Yehuda Yifrach, Courts Editor for Makor Rishon, on Friday listed the eight most important and least known facts about the Amona case. If you haven’t read a rightwing Jewish publication in the last month, Amona is a community of some 40 Jewish families in Samaria, slated by the Supreme Court for demolition on Dec. 25. You can read some background material here.

1. Jordan had no right to parcel out lands When the Amona case first reached the Supreme Court, a representative of the land registrar for the IDF Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) argued that despite the fact that the location was a bald and abandoned mountaintop, there existed documented parcels of land which had been registered by the Jordanian government as belonging to area sheiks and clans. However, as an invading and occupying power, Jordan had no right to award these lands. Jordan’s rule over the “West Bank” was not recognized by the vast majority of UN member states save for the UK and Pakistan, and so this local Arab “ownership” is based on a lie.

2. Only 0.5% of the Amona land is registered to private Arab owners After the Supreme Court had ruled in their favor, anti-Israeli NGO Yesh Din, which has been at the forefront of the Lawfare attacks on the Jewish State, decided to sue for damages over the years of denied use of the parcels in question. The problem is that while the Supreme Court does not entertain evidence, lower courts do, and in Jerusalem Magistrate Court it was discovered that out of the nine Arab petitioners, seven own land that is entirely outside the Amona perimeter, and have had no problem working their land had they been so inclined. The remaining two owned only a sliver – about half an acre altogether, out of the 125 acres of the Amona territory – less than .5%. The remaining land is registered to names of non-existent people who do not appear in the 1967 census.

3. COGAT didn’t differentiate between the parcels with known and unknown ownership Despite the above facts, the COGAT prosecution related to the parcels whose owners are unknown as being privately owned, declaring that some 15 acres in the southern part of the settlement belonged to real private owners. They then told the court that, in fact, there was no difference between the various parts of the community and that the half-acre that became 15 acres was, in effect, indistinguishable from the rest, and the entire community had to come down.

4. The Settlement Arrangements Act does not violate international law Regarding the Settlement Arrangements Act, which the left, as well as senior Netanyahu cabinet officials, are saying violates international law, former Tel Aviv University president and international law expert Prof. Yoram Dinstein has argued that “when an occupier appropriates the power to legislate in an occupied territory, said power belongs to the occupying state and not to one of its organs (COGAT).” In a recent article, Prof. Dinstein has shown how international law is entirely indifferent regarding the particular mechanics of legislation in an occupied zone, be it the local general or be it the government that posted said general in said zone.

5. International law compels Israel to care for the rights of Jewish and Arab resident Another popular argument against the Settlement Arrangements Act is that it violates international law because it sanctions the impounding of Arab owned land for the sake of a Jewish community. However, it has been noted that international law compels the occupier to care for the needs of all the civilians under its rule, Jews and Arabs alike, and the right of a government to expropriate private property for public use, with proper payment of compensation (eminent domain) is inherent in exerting such care.

6. The Settlement Arrangements Act is consistent with the pre-67 law in Judea and Samaria This one is quite interesting. Unbeknownst to many, the Settlement Arrangements Act is consistent with the legal systems that were in use in Judea and Samaria before 1967. Both Ottoman law and Jordanian law determine that in a case where a man built and planted in good faith land belonging to another, should the value of the construction exceed the value of the land, the land owner is compelled to receive compensation.

7. Israel legislates retroactively when needed Another argument against the Settlement Arrangements Act is that it retroactively alters a court ruling. But the state of Israel regularly legislates retroactively, as in the amendment that reversed many hundreds of court sentences of Arab terrorists, to facilitate the Gilad Shalit deal with Hamas.

