ETHNIC CLEANSING IN JERUSALEM
THE CASE OF IDENTITY CARD LOSS

Since 1948, the Israeli occupation has sought to fragment the Palestinians (who still living in Palestine) into three groups, and to simultaneously create a legal condition pertinent to each ( especially concerning the issue of citizenship).

First: Palestinians living within the green line in the lands occupied in 1948.

Second: Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza (under Military Occupation).

Third: Palestinians living in East Jerusalem.

Recently, and after the Oslo Accord were signed in 1993, these three groups were complimented by a fourth, that being, people living in the Palestinian National Authority areas ( apart from refugees).

What concerns us, when discussing the issue of withdrawing Jerusalmites' ID cards is the Jerusalemites resident in Jerusalem and how the Israeli occupation hurried to exploit issues of residency and citizenship in Jerusalem with the aim of tipping the demographic balance to their own advantage. They also aimed at increasing the numerical proportion of Jewish residents in the Eastern Part, simultaneous to geographic Judaization through land confiscation, settlement building, house confiscation, etc...

Jerusalem's Cadastral and Israeli Annexation:-

In order to comprehend the demographic struggle, through the procedure of withdrawing identity cards and expelling residents, we shall very briefly refer to Jerusalem's geographic status. The area within the borders of the previously Jordanian East Jerusalem is 8.5% of 71 thousand dunums. However, Israel remained dissatisfied with this area after occupying and annexing the city.

It continued to expand this area according to its plan for a Greater Jerusalem, by annexing 28 Arabs villages. Villages and neighborhoods from the cities of Al-Bireh, Bethlehem, and Beit Jala up to an area of 70.5 km, whereby Jerusalem came to represent an area of 27-28% of the West Bank. This was made evident in a report prepared in 1993 by the International Committee for Inter-Nongovernmental Organization Coordination on occupied East Jerusalem.

After signing the Oslo accord in 1993, it was noted that efforts were intensified to establish further settlements in ( Greater Jerusalem ); the latest of which were ratifying the plans to build in Abu Ghneim. This was carriedont attempts to introduce greater numbers of Jewish residents into these settlements in order to achieve the Israeli aim of rendering Jewish numbers in Eastern Jerusalem surpass Arab numbers in a manner that would eventually affect the future political settlement concerning Jerusalem.

It is also relevant to note that Israel intends to annex new neighborhoods to Jerusalem, especially from the south towards Bethlehem and Beit Jala. This being according to a policy of adding new neighborhoods have no Palestinian Arabs or that have very few Palestinian residents, while at the same time encouraging Jerusalemites to build North of the city towards Rammalah in Al-Ram and Dahiet Al Barid, Samiramis and others, to say today that residents of these areas are outside Jerusalem's municipal boundaries according to the criterion that defines a Jerusalmite in the ministry of Interior.

Withdrawal of Jerusalemite's Ids:

After the Israeli occupation of East Jerusalem in 1967, the Israeli Authorities took expedient measures to carry out a census of Arab residents living in it, according to which the number of residents with the right to live there was determined. Thousands of Palestinians were denied this right, not only because they were displaced as a result of the '67 war but also because they were outside the city for a variety of reasons during the census.

This was accompanied by the creation of a special bureau subsidiary to the Israeli Ministry of Interior in East Jerusalem to follow up matters of residency particular to Arabs in the city. This bureau has been and still is the consecutive Israeli governments' tool for implementing policies of judiazing the city demographically and geographically.

The problem of Palestinian citizenship in Jerusalem stems from the Israeli interpretation of a Jerusalemite. This is clearly evident through implementing the law of permanent residency issued in 1952 and its amendments in 1974. Israel considers Palestinians resident in Jerusalem as mere residents in the state of Israel and not citizens. Thus, they have no rights as citizens, but have to shoulder the commitments of residency.

We can sense this view towards Palestinians in Jerusalem from the decisions by the High Court of Justice, the most prominent of which was the one mentioned in decision no # 88\282 concerning the appeal presented by Mubarak Awad, who had the right to residency according to the Israeli interpretation. However, the court decided to expatriate him, whereby the judge noted in his decision ( permanent residence is granted to East Jerusalemites in exactly the same manner as it is given to any foreigner).

Cancelling Permanent residency According to Order no 11 of 1974:

The Israeli law, in congruence with the Regulations for Entry into Israel,as was previously mentioned, is applicable to the right of residency for Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem, noting loss of residency in the following cases:-

(refer to article 11 of the regulations for entry into Israel)

1. If the minister of Interior places any condition that is inapplicable.

2. If there is any alteration of the travel document, that is, if the right of permanent residency was given by a person who does not possess the authority to implement such a change.

3. If the person who possesses the right to permanent residency leaves Israel and settles abroad.

Moving to another state outside of Israel is applicable in 3 cases those being:- (refer to ordinance 11(A) of Regulations for Entry into Israel for 1974).

A. Living outside Israel for more than 7 years.

B. Becoming a permanent citizen of another country.

C. Applying for citizenship in another country.

Utilizing these laws and other directives or instructions issued by the Israeli Ministry of Interior, recently Israel has started to withdraw Jerusalemites' identity cards, to suspend applications for re-unification of Palestinian families and to refuse to register children of Jerusalemite mothers... etc. That being to serve its policy of evacuating the city of its Arab residents.

Observations Relevant to Comprehending the Reality of Withdrawing Jerusalemites' Identity Cards:

- It is known that the Jerusalemite who wants to go abroad has to obtain a departure permit.

This permit is valid for three years. That is, the person who leaves the city utilizing such a permit has to return within three years of departure and is permitted to renew it for another three years. If he does not return during this period he loses his right to residency.

(Those who leave by an Israeli travel document (Laissez Passé) have to return within a year of departure).

This policy is still being used by the Israeli Ministry of Interior concerning those travelling abroad. It was officially declared by the Ministry of Interior's spokesperson in March 1994 in an interview with " Al- Nahar" wherein she stated:

(That her ministry will withdraw the identity cards of those resident outside the city for seven consecutive years).

- In addition to that the Ministry of Interior's policy until mid 1995 saw the possibility of dealing with Palestinian reunification applications and registering children born to Jerusalemite mothers married to persons from outside of Jerusalem, if the large number of documents demanded by the Ministry of Interior from the applicant, were available.

- Conditions driving Jerusalemites to Residency Outside the Municipal Boundaries:

* Confiscation of Arab land in the city.

* Inability to build, considering the unavailability of plans for building in East Jerusalem, as most of the lands are considered " green" zones in which it is not allowed to build.

In addition to demolishing houses built without license.

* East Jerusalemites are denied the basic services as data indicates (in a report published in "Ha'artez", an Israeli newspaper, on 4th May 1994) that only 2% of the municipality's budget was invested in the infrastructure of East Jerusalem. While this municipality levies massive sums from Arab citizens.

* Marriage to women or men from outside of Jerusalem and refusal of their applications for family reunification or delay of response to such applications and refusal of granting a permit for residence with the spouse from Jerusalem, has driven the husband or wife to reside outside the city.

* As mentioned previously, by allowing Jerusalemites to build in the direction of Ramallah and Al Bireh and especially in Al- Ram, Dahiet Al Barid, im Alsharayet, Semiramis and others.

Why Has the Implementation of Order 11 of 1974 Been Delayed Until Today?

Delaying discussion of the Jerusalem issue, according to the Oslo Accord signed by the PLO and Israel, and transferring discussion of the refugee issue to the joint committee formed by Jordan, Egypt, Israel and Palestine gave Israel the opportunity to find provisions from within the framework of its occupational laws to help achieve its policy of evacuating the Holy City.

