The demolitions in Wadi al-Humos: The excuse – security, The strategy –
a Jewish demographic majority
22 July 2019
This
morning, Monday, July 22, 2019, the Israeli authorities began demolishing
buildings in the neighborhood of Wadi al-Humos, the eastern extension of Zur
Baher in East Jerusalem. The move came after the Israeli Supreme Court rejected
the residents’ appeal and ruled there was no legal barrier to the demolitions.
Israel intends to demolish a total of 13 buildings, including at least 14
apartments, the vast majority of which are in various stages of construction.
Until this morning, the buildings were home to two families including 17
people, of which 11 are minors. Some of them were built in Area A, with
building permits issued by the Palestinian Authority, which holds planning
powers in those areas. Wadi al-Humos is outside of Jerusalem’s municipal
boundary and constitutes the mainland reserve for the development of Zur
Baher. The Zur Baher committee estimates that 6,000 people currently live in
that neighborhood – a quarter of the total population of Zur Baher.
In 2003 the Zur Baher committee
petitioned the Supreme Court against the route of the separation fence, which
was set unilaterally by Israel to serve its interests. The route was supposed
to run near Jerusalem's municipal boundary and thereby disconnect all of the
homes of the Wadi al-Humos neighborhood from Zur Baher. Following the petition, the State agreed to reroute the fence a few hundred meters eastward into West
Bank territory. In 2004 and 2005 a “light” version of the separation fence was
erected:. Instead of a concrete wall, as in most of the route of the fence in
East Jerusalem, Israel built a two-lane patrol road with wide shoulders and
another fence. The fence surrounds the neighborhood of Wadi al-Humos, which may
not have been cut off from Zur Baher, but which was cut off from the rest of
the West Bank by the fence, even though the land on which it was built was
never annexed to Jerusalem's municipal territory.
The Wadi al-Humos neighborhood is not
considered part of Jerusalem, and therefore the Jerusalem Municipality does not
provide the neighborhood with services, except for garbage collection. The
Palestinian Authority does not have access to the neighborhood and therefore
cannot provide it with any services, except for the planning and providing
construction permits. The neighborhood's residents built its infrastructures
themselves, including roads and water pipes from Zur Baher and Beit Sahur. On
the southeastern edges of the enclave, which were defined by the Oslo Accords
as areas A and B, the Palestinian Authority has planning and building
jurisdiction. But most of it is defined as Area C, where the Civil
Administration is responsible for the planning, and where, just like in the
rest of the West Bank, it refrains from drawing up outline plans that would
allow the residents to build legally. This Israeli policy, which completely
limits Palestinian construction in East Jerusalem, causes a severe housing
shortage for the city's Palestinian residents, who are forced to build without
permits.
In December 2011, about six years after
the separation fence was erected in the area, the Israeli Military issued an order forbidding construction in a strip measuring 100-300 meters on either
side of the fence. The Military argued such an order was necessary in order to
create an “open barrier area” it needed for its operations because of the Wadi
al-Humos area is a “weak point of illegal entry” from the West Bank into
Jerusalem. According to the Military's figures, at the time the order was
issued, 134 buildings already stood on the land designated as a no-building
zone. Since then dozens of additional buildings were built and by mid-2019
there were already 231 buildings in the zone, including high-risers built only
dozens of meters from the fence, and distributed between areas designated as A,
B and C.
In November 2015 the Military announced
it intended to demolish 15 buildings in Wadi al-Humos. About one year later, in
December 2016, the Military demolished three other buildings in the
neighborhood. In 2017 the owners and tenants of the 15 buildings under the
threat of demolition petitioned the Supreme Court through the Society of St.
Yves – Catholic Center for Human Rights. The petition argued, among other
things, that most of the buildings had been built after receiving building
permits from the Palestinian Authority, and that the owners and tenants were
not even aware of the order prohibiting construction.
During
the hearings on the petition, the Military agreed to cancel the demolition
orders against two of the buildings. As for the 13 other buildings, the
Military announced that for four of them the demolition would be partial. On
June 11, 2019, the Supreme Court accepted the State’s position and ruled that
there was no legal barrier to demolishing the buildings.
The Supreme Court ruling, written by
Justice Meni Mazuz fully accepted the State's framing of the issue as one of
purely security matter. It thereby completely ignored Israel's policy of
limiting Palestinian construction in East Jerusalem, and the planning chaos in
the Wadi al-Humos enclave that allowed the massive construction in the area –
of which the Israeli authorities were fully aware. Like in many past cases, the judges did not discuss in their ruling the
Israeli policy almost completely preventing Palestinian construction in East
Jerusalem, with the purpose of forcing a Jewish demographic majority in the
city – a policy that forces the residents to build without permits. The severe
building shortage in East Jerusalem, including in Zur Baher, was at the basis
of the village's demand to reroute the separation fence eastwards. Instead, the
judges ruled that the home demolitions were necessary for security
considerations because construction near the fence “can provide hiding for
terrorists or illegal aliens” and enable “arms smuggling."
The judgment also clarifies the extent
to which the “transfer of powers” to the Palestinian Authority in areas A and B
as part of the interim agreements has no practical meaning – except for the
need to promote Israeli propaganda. When it serves its own convenience, Israel
relies on that “transfer of powers” to cultivate the illusion that most of the
residents of the West Bank do not really live under occupation and that
actually, the occupation is almost over. Whereas when it is not convenient for
Israel, like in this case, it sets aside the appearance of “self-government,”
raises “security arguments,” and realizes its full control of the entire
territory and all of its residents.
The judges rejected, almost flippantly,
the argument by the petitioners that they did not know of the existence of the order forbidding them to build, and that they built after they relied on
permits they received from the Palestinian Authority and ruled that the
residents “took the law into their own hands." According to the court, the
residents should have known about the order. The judges relied on this point
on the provisions of the order requiring that its contents be brought “as much
as possible” to the knowledge of the residents, among other ways by hanging it,
along with low-resolution, difficult-to-understand maps, in the District
Coordination Office, as well as on the State representatives' arguments before
them. In doing so, the judges completely ignored the relevant facts: that the
Military took no action to bring the order to the knowledge of the residents
before November 2015, that the order was issued years after the construction of
the fence and the construction of the buildings, and even then – nothing was
done for the first years to enforce it, and no real effort was made to ensure
that the residents knew about the existence of the order – not even as obvious
and simple an action such as pasting it to the residents' walls.
This Supreme Court ruling may have
far-reaching implications. In various places in East Jerusalem (such as Dahiat
al-Barid, Kafr Aqab, and the Shuafat Refugee Camp) and other parts of the West
Bank (such as a-Ram, Qalqiliyah, Tulkarm, and Qalandia al-Balad), numerous
residential homes were built near the separation fence. Furthermore, as a
result of the Israeli planning policy that prevents Palestinians from receiving
building permits, many other buildings were built without permits, there being
no other choice. The latest ruling gives Israel legal authorization to demolish
all of these houses while hiding behind “security arguments” in order to
carry out its illegal policy.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario