Following petition by Gisha, Gaza resident able to travel to the Dutch Embassy in Tel Aviv and reunite with her spouse in the Netherlands
January 31, 2019. Gisha filed a petition on behalf of a Gaza resident married to a Dutch citizen. The petitioner hoped to travel to the Netherlands to reunite with her spouse and begin their new life together. In order to do so, she was required to first attend an interview at the Dutch Embassy in Tel Aviv and take a written test. About a week before the interview she had scheduled at the embassy, Israel denied her permit application on the grounds of unspecified security reasons, also called a “security block.”
In the petition (Hebrew), we argued that the security-based denial of our petitioner’s permit was arbitrary and had no factual basis, as is the case in hundreds of other instances. We further argued that the decision to deny her permit was disproportionate given the profound infringement on her rights, as it effectively forced her to live apart from her spouse for an unspecified amount of time though she has done nothing wrong.
When the petition was submitted, the state withdrew the “security block” and informed the court that the petitioner would be allowed to exit Gaza and travel to the interview but only on a direct shuttle organized by the Palestinian Civil Affairs Committee. Gisha objected to this stipulation, at which point the petitioner was summoned for a security interview. The state then withdrew its demand and agreed to let the petitioner travel independently to the interview at the embassy.
Once the petition was deleted, Gisha filed a motion to issue a costs order against the state. Judge Sarah Dovrat dismissed (Hebrew) the motion despite ruling that the petitioner had undisputedly obtained the remedy thanks to our petition.
The reasoning provided for the motion’s dismissal is particularly troubling as it is based on a factual and legal error: Judge Dovrat found that “the security grounds at the foundation of the refusal had not been disproven.” This finding contradicts the state’s update whereby the “security block” had been lifted after the petitioner provided satisfactory clarifications to Israeli authorities regarding the suspicions raised. The judge also found that: “due to the large number of permit applications, it is impossible to perform security screening for each and every person applying to enter Israel.” We believe this finding is incongruent with the legal obligation of the authorities to make decisions based on facts, rather than assumptions. Not only is this finding erroneous, it also legitimizes the practice of the Israel Security Agency applying “security blocks” arbitrarily.
