In a press conference held in Qalandia Refugee Camp on Thursday, 20-3-1997, the local Coordinating Committee of the Campaign for the Defense of Refugee Rights presented its aims and program to the media, thus marking the official start of their campaign.
The Campaign for the Defense of Refugee Rights - to be launched in the West Bank - is a local expression of the awakening of Palestinian refugees in the region triggered by the concern for their future in the framework of the Oslo Process. Earlier this year, Palestinian refugees in both Lebanon and Syria conducted strikes and protest pickets against the cuts in UNRWA services and salaries, and the Department of Palestinian Affairs in the Jordanian Foreign Ministry warns of violent protests which may arise also among the 1.3 million refugees living in Jordan, unless the international policy of dismantling UNRWA is reversed.
-Once a family reunification application is approved, the candidate is issued a B-1 visa, valid for 27 months, which allows him/her to stay and work in Jerusalem.
-Later on he/she is issued a three year visa (category A-5).
-Only then, after five years and three months, the probation period is finished and the candidate is issued the blue ID card identifying him/her as a permanent resident of Israel with access to state welfare services.
In 1995, the Alternative Information Center, supported by ACRI and the Israeli Coalition for the Freedom of Information filed a High Court petition against the Israeli Ministry of Interior, demanding access to data on ID card confiscations and family reunification in East Jerusalem. In May 1996, the Ministry - in an apparent effort to convince the NGOs to withdraw their petition - released partial information concerning family reunification (see ARTICLE 74/16). At that time, the Ministry refused to release information on the matter of lost residency rights, arguing that, “it was impossible to conduct a statistical examination using our computers”. The petitioners were skeptical regarding this claim and decided to continue the legal procedures.
In a preliminary hearing of the case on 27 February 1997, the Ministry offered to cooperate in providing the requested data, if the petitioners are willing to cover expenses involved in the computer processing of the data (approximately US $1,000). This because, the Interior Ministry representative argued, data on lost residency cannot be accessed with the computer programs currently used by the Ministry. The petitioners accepted this offer in principle, however negotiations over the actual costs involved and to be paid are not yet completed.
On Thursday, 13 March 1997, elected representatives of the village Bir ‘Ona and their lawyer, Atty. Lea Tsemel met with Jerusalem Major Ehud Olmert in order to discuss the practical implications of the 1967 annexation of Bir ‘Ona by Israel. The village of Bir ‘Ona, numbering approximately 50 families, is located on the slopes of Gilo settlement, on the border on the West Bank town Beit Jala. When Israel, in 1967, drew the borders of the occupied Palestinian lands to be annexed to Jerusalem, Bir ‘Ona was included on the Israeli side. However, it seems that for years the Israeli Ministry of Interior and the Jerusalem Municipality did not know of the existence of the village Bir ‘Ona, and its residents were not recognized as “residents of Israel”.
In January 1997, the High Court rejected an appeal by Fares Bustani, aged 47, a Jerusalemite living in Jordan and still holding a valid Jerusalem ID. Bustani, represented by Atty. Usama Halabi, had argued that although he went to Jordan to seek work, he continued to return to Palestine at least once a year for the 20 years he lived outside, and he was never informed that a valid re-entry visa would not protect his residency rights in the city. The Court, however, accepted the Interior Ministry’s argument that physical presence, i.e. “center of life”, was the precondition for the status of permanent residency in Israel. A similar ruling defeated another case represented by Atty. Andre Rosental in March 1997.
Atty. Lea Tsemel and Atty. Eliahu Abrams, on behalf of ACRI, AIC, DCI-Israel, HaMoked and PHR, are currently engaged in a new effort for challenging the Ministry’s policy in the High Court. They argue that their clients possessed valid Israel re-entry visas when their permanent residency status was revoked, and that they had never been informed of the fact that their valid documents were insufficient to protect their residency rights in Jerusalem. The petitioners will support their argument by means of affidavits collected from former Ministry and Jerusalem municipality personnel confirming that the policy - until 1994 - was to renew travel documents regularly, to consider holders of valid documents residents of Israel, even if they overstayed the seven-year time limit set by the law, and that no announcement was ever made prior to the change of this procedure. The petitioners believe that challenges of the new policy of ID card confiscations in the Israeli courts, conducted in coordination with human rights organizations, are correct and important, despite the failures of the past. This especially since dozens of petitions by private Israeli lawyers, not familiar with the matter, are currently scheduled with the State Attorney’s office.