After taking the previously mentioned measures, Israel drove Jerusalemites to living outside Jerusalem's municipal boundaries and allowed them to travel abroad and return, as mentioned in our discussion of the departure permits. Thus it pushed them into a trap, as it added the expression "center of life" as a basis for Jerusalemites' retention of their residency.

Thereby, it became obligatory for each applicant for documents from the Bureau of the Ministry of Interior in East Jerusalem, for whatever purpose the application may be, to present verification of residency in Jerusalem (a long list of applications: receipts for Arnona (kind of tax), water and electricity bills, papers concerning the children's vaccination, and documents to prove that children are studying in Jerusalem), whereby if these certifications do not meet the requirements, assent or convictions of the Ministry of Interior it is possible to confiscate any Jerusalemite's identity card and cancel his residency.

This policy was extended to initially include the Jerusalemtes living abroad, who are trapped when returning via border reentry points and requested to refer to the Ministry of Interior, where their identity cards are withdrawn on the pretext that their "center of life" is not in Jerusalem any more. In addition to exploiting the fact that they are unable to provide the afore mentioned list of documents to prove residency in Jerusalem.

This policy has now started to affect Jerusalemites living outside Jerusalem's city limits ; where the Israeli authorities have initiated sudden raids on some villages around Jerusalem, in order to confiscate the identity cards of Jerusalemites residing in these areas, on the pretext that their "center of life" is outside the city. This measure could also be extended to apply to between 50-60 thousand Jerusalemites who were impelled by Israel, as explained previously, to live outside Jerusalem's municipal boundaries.

But why has the Ministry of Interior still not declared these Policies officially? And why has it not published any instructions prior to their implementation on Jerusalemites to give them an opportunity to put their affairs in order?

It is relevant to note, that the Ministry of Interior has not yet officially declared this policy either by publishing its response to local journalists' comments, who queried the issue, or to the queries raised by some Israeli Kenesset members to the Israeli Minister of Interior.

On the contrary Israeli denial of this policy even included the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who responded, when on one of his visits to Jordan, to a question on the issue of identity card withdrawal, that they were withdrawing counterfeit identity cards only.

Lack of open declaration of this policy indicates the weak political and legal position upon which Israel depends, in this case, as adopting order 11 of 1974 as a basis for this policy is extremely weak from the legal point of view, since it can be easily contested and appealed at the Israeli High Court of Justice. However, experience of this court's rulings indicates that it ratifies most of the appeals presented, concerning measures taken by the racist Israeli government. Thus, it is seen more as a political court than a legal one. In addition to the fact that, there are previous decisions on the same issue, which make appeal to this court a perilous course.

New Measures Taken Towards Jerusalemite Couples:

We would like to draw attention to the fact that spouses married to individuals from outside of Jerusalem were the first victims of the new Israeli policy concerning withdrawing Jerusalemite ID cards.

As, since the latest closure which began in February 1996, it was not allowed for any husband carrying a West Bank or Gaza ID married to a wife carrying a Jerusalem ID, to get a permit from the occupation authorities in order to meet with their wives in Jerusalem. Whereas the previous policy had been to grant permits for entry into Jerusalem to a person married to a woman from Jerusalem.

When a lawyer interfered to reveal the new policy, and to emphasize that implementing such a policy attacked the sanctity of marital life and barred freedom of movement......

The Israeli response issued by the Bureau of Justice in the West Bank was as follows:

"Pursuant to the alleviating military closure, it has been decided that mere marriage to an Israeli does not form a basis for granting permits to leave the West Bank and Gaza into Israel. As to the claim concerning the sanctity of marital life, no one has prevented the conservation of this sanctity in the West Bank and Gaza. From now on, no permits will be issued for exit from the West Bank and Gaza into Israel for those who have applied for family reunification, the permit will only be issued pursuant to approval of the application, that being an interim procedure before granting permanent residency".

This means that in light of preventing the husband to follow his wife and live in Jerusalem and the wife's obligation to live with her husband in the West Bank or Gaza, the wife will be exposed to having her Jerusalem ID withdrawn and her residency canceled on the pretext that her " Center of life" has moved outside the city ( as explained previously when discussing " center of life").

