From:
Tony greenstein
Date:
2007 Feb 14 21:00 UTC
Short link
I was just sent this by an Israeli peace list. It's from an article in
Ha'aretz (the Israeli equivalent of what The Times used to be). It is a
stunning example of the systematic apartheid discrimination in Israel
If an American-Jewish couple was prohibited from settling anywhere in
Britain it would rightly be considered anti-Semitic. The media would be all
over it, warning for the return of anti-Semitism and ask how this could happen.
But in Israel Palestinians are victims of daily discrimination by the Israeli
state. And of course, just pointing this is out is regarded as anti-Semitic!
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/825948.html
Israeli Arab couple petitions High Court after Residency denied
By Jack Khoury, Haaretz Correspondent
An Israeli Arab couple petitioned the High Court of Justice this week, asking
it to issue a temporary injunction that would allow them to live in the
predominately Jewish town of Rakefet.
The couple, residents of Sakhnin, said they were denied residency in the town
because they are Arab, but say that local authorities in Rakefet and officials
at the Israel Lands Authority found an alternative way to keep them from moving
into the town: By stating that according to a "suitability test," the couple
are "not fit to live in the town."
The couple is being represented by Adalah, a non-profit organization which
fights discrimination against Israeli Arabs. According to the organization, the
couple was refused permission to settle in the town because they are Arabs.
The couple is now requesting that the High Court instruct the Israel Land
Authority and heads of the Misgav Regional council to ensure their rights to a
residential plot in Rakefet.
The couple, Ahmed Zvidat and Fahina Avrik, graduates of the archaeology
department at Jerusalem's Bezalel College, tried in 2006 to find a place to
live in northern Israel. According to Zvidat, he had sought approval to build a
house in a neighborhood of Sachnin, but the land on which he wanted to build
was reserved for agricultural purposes, and bordered the jurisdictional
boundaries of Rakefet.
A short inquiry made to authorities at the Misgav Regional Council made it
clear to Zvidat that changing the land's designatino was not possible.
"They told me, just rent a house," Zvidat told Haaretz this week.
After their plans to build in Sachnin were denied, the couple made plans to
move to Rakefet, a small agricultural community of 165 families. They looked
forward to building a house, and to enjoying the benefits of living in a
smaller community.
In their request for a temporary injunction, they emphasized that at the time
their plans to move to Rakefet were denied, the town was enlarging in order to
accommodate new families.
Zvidat and Avrik met with representative from the Rakefet local committee, and
requested that they be allowed to address the regional absorption committee of
Misgav at a meeting that was also attended by a representative from the Jewish
Agency and a representative from the absorption committee of Rakefet.
After the meetings, the couple requested a "suitability exam" at the
Keinan-Sheffey institute, which came out in favor of Avrik.
"Fahina [Avrik] is an intelligent woman of high personal character, who aspires
to great success", the committee's ruling stated. "She grew up in a home that
stressed personal betterment and integrity, values that she has carried into
adulthood. Also, she is someone who aspires to befriend and avoid conflict with
those around her," the committee added.
Nonetheless, the committee came to the conclusion that Avrik is not suited to
live in Rakefet.
"The impression is that she is an individualistic woman, and therefore, in the
end, she is looking to advance her own goals, much more than she is concerned
about the community in which she lives," the committee stated in its ruling.
Regarding Zvidat, the committee ruled he "is of a suitable personality, and
looks to adapt himself to the norms, customs, and accepted rules of behavior."
Nonetheless, the committee found Zvidat not suitable, since he "lacks
sufficient knowledge of sophisticate interpersonal relations, and has problems
fitting into the community." In the end, the "suitability test" ruled that "the
couple's suitability level for acceptance into the community is low."
"We felt very insulted by the committee," Zvidat said. "I wonder what would
happen if committee members or residents of Rakefet were forced to pass a
suitability test? Would it rule that they are more intelligent than us, and
more deserving of residence in Rakefet than us?"
In response to the appeal, the Rakefet local council emphasized the special
characteristics of the town, specifically , its small, close-knit and
"homogenous nature." Furthermore, each resident is required to adopt certain
obligations and duties for the betterment of the town. Regarding the
nationality of the petitioners, the council added "this town doesn't place a
special emphasis on the concept of co-existence."
Nonetheless, the council explained that Rakefet is a pluralistic town with a
diverse population, where secular families live side-by-side with more
traditional and religious families.
Less than a month ago, attorney Suhad Bishara from Adala received the ruling of
Israel Lands Authority Director Yaakov Efrati, that attempted to sidetrack the
couple's appeal. In the temporary injunction request, Bishara stated that the
decision to bar the couple from living in Rakefet was made on the basis of
nationality and religion, and violate laws protecting equality, dignity, and
residence.
Bishara maintained that Israel Lands Authority representatives delegate
authority over the appropriation of land to local acceptance committees,
contrary to their official role as advisory bodies only.
Israel Lands Authority: "Nationality is not a consideration"
Representatives from the Israel Lands Authority have stated that in communities
of up to 500 households, they parcel out land based on the recommendations of
local acceptance committees, which do not consider "the nationality or
religion" of the applicant. As an example, the authority cited their recent
decision to allow an Arab couple to move to Kibbutz Hasollalim.
The authority also rejected the petitioners' claim that the acceptance
committee fulfills an official public role that is not assigned to them by law.
According to recent rulings by the Supreme Court, the authority over decisions
relating to residency candidates is ultimately left to the Israel Lands
Authority, even when there is a local acceptance committee.
"In instances where a couple is rejected due to reasons of unsuitability to the
way of life of the community in question, the issue of greatest importance is
the social unity of the community, not just the couple's ability to assimilate
and contribute to the community," the Israel Lands Authority stated.
---------------------------------
Looking for earth-friendly autos?
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.