil Affairs, all multilateral talks, except the Multilateral Working Group on Refugee Affairs, will be effected by the Palestinian boycott (Reuters, FoFognet/McGill University, Montreal, Canada).
What About the Achievements of the Taba Agreement?
Written by Badil-AICA positive aspect of the September 1995 Taba (Oslo II) Agreement was the fact that it provided - for the first time - for the establishment of procedures for a Palestinian population registry, which - it was hoped - would contribute to securing the residency rights of those already living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
6.1. ”Election IDs” Not Yet Issued
Article II (“The Right to Vote and the Electoral Register”) provides that all persons able to document their presence in the country for a consecutive period of three or four years are permitted to register for the Palestinian elections and would be issued ID cards in the future (Paragraph 1/g/1,2).
In the short period between December 1995 and the January 20, 1996 Palestinian elections, the CAC collected 4,500 applications for such ID cards. 1,000 additional applications reached the CAC after the election deadline, and Israel has so far rejected to include them in the original contingent. By November 1996, none of the applicants had yet received his/her ID card.
Student and Worker’s Visas Issued via the PA - An Option for Few
Written by Badil-AICAccording to the Israeli-Palestinian Agreements, the PA is authorized to process applications for special one-year visas for persons studying or working in the PA areas. Such visas could solve the problem of many, Palestinians and foreigners, who have difficulties in renewing their regular visitor’s permits or visas (see 3. and 4. above).
The CAC has filed applications for professionals working in PA institutions, investors and employees in the private sector (large enterprises only), and local and international NGOs. According to the current procedure, applicants must enter on a regular visitor’s permit or visa, and then submit a work permit application to the local Palestinian Interior Ministry offices. These applications are then transferred to the CAC, which negotiates each case with the Israeli side. In case of Israeli approval, a six-month visa is issued and renewed once for another six months. If the applicant holds a visa which permits entry to East Jerusalem/Israel, his/her work permit will also permit crossing the Israeli checkpoints; if the original visitor’s permit is restricted to the PA areas, the attached work permit does not entitle to enter Jerusalem/Israel. Since the 1995 hand-over of civil affairs in the West Bank, the CAC is confronted with numerous applications by persons claiming to fit this category and is forced to decide each case alone. In order to establish transparent procedures, the CAC calls for the introduction of an “investor’s certificate” which should be designed jointly by Israel, the PA Ministry for Economy and Trade, and the CAC
Foreigners Encounter Problems Renewing their Visa via the PA
Written by Badil-AICThe Bethlehem Interior Ministry has also stated that the Israeli DCO refuses to accept applications for visa extension by foreigners residing in the PA areas. Thus, holders of foreign passports can either try to obtain a renewal directly from the Israeli Interior Ministry but, if refused, are forced to leave the country. According to the CAC, this matter was raised in a recent joint meeting and the Israeli side agreed to return to the former procedure, i.e. to process visa applications transferred to them by the regional Palestinian CAC offices
Expired Visitor’s Permits: Israeli Pressure on the PA
Written by Badil-AICIn March 1996, only three months after the hand-over of civil affairs to the PA, Israel informed the Bethlehem Interior Ministry of 960 persons who were allegedly staying in the area after their visitor’s permit had expired. This although the Cairo Agreement provides for three-month visitor’s permits issued by Israel to be extended by the PA for an additional four months without requiring Israeli consent. In general, the issue of “illegally present” visitors is regularly raised by the Israeli side in joint meetings at all levels. Israel claims that a total of 30,000 persons with expired visit permits are currently staying in the West Vank and Gaza Strip, and has been requesting action to be taken by the PA.
The CAC, on the other hand, has been trying to counter Israeli pressure by preparing detailed case lists based on field research. According to the CAC, the findings show that many of the allegedly illegal over-stayers have either left the country, obtained other types of visas (students, investors) or have been registered as residents. So it would seem that the Israeli figures are exaggerated.
Visitor’s Permits: Israel Refuses Implementation of the Taba Agreement
Written by Badil-AICOriginally, the Taba (Oslo II) Agreement had promised a somewhat less restrictive situation in regard to visitor’s permits issued for Palestinian relatives of residents in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Annex III/Article 28/13 stated that visitor’s permits would be issued throughout the year (not only in the summer season), that applications could be submitted by any relative or friend (not only “first degree” relatives), and that visitor’s permits would allow the holder to enter East Jerusalem and Israel.
