Gisha filed three petitions against Israel’s refusal to allow persons registered in the West Bank to return there permanently
A Palestinian whose registered address is in the West Bank has a vested right to return to live there, both under international law and according to the narrow criteria Israel has defined for movement between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians in the three petitions, whose registered addresses are in the West Bank, contacted the Gaza Civil Liaison Administration (CLA) asking to return to the West Bank. After Gisha intervened on their behalf, the CLA responded that they denied the applications because the applicants “did not coordinate their entry into Gaza with the State of Israel or travel through its territory.” As Gisha and the Gaza CLA corresponded further, the CLA demanded proof for the claim that two of the petitioners did in fact coordinate their entry into Gaza with Israel and did travel through its territory. The petitions were filed due to the refusal of the applications to return to the West Bank.
The first petition (Hebrew) concerns the A.T. family – a couple and their young daughter. The family lived in the West Bank for many years, and their registered address is there. They traveled to the Gaza Strip through Rafah Crossing in 2000 for personal reasons. The petition argues that the stringent criteria for travel through Erez Crossing implemented by Israel at the time forced them to enter Gaza through Rafah, which was then open on a daily basis. The petitioners also claimed that the state’s decision was unreasonable and ignored relevant considerations, and that the state disproportionately violated the petitioners’ rights to freedom of movement and autonomy. The petition is scheduled for a hearing on February 6, 2019.
The second petition (Hebrew) concerned M.S., a young man who was born in the West Bank. He lived in the West Bank until the age of seven, when he moved to the Gaza Strip with his family via Erez Crossing. The petitioner completed high school and hoped to return to the West Bank to begin university. While the Gaza CLA claimed that the petitioner had entered Gaza via Rafah Crossing, the petitioner emphasized that he entered via Erez Crossing with Israel’s approval, and that evidence of this should be in Israel’s possession. The petition argued that shifting the burden of proof to the petitioner, who was a minor at the time that the family moved, was unreasonable, unfair and arbitrary. Following a motion for an urgent hearing, filed with the petition, the court ordered the respondents to respond to the petition by June 14, 2018. After reviewing the petitioner’s information, the Gaza CLA decided to approve his travel to the West Bank. Therefore, the petition was erased, and a costs order was issued in favor of the petitioners in the sum of 5,500 ILS.
The third petition (Hebrew) concerns A.A., another young man, who was born in the Gaza Strip and still lives there. He completed high school and now wishes to begin his adult life near his father who resides in the West Bank. The petitioner’s registered address, like his father’s, is in the West Bank. In its refusal, the Gaza CLA claimed the petitioner had not coordinated his entry into Gaza with Israel or traveled through its territory, and that his registered address was in the Gaza Strip. The petitioners clarified that A.A. had never entered Gaza through Rafah Crossing and that his registered address is listed in the West Bank in both his birth certificate and his ID card. The Gaza CLA provided no explanation for its previously stated allegations, which violates the petitioner’s right to make his case. In their response (Hebrew), the respondents persisted in their refusal, and the petition has been scheduled for a hearing on October 29, 2018.
