This piece was reprinted by OpEdNews with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
International law states that an occupying power must respect existing local legislation. Applicable Jordanian law allowed private property expropriation if compensation was paid, provided it was for a "public purpose," such as roads and public buildings. The statute remains in effect.
However, Israeli settlement development constitutes a non-public purpose land grab. In a May 1980 position to the Israeli Cabinet, attorney general and later Supreme Court Justice Yitzhak Zamir said:
"It is not permissible to act under Jordanian Law to expropriate land in Judea and Samaria."
Pli'a Albeck, head of the State Attorney's Office civilian division, held a similar position. Eyal Zamir, former Judea and Samaria deputy legal advisor, summarized Israel's official policy that:
"Expropriation of land for public purposes is not prohibited. Three pre-conditions (must) exist: first, the acquisition is made in accordance with the local law; second, the landlord is fully compensated; and third, the acquisition is for a public purpose....It should be emphasized that Israel is not expropriating land to establish settlements in the area."
Nonetheless, Ma'ale Adummim was created in violation of this policy, based on the 1974 inter-ministerial team's recommendations, headed by the then-attorney general and later Supreme Court president, Meir Shamgar, who said:
"Regarding expropriation in Judia and Samaria, it should be mentioned that international law generally denies the military government the authority to expropriate land in occupied territories; however, there is evidence supporting the position that it is permissible to expropriate land for the needs of the local population upon payment of compensation." Having previously done it for roads and public buildings, "it may also be permissible to (do so) for an industrial zone....whose construction is approved under the local planning and building laws."
The justification was that factories would benefit Palestinians as well as Jews. Yet, settlement development was intended that under international and local law as well as High Court decisions at the time are illegal.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