This means refusing any application for family reunification of husbands or wives, where the basic condition for approval of these applications is residency and work in Jerusalem.

The Position Taken by International Law Concerning ID Withdrawal:-

Israeli authorities cannot utilize the law of Entry into Israel and apply it on Palestinians in Jerusalem or exploit it to deny thousands of Arab citizens their right to reside there. As the general provisions of international law do not recognize the legitimacy of such a law or the legitimacy of the sum of measures built upon it .

Jerusalem is an integral part of Palestinian lands occupied after 1967 by armed military force, therefore the provisions of the Geneva convention for 1949 should be applied to all these lands, as Israel ratified this accord on 6-7-1951.

In addition according to the provisions of article six of the fourth Geneva convention the occupied territories, including Jerusalem should enjoy protection provided by the provisions of this convention, which stipulates:

(The present convention shall apply from the outset of any conflict or occupation mentioned in article 2. In the territory of parties to the conflict, the application of the present convention shall cease one year after the general close of military operations; however the Occupying Power shall be bound, for the duration of the occupation, to the extent that such power exercises the functions of government in such territory, by the provisions of the following articles of the present convention: 1 to 12, 27, 29 to 34, 47,49,51,52,53,59,61 to 77, 143.)

In addition Israel cannot justiits measures in any way on the pretext of annexing the city as this conflicts with the contents of article 47 of the fourth Geneva convention which stipulates:-

(Protected persons whose release, repatriation or re-establishment may take place after such dates shall meanwhile continue to benefit by the present convention).

In addition, Israel cannot justify its measures in any way on the pretext of annexing the city as this conflicts with the contents of article 47 of the 4th Geneva Convention which stipulates:

( Protected persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory).

In addition, application of article 11 of the law of Entry in to Israel is in contradiction with article 34 of the Hague Convention which provides occupation authorities with only the temporary and limited mandate necessary for general peace and order, or for security reasons required for military necessities. The occupying authority is not allowed to issue all kinds of regulations, regardless of their concern, nor is it permitted to alter or amend the legislative, judicial, social or economic conditions. If any such action is taken the occupier should take the occupied nation's welfare into consideration.

Israel is committed to implementing the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 as they represent part of customary international law. And this law is distinguished by the fact that is binding and applies to all states whether they participated in formulating it or not and whether the state existed at the time of the formulation of its principles or not. This was ratified by the Israeli High Court of Justice in its decree passed in 1979 concerning the settlement of Rojeeb ( Elon Moreh) as it stated:-

(Customary International Law is a part of the local Israeli law)

It also decreed within the same judgment that the military administration of ( Judea and Samaria) is bound by the Hague convention, as it is part of Customary International Law.

All of the above being, apart from the incongruence of these measures with the right to freedom of movement, travel and residence, in addition to racial discrimination in the measures applied to Arab citizens, which totally contradicts the stipulations of International Conventions.

Summary:

One can conclude that the measures taken and methods utilized by the Israeli authorities aim at:-

- Establishing a new status quo within the city represented by severing it from ather cities in the occupied territories, thereby eliminating the idea of applying withdrawal from the city.

- Creating a new demographic and geographic reality in the city by establishing settlements and confiscating lands and houses, while at the same time increasing the percentage of Jewish residents.

- After the idea of " Greater Israel " failed , Israel is trying to put forward the idea of " Greater Jerusalem " as a device that can be utilized by any governing party to unite the Israeli people and their political parties.

In order to face these objectives it is necessary to take immediate political action and to resort to international law to fight the Israeli measures taken to cancel Palestinian Jerusalemites' residency and withdraw ID cards. Restricting actions to Human Rights Institutions, and the dispersal of efforts to stand in the face of such a policy will not bear any fruit or solve this important issue that entails obvious dangers.

Ahmad M. Rwaidy

The Palestinian Independent Commission For Citizens' Rights