For three and a half years, two children of a Nepalese citizen and an Indian father who were born in Israel and are now in seventh and second grades have been awaiting an appeal against the ruling of the Appeals Court that ordered their deportation from Israel, even though there is a pending procedure to arrange their status in Israel on humanitarian grounds. Now Tel Aviv District Court Judge Michal Agmon Gonen has ordered the Population and Immigration Authority that by the beginning of July, a social worker certified in youth will meet with them, and in the meantime has charged the authority NIS 15,<>.
At the time the appeal was filed, the children were 9 and 4 years old. Their mother entered Israel on a long-term care visa that was valid until 2011, and has been living in Israel illegally ever since. The children were born in Israel, never left it, they study in the Israeli education system and speak Hebrew only. The children are Indian citizens, like their father who lives in Israel and is not a candidate for deportation. In August 2019, nearly four years ago, they were arrested by Population and Immigration Authority inspectors for illegally staying in Israel, and custody and restraining orders were issued against them under the Entry into Israel Law. They were released from custody a few weeks later and a temporary injunction was issued preventing their deportation pending a decision on the appeal.
Judge Michal Agmon-Gonen noted that the Authority did not present an opinion on its behalf in response to the two opinions submitted by the appellants regarding the best interests of the children, despite several opportunities given to it to do so: "Holding the hearing only, which should be discussed as long as they are minors, and relatively quickly, since waiting for many years in the shadow of the deportation may cause them harm. In this context, weight should be attributed to the time that passes without the handling of the matter progressing and the decision from 2020 is not fulfilled, and requests for extensions of deadlines are repeatedly submitted on behalf of the Authority."
Judge Michal Agmon-Gonen,
Justice Agmon-Gonen added: "The duty of fairness also includes a measure of compassion, of seeing the interest of the individual and giving him appropriate weight in terms of preventing unnecessary bureaucracy and unnecessary burden on already complex processes. The best interests of the children therefore require that the interview with them be conducted by a Youth Law social worker who is trained to care for the children, be conducted in their natural environment, in the presence of their mother or another companion of their choice, take a reasonable amount of time to create trust in light of their anxiety, and provide advance information about her regarding its purpose, location, duration, participants and any other detail that can reduce anxiety and enable the best interests of the children to be maintained within the framework of the clarification process itself."
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us