However, Palestinian visitors lucky enough to obtain a visitor’s permit, have not been permitted to leave the Gaza Strip or to pass the Israeli checkpoints separating East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank. This has prevented thousands from visiting relatives in Jerusalem or from realizing their dream of praying at the al-Aqsa mosque. According to the CAC, the Israeli chief negotiator on civil affairs, Oren Shahor informed the PA immediately after the signing of the Taba Agreement (September 1995) - in writing - that Israel would not implement this provision of Article 28/13. Since then, CAC negotiators have been trying to obtain an Israeli compromise by offering various new formula (e.g. a special Israel entry visa attached to the visitor’s permit) - but to no avail. PA Interior Ministry staff in Bethlehem expressed the feeling that this Israeli policy was part of a broader Israeli scheme, i.e. to prove to the people that the PA is inefficient: Visitor’s permits issued via the PA do not allow access to East Jerusalem and Israel, its holders are subject to the Israeli imposed military closure, while persons coming from Jordan on an Israel-issued tourist visa are permitted to move freely and even allowed to cross the checkpoints in their private cars.
The only category of “visitors” not encountering problems according to all Palestinian sources are spouses of Palestinian residents covered by the November 1992 Israeli High Court Agreement. Israel continues to renew their six-month visitor’s permits as in the past. However, many of them have not yet received permanent resident status and ID cards, although an 1994 Israeli policy statement explicitly announced such a step.
In order to avoid additional pile-up of visitor’s permit applications in its offices, the Bethlehem Ministry decided to accept no more than a quota of 100 applications per week. Israel’s handling of visitor’s permit applications is similar in other districts, with the exception of Hebron. There, visitor’s permits are being issued even in times when procedures are stopped elsewhere - this could be to show people that the situation is better in areas where Israel is still handling such affairs.
The processing of visitor’s permit applications by Israel has remained disappointingly slow throughout 1996.
Since the November 1995 hand-over, the situation in the Bethlehem District has been as follows:
Applications collected by the Int. Ministry 3,400
Approved by Israel 1,400
Refused by Israel 300
Still pending with Israel* 300
Stored at the Interior Ministry** 1,400
* 300 visitor's permits applications have been pending with the Israeli DCO since April 1996; between mid-August and October 1996, Israel has not processed applications at all.
** Therefore, visitor's permit applications are piling up at the PA Interior Ministry, and the latter has stopped transferring them to the Israeli DCO
Family Reunification: Married in 1995 - United in 2001?
Written by Badil-AICThe procedure of family reunification in the West Bank has come to a standstill since the hand-over of authority to the PA. As of November 1996, the Israeli authorities are exclusively handling family reunification applications which were submitted before the November 1995 hand-over to the PA. All Israeli answers to applications reaching the Bethlehem Ministry thus concern applications from before November 1995. In violation of all promises and agreements in the multilateral and bilateral talks, the Israeli Civil Administration, formerly responsible for this matter, did not provide the PA Ministry with records of these old pending applications. The latter has made efforts to compensate for the missing records by copying and compiling the responses arriving to individual applicants from the Israeli side. In this way, the Bethlehem Ministry has obtained a partial list of these pre-November `95 applications and the pattern of Israeli responses:
Israeli response to family reunification applications (Bethlehem district, 11-95 to 11-96)
preliminary positive 6 (1 dated 92, 2 dated 94, 4 dated 95)
positive, waiting for result of individual investigation 314 (17 from `94 quota, 105 from `95 quota,
192 unknown)
refused 42
received ID 220*
*list submitted by Israel and the PA Interior Ministry; Note: the total number of pending pre-November `95 applications is unknown.
The Israeli DCO-Bethlehem has so far refused to accept any family reunification application dating from 1996. Varying explanations for the halt of family reunification procedures are offered by the parties involved. According to the Bethlehem Interior Ministry, Palestinian liaison officers were informed by the Israeli side that “there is a quota which is full, and in fact it will remain full until the year 2000.” Since the PA Ministry is thus unable to transfer family reunification applications collected from the people to the Israeli DCO, it has taken the drastic decision to stop collecting family reunification applications completely, in order to avoid creating wrong expectations among people.
The CAC, on the other hand, stated that it never received official Israeli notice of the fact that quota for family reunification were full until the year 2000, but it confirmed that Israel is currently handling only pre-1995 applications. Also CAC personnel are dedicating efforts to facilitate the completion of procedures concerning old applications, i.e. mainly those cases which already received positive Israeli answers to their applications, but have not yet been issued ID cards.
A third explanation, supported also by the Israeli side, holds that the problem originates in the rejection by the PA, of the Israeli quota allocated to family reunification (2,000 annually). In protest against the Israeli unwillingness to raise the quota, the PA decided - at the time of the 1995 hand-over - not to collect any new family reunification applications, a step which is perceived to pressure Israel to change or abolish the quota system. Thus, whenever local offices of the PA Interior Ministry not informed of, or in disagreement with this PA strategy, try to transfer applications to the Israeli side, the latter would refuse to receive these applications.