The NGO Lobby expresses its deep satisfaction of the fact that two major Israeli human rights organizations, B’tselem and HaMoked, have decided that the issue of ID card confiscations is serious enough to justify special campaign efforts.
We wish B’tselem and HaMoked great success in their public campaign “STOP THE SILENT DEPORTATION” to be officially launched with a press conference on 7-4-1997.
“The Minister of Interior, Mr. Eliyahu Suissa, requested that I confirm receipt of your letter of December 16, 1996 and advise you that the Ministry does not revoke residency of permanent residents in general and of East Jerusalem in particular.
Your petition may relate to persons who left Israel and lived elsewhere for seven years or took citizenship of another country. Under these circumstances there is no revocation of residency but rather expiration.
This according to the Law of Entry Into Israel and the regulations pursuant to this law as well as the rulings of the supreme Court of Israel. These rules have been in effect for many years and there have been no recent changes.”
Sincerely,
Tova Elinson (signed)
Spokesperson, Ministry of the Interior
Date: 5-2-1997
On 11 December 1996, MK ‘Azmi Bishara (National Democratic Alliance), submitted the following parliamentary questions (# 434) to the Minister of Interior, Eli Suissa:
“Recently, Israeli identity cards and with them the residency rights in the city were taken from many inhabitants of East Jerusalem. I would like to ask:
As in the case of the new Israeli settlement on Abu Ghneim Mountain, the Israeli government is stubbornly ignoring local and international protests in regard to another blatant violation of Palestinian rights in Jerusalem, i.e. the confiscation of ID cards from Palestinian residents of the city. The first three months of 1997 were, in fact, characterized not only by Israeli disregard of the growing international criticism, but by the introduction of even more drastic measures against Palestinian residency rights in the city.
Among the new measures is a standard letter addressed to a large number of Jerusalemites living in West Bank communities outside the city, sent via registered mail by the Interior Ministry to inform them that their “permanent residency permit in Israel has expired”; and search-visits to Palestinian homes conducted by investigators of the Israeli National Insurance Institute. Both measures indicate that the Israeli authorities are proceeding from a “passive role”, in which ID cards would be revoked from Palestinian residents who personally approached the Ministry with a specific request (e.g. travel document, family reunification), towards a more active role, in which the Ministry actually initiates ID card confiscations based on its own records and assumptions.
By March 1997, the Interior Ministry was confiscating two or three ID cards per day (see official figures, below), and the future ahead promises worse. The Ministry’s policy of ID card confiscations - unless stopped in time - may develop to unprecedented proportions in the second half of 1997. Then the Ministry will begin to replace all current ID cards in Israel with new versions of magnetic, computerized ID cards. At that point, every Palestinian Jerusalemite will be forced to approach the Population Registry in order to submit his/her application for a new identity card - a unique opportunity for a full-fledged and comprehensive revision of personal files ...
In the meantime, the Interior Ministry continues denying any policy change and claiming that ID card confiscations are “usual and correct bureaucratic procedure.” However, Israeli politicians - questioned for the first time in a major Israeli TV-news program - have taken a much clearer stand. Uri Savir, legal advisor to the prime minister in the former Labor government and architect of the Oslo Accords, agrees with Ehud Olmert, Jerusalem mayor/Likud in that the revocation of Palestinian residency rights in Jerusalem is part and parcel of the Oslo process. Both the Labor and the Likud government have taken concrete measures aimed at establishing the unilaterally defined borders of Israeli sovereignty; and “the division of Palestinian Jerusalemites between those who will be permitted to live in Israel - controlled Jerusalem and those who will not, is a logical consequence of establishing the necessary borders between the Israeli State and the Palestinian entity.” (Uri Savir and Ehud Olmert in Israeli TV-Channel 1, 30-3-1997).
Revocation of Residency via Registered Mail
The following letter is currently being sent to hundreds of Palestinian Jerusalemites who - due to the lack of adequate housing and the denial of family reunification - were forced to live in West Bank communities outside the Israel-defined municipal borders of occupied and annexed East Jerusalem:
Date:
To: [name of East Jerusalem permanent resident]
[his/her address in Jerusalem]
Dear Sir/Mdme,
re: [name of the above person] ID number __________
Expiration of permanent residency permit
We hereby inform you that your permanent residency permit has expired according to the Law of Entry to Israel 1952 and the Entry to Israel Regulations 1974,
due to the fact that you transferred the center of your life outside of Israel.
Moreover, also the residency permit of the following family members has expired:
___________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
Based on the above, you are requested to return your ID card and your travel document to the office of the population registry in Jerusalem and to leave Israel.
