Yesh Din
Volunteers for Human Rights
Petition: Annul military requisition orders preventing Burka residents from returning to their land
12/19/2011
The council head of the Palestinian village of Burka and six of its residents petitioned today the High Court of Justice to order the IDF and the Civil Administration to annul the military requisition orders that prevent the Palestinian land owners from returning to their land after the settlement of Homesh, which was built on their land illegally in the first place, was evacuated in 2005 as part of the "disengagement plan."
The petition, submitted by lawyers Michael Sfard, Shlomi Zachary and Avisar Lev of Yesh Din's legal team, asks the court to order the Chief of the Central Command and the Civil Administration to show cause "why they should not annul the requisition orders … and why the rights and possession of the land that is the subject of the requisition orders should not be restored to those who were its right holders and occupants before the requisition or to their heirs."
The petition argues that the land upon which the settlement of Homesh was built was requisition for military necessities in 1978. Those military necessities changed a short time later and instead of the Nahal outpost a civilian settlement named Homesh was built on the site. After the settlement was evacuated in 2005 the area became a closed military area for Israeli citizens and the requisition orders were not annulled even though the original necessity for which they were issued was canceled.
For the last six years, since the settlement of Homesh was evacuated, the land has continued to be occupied for military necessities even though there aren't any, and the land owners are barred from accessing their land and cultivating it.
The petitioners explain in the petition that "the 'urgent and imperative' military necessity no longer exists. There is no military base in the area; because of its location and because of the evacuation of the Israeli settlements from the sector it does not constitute a security measure for such settlements; at the very most, Israeli trespassers and military zone order violators access it periodically."
The petition goes on to say that "unfortunately for the petitioners and disgracefully for the state, the respondents are not returning the land to its owners and so, while lawbreakers from the occupying population continue to visit the site under the protection of the inadequate enforcement and in violation of orders issued by the respondents themselves, the owners are barred from enjoying their property." Therefore, the petition claims, the respondents have no choice, and are in fact obligated, to order the annulment of the requisition orders and return to the petitioners the possession of their land free of any object as it was right before it was seized by the respondents."
Press release
Petition Summary
The petition, submitted by lawyers Michael Sfard, Shlomi Zachary and Avisar Lev of Yesh Din's legal team, asks the court to order the Chief of the Central Command and the Civil Administration to show cause "why they should not annul the requisition orders … and why the rights and possession of the land that is the subject of the requisition orders should not be restored to those who were its right holders and occupants before the requisition or to their heirs."
The petition argues that the land upon which the settlement of Homesh was built was requisition for military necessities in 1978. Those military necessities changed a short time later and instead of the Nahal outpost a civilian settlement named Homesh was built on the site. After the settlement was evacuated in 2005 the area became a closed military area for Israeli citizens and the requisition orders were not annulled even though the original necessity for which they were issued was canceled.
For the last six years, since the settlement of Homesh was evacuated, the land has continued to be occupied for military necessities even though there aren't any, and the land owners are barred from accessing their land and cultivating it.
The petitioners explain in the petition that "the 'urgent and imperative' military necessity no longer exists. There is no military base in the area; because of its location and because of the evacuation of the Israeli settlements from the sector it does not constitute a security measure for such settlements; at the very most, Israeli trespassers and military zone order violators access it periodically."
The petition goes on to say that "unfortunately for the petitioners and disgracefully for the state, the respondents are not returning the land to its owners and so, while lawbreakers from the occupying population continue to visit the site under the protection of the inadequate enforcement and in violation of orders issued by the respondents themselves, the owners are barred from enjoying their property." Therefore, the petition claims, the respondents have no choice, and are in fact obligated, to order the annulment of the requisition orders and return to the petitioners the possession of their land free of any object as it was right before it was seized by the respondents."
Press release
Petition Summary