Whatever the exact reason for the problem, the lives of Palestinian residents in the PA areas are strongly effected by the clear bottom line of the matters described above, i.e. the fact that there is no family reunification for newly-wed couples. Whoever married a non-resident spouse after November 1995, is confronted with the fact that s/he will not be able to unite with her/his wife/husband until the turn of the millennium, and even then not for sure. It is important to remember here that the crisis of family reunification in the 1967 occupied territories as such is not new. But whereas in the past, the Israeli Civil Administration was prepared to accept an unlimited number of applications - thus maintaining people’s hopes for a rapid positive answer - the sustenance of (false)hope is now no longer a major Israeli concern.
Palestinian Residency Rights in the Palestinian Self-Rule Areas
AIC - Residency & Refugee Rights Project, International Day of Human Rights, 10 December 1996
This report is based on meetings with Issa al Khdour, Director General/Bethlehem Interior Ministry (8-10-96) and with the Civil Affairs Committee of the PA (Ramallah, 17-10-96, Khaled Salim/Committee for Population Affairs, Muhammad Shqeir/Population Registration-Lost IDs, Hassan Abu Hashish/Family Reunification, Visit Permits) and on AIC field research conducted in 1996. Information provided to the AIC by the PA Interior Ministry describes the situation on the ground. PA Interior Ministry offices are a major address approached by Palestinian residents seeking family reunification, visitor’s permits, ID cards, etc. for local residents. The example of Bethlehem is representative of all other West Bank districts, with the possible exemption of Hebron which is still under Israeli control. PA agenda and strategies of coordination and negotiations with the Israeli side are the arena of the Palestinian Civic Affairs Committee (CAC). Thus, the CAC is a source of background information on the ongoing negotiations which have created the new reality in which both, the PA Interior Ministry and Palestinian residents are forced to act.
Unregistered Children and Spouses Entitled to State Health Insurance - Israeli Sick Fund Refuses to Pay
Written by Badil-AICFollowing an extensive investigation into the policy of the Israeli National Insurance Institute (NII) and the National Sick Fund (Kupat Holim) by the Israeli Physicians for Human Rights (PHR), it was confirmed that persons who are defined as Jerusalem residents by the National Insurance Institute - even if they do not hold identity numbers - are entitled to state health insurance and services (see also ARTICLE 74/16 and 17). However, Palestinian families who were defined as residents by the NII - usually after a lengthy investigation - and then approach the East Jerusalem offices of the National Sick Fund (Kupat Holim) are turned back and fail to obtain health insurance. According to explanations provided to PHR, the reason is technical: the computer system of the National Sick Fund does not allow registration of persons who do not hold an identity number issued by the Israeli Ministry of Interior. PHR emphasizes that all offices of the National Sick Fund who refuse to accept such membership applications are violating Israeli law. It is upon the Sick Fund to provide for a rapid solution, especially since private Israeli insurance companies have since long been able to overcome this technical problem.
The Implications of ID Card Confiscations and the Denial of Family Reunification are that Unregistered Children are Denied Health & Social Welfare Benefits
Written by Badil-AIC(The following is a Summary of Questionnaires done by the Family Adoption Program - Lobby for Palestinian Women’s Rights in Jerusalem)
Total number of questionnaires 37 (all East Jerusalem, except 1)
a.) Types of Problems:
Family Reunification 32
application for: husband 31
wife --
other relative 01 (adult daughter)
17 of these 31 husbands are residents of the West Bank, 14 are Palestinians living in Jordan. Eight of the 31 husbands were actually born in Jerusalem before 1967. In nine cases, the wife’s application for family reunification has already been rejected at least once; 24 families are still waiting to receive the Interior Ministry’s answer.
ID Card Confiscations 08
from husband 03
from wife 04
from child 01 (Interior Ministry refused to issue an ID card to a
registered child)
These eight cases refer to five families. In two families both parents had/are in the process of having their ID card confiscated. In one case, the wife’s application for family reunification for her husband was rejected and then her ID card was confiscated. All of these ID cards were confiscated due to prolonged absence abroad.
b.) Denial of Family Reunification and ID Card Confiscations: Effects on Children (all 37 cases)
Unregistered children 84 (40 of them born in Jerusalem)
Children registered in the West Bank 15 (13 of them born in Jerusalem)
All of these children live in Jerusalem, most of them are enrolled in Jerusalem educational institutions. All of these 99 children will not be issued Jerusalem ID cards once they reach the age of 16; therefore, they will not be allowed to enter live in the city.
c.) Denial of Family Reunification and ID Card Confiscations:
Effects on Health and Social Welfare (all 37 cases)
Health Insurance
Receiving health insurance* 20
Not receiving health insurance 11
Unknown 6
National Insurance
Receiving National Insurance** 5
Not receiving National Insurance 23
Unknown 9
* It must be understood that in most of these cases, insurance covers the registered wife/mother only, and not her unregistered children and husband.
** This includes services such as paid maternity leave, child allowances, pensions for disabled, retirement pensions, etc.
Réfugiés palestiniens et les déplacés internes (IDP)
Centre d’éducation sur la Nakba en Cours
Mobilisation et Intervention