Yours sincerely,
Aharon Louzon [signed]
Director
As of now, the Ministry insists that, “We are not spying on East Jerusalem residents, and there are no systematic checks, by means of computers, on who fulfills the criteria and who not ... However, when a person approaches the Population Registry with a request, such as an application for a new ID card, the registration of a newborn child, family reunification, etc., we check if this person really lives in the city” (Malka San/office of the Legal Advisor to the Ministry of Interior to Ha’aretz, 17-3-1997).
However, the Interior Ministry’s spokeswoman admitted that once it is discovered that the residency permit of a Palestinian applicant for one of the Ministry’s services has “expired”, the Ministry now also looks into the legal situation of the rest of his/her family. Once the resident status of a person is doubted by the Ministry, it is upon him/her to refute these doubts. “If you live in the country, you don’t have a problem proving it - you are paying municipal tax, your children are registered in a Jerusalem school, you are entitled to National Insurance, etc. Therefore it seems reasonable to us to raise this demand”, says the Ministry’s spokeswoman (Ha’aretz, 17-3-1997).
Information about recipients of this letter gathered in the framework of legal aid services suggests that the Interior Ministry does not thoroughly check personal records prior to mailing, but sends this letter to everybody who will - according to the Ministry’s assumption - later on have difficulty proving “center of life’ in the city. Thus this letter was received by Palestinian Jerusalemites who had lived abroad in the past, but returned to Jerusalem as many as five years ago, and by persons who never left the city by themselves, but have close relatives living abroad or in the West Bank, outside the city boundaries.
Night-time Raids by National Insurance Investigators
Palestinian inhabitants of Jerusalem and human rights organizations report that investigators of the National Insurance Institute (NII), accompanied by Israeli Border Police, have been raiding private Palestinian homes in the middle of the night. Such raids were reported from residents of al Ram, located on the northern boundaries of the city, but also from residents living in neighborhoods within the city boundaries (St. Yves Resource and Legal Aid Center, 24-2-1997). NII investigators, hired to determine whether a Palestinian family actually lives in Jerusalem and is thus entitled to state welfare services, function also as major informants to the Interior Ministry. NII investigators, in fact, criticize that the Ministry is slow to take action based on NII field information, and claim that many Palestinian families are issued ID cards, despite NII reports documenting that they live outside the city boundaries (Israeli TV/Channel 1, 30-3-1997).
Case: Faten Ya’qoub Abu Khdeir
Faten is a 24 year old Jerusalemite, born and raised in Jerusalem, living in Shu’fat/Jerusalem with her mother and sisters, and currently working with an international NGO in the city. She has never left the country. In December 1996, she applied for an exit permit at the Interior Ministry in order to travel to Jordan to visit relatives there. At the Ministry, her ID card was confiscated and she was told that she would only receive it back, if she could bring documents proving that she has been living in the city since birth. This, the clerk explained, was necessary because Faten’s father has been living in the United States for more than 15 years and is no longer a permanent resident of Israel. By the end of March 1997, Faten - still without her identity card - had collected all the required documents in order to approach the Ministry another time.
Case: A 17 Year Old Youth, Living and Studying in Jerusalem, Cannot Prove “Center of Life” in the City
Abdel-Hamid Samra is 17 years old and carries a Jerusalem ID card. He lives with his father, a Jerusalem resident, in Kufr Aqab, the northern edge of Jerusalem (outside the al Ram checkpoint, but within the municipal boundaries of the city); since September 1996, he has been studying at Ort College in East Jerusalem/Sheikh Jarrah.
The family had lived in Amman for several years. Abdel Hamid’s father returned to Jerusalem two years ago and has since been working with an Israeli company in Nazareth. His mother and the rest of the family remained in Jordan.
In November 1996, while crossing the al Ram checkpoint into Jerusalem, Abdel Hamid was asked by a soldier to show his ID card. The soldier tore the plastic cover and told him to have his ID renewed at the Interior Ministry. He went to apply for the renewal of his ID on 3 November 1996. He had to hand in his old ID, was given a receipt, and asked to come back after two weeks. Two weeks later, he was told to come back on 12 December 1996. When he went to the Interior Ministry the second time in order to receive his new ID card, he was asked to prove that he lived in Jerusalem by presenting his Arnona (municipal tax) receipts issued on his father’s name and his school certificates. Abdel Hamid cannot present the requested Arnona receipts, because he and his father are living in the home of his grandfather, which is registered on the name of the father’s sister.