The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Settlement news: the High Court of Justice expects that Mitzpe Caremi may save thousands of buildings in Judea and Samaria | Israel Hayom

2022-07-27T21:08:13.693Z


The President of the Supreme Court ruled that the settlement must be vacated because it was established on Palestinian land • The residents demanded to recognize the settlement because the land was allocated to them due to a mistake by the state • When the verdict came out they rubbed their eyes in astonishment • After many years of struggle - they won, and with them the entire settlement


At the settlement they were already prepared for the worst today.

After nearly 20 years of struggle, they reached the moment of truth in the additional hearing at the Supreme Court regarding Mitzpe Karim, and some of them were pessimistic and did not believe there was a chance.

After all, about two years ago the President of the Supreme Court, Esther Hayut, overturned the decision of the District Court and stated that the state must evacuate the settlement. When the verdict came out, they rubbed their eyes in astonishment and wanted to rewrite their prepared responses. After many years of fighting against the system - They won, and with them the entire settlement.

In order to understand the event of Mitzpe Karim, you have to go back years.

As part of the outpost agreement during the days of Ehud Barak, a settlement point was evacuated in the area of ​​the settlement of Kochav Hashar and in return the state provided land for the construction of a settlement - Mitzpe Karmei named after him.

The Commissioner for Abandoned Property, which corresponds to the Israel Lands Administrator in Judea and Samaria, allocated an area to the brigade for settlement and they allocated it to build a settlement.

In retrospect it turned out that a mistake was made - part of the settlement was built on land that is defined as private and belongs to the Palestinians.

A few years later, Palestinians filed a lawsuit against the settlement at the High Court of Justice, claiming that it was private land. The settlers, on the other hand, said that they have a presumption of good faith that is protected by the market regulation, and therefore the matter should be resolved in the district court - in order to find out the facts. At first, Judge Noor approved The claim of the settlers, and in the settlement they won in the district court, but in response a leftist organization filed again at the High Court and two years ago Judge Hayut ruled that it was a land grab.

According to her, the bar of good faith in the market regulations must be much higher than it was in the case of Mitzpe Karim.

Mitzpe Karemi outpost, photo: Miriam Tzachi

They did not give up on the settlement, and with the assistance of the Minister of Justice at the time, Ayelet Shaked, who was mobilized for the matter, and attorney Harel Arnon, a veteran lawyer who has been working for many years in the YOS, began a ceremony of advice.

In coordination with the ombudsman at the time, Avichai Mandelblit, they activated section 5 of the market regulations, which allows recognition of situations in which it turned out that the commissioner of abandoned property had mistakenly assigned land to settlers - who entered into a deal with him in good faith, and it later turned out that it was not the state's land.

Although the additional discussion on the issue was a bright spot, not everyone in the settlement was optimistic about the possibility that the High Court would agree with the residents. "The residents of Mitzpe Kerim and Zambish were optimistic about the ruling, but I was rather pessimistic," Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked told me. Other officials in the settlement told who were ready with responses against the High Court ruling, and were very surprised when they received the final acknowledgment that Mitzvah Kerim would not be evicted.

She was pessimistic about the High Court of Mitzpe Karemi, Ayelet Shaked, photo: Oren Ben Hakon

It should be understood that this is a very fundamental judgment for Judea and Samaria.

Over the years, the senior officials of the Yosh expressed opposition to the regulation law, because they believed that the existing regulations - the market regulations - should be used. Shaked said that unlike those who believe that D9 should be brought before the Supreme Court, she believes that the tools of the system should be used in order to change the conditions On the field. These conditions, the senior officials of Yosh now hope, have matured with the ruling of the High Court of Justice.

There are between 2000 and 3000 buildings in Judea and Samaria that are in the status of Mitzpe Caremi.

Most of them are buildings in the depths of settlements that have existed for 30 years or more, and the reason they are in this status is that the Civil Administration redrew the blue line in the settlements and excluded them out.

For example, a neighborhood in Alfi Menashe that has been built for decades suddenly found out that it is destined for demolition.

BJH hopes that now the High Court will leave the equation in most cases, because the issue can be discussed based on facts in the district court.

Even if such houses end up in the High Court, they hope that the presumption of good faith will be upheld and they will be able to make a change through the market regulations. If this indeed happens, then thousands of buildings in Judea and Samaria will be approved and will no longer be in danger of demolition. This is her greatest achievement in office next to the appointment of judges. This is the magnitude of this decision.

were we wrong

We will fix it!

If you found an error in the article, we would appreciate it if you shared it with us

Source: israelhayom

All news articles on 2022-07-27

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-28T06:04:53.137Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.