8. The Settlement Arrangements Act is not unconstitutional
Finally, the most crucial argument against the Settlement Arrangements Act is that it is unconstitutional – the constitution in this case being Israel’s Basic Laws. Setting aside the paradox whereby one Knesset law is inapplicable in the territories while the same Knesset’s basic laws are applicable – does Israel’s basic law really dictate that 40 families with their 200 children who have lived in Amona for 20 years be evicted to satisfy the alleged rights of two claimants who own less than .5% of the land and have never lived there? Has the court become so immoral as to be the enemy of its constituents without any foundation?

http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/eight-crucial-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-amona-case/2017/02/01/

1 COMMENT

  1. All above are good arguments but the main legal arguments you have not mentioned.

    It is time for sensible international law makers such as former Judge Levy, to make the following claims:

    Cambon Declaration: http://www.balfourproject.org/french-support-for-the-zionist-cause/

    The Secretary General of Foreign Affairs

    to Mr Sokolof

    Paris 4th June 1917

    You were good enough to present the project to which you are devoting your efforts, which has for its object the development of Jewish colonization in Palestine. You consider that, circumstances permitting, and the independence of the Holy Places being safeguarded on the other hand, it would be a deed of justice and of reparation to assist, by the protection of the Allied Powers, in the renaissance of the Jewish nationality in that Land from which the people of Israel were exiled so many centuries ago.

    The French Government, which entered this present war to defend a people wrongfully attacked, and which continues the struggle to assure the victory of right over might, can but feel sympathy for your cause, the triumph of which is bound up with that of the Allies.

    I am happy to give you herewith such assurance.

    http://defendinghistory.com/antisemitism-denial-an-english-intellectual-speciality/60534

    Balfour Declaration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration

    “His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of the object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious’ rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country”.

    Weizmann Faisal Agreement of January 3, 1919

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal%E2%80%93Weizmann_Agreement

    Article II
    Immediately following the completion of the deliberations of the Peace Conference, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Conference,_1919) the definite boundaries between the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a Commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto.
    Article III
    In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees for carrying into effect the British Government’s Declaration of the 2nd of November, 1917.
    Article IV
    All necessary measures shall be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasant and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.

    Jan Smuts Resolution of January 30, 1919

    http://www.americanforeignrelations.com/E-N/Mandates-and-Trusteeships-League-of-nations-mandates.html

    Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919:

    https://www.loc.gov/law/help/us-treaties/bevans/m-ust000002-0043.pdf

    Franco-British Convention of December 23, 1920:

    http://www.worldlibrary.org/articles/franco-british_boundary_agreement_(1920)

    Mandate for Palestine July 24, 1922

    http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/2FCA2C68106F11AB05256BCF007BF3CB

    http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/palmanda.asp

    Mandate is a power of attorney given to any super power to control either temporarily or partially a territory whose population is still not ready for self-government or imposed by certain sanctions. The Trustee’s mission is to guide, tutor, and develop the territory to allow the population to establish a viable self-government. The Mandate should be terminated when residents are able to manage their affairs independently. Often referred to in this concept is the context regime method developed by the League of Nations mandate, according to Article 22 of the League of Nations. In the framework of the League of Nations the management of the mandate was given to the victorious powers in World War I, Britain and France, the territories previously controlled by countries defeated in this war, especially the German Empire and the Ottoman Empire.

    Article 2 of the Mandate states clearly that one of the goals of the mandate is to create conditions for the establishment of a National home for the Jewish people, while maintaining civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of the country. Article 4 of the Mandate recognizes The Jewish Agency (to be established), In order, to realize the promises of the Balfour Declaration on the establishment of a National home for the Jewish people.

    http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/2FCA2C68106F11AB05256BCF007BF3CB

    The Council of the League of Nations:

    The British sought to set up legitimacy for their continued control of the region and this was achieved by obtaining a mandate from the League of Nations in June 1922. The formal objective of the League of Nations Mandate system was to administer parts of the defunct Ottoman Empire, which had been in control of the Middle East since the 16th century, “until such time as they are able to stand alone.” The Mandate for Palestine was a commission granted by the League of Nations to a Great Britain for the establishment of a responsible government over the former Ottoman Empire.

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have agreed, for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine, which formerly belonged to the Turkish Empire, within such boundaries as may be fixed by them; and

    Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on November 2nd, 1917, by the Government of His Britannic Majesty, and adopted by the said Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish People, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and

    Article II

    The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing institutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.

    The legally binding document was conferred on April 24, 1920 at the San Remo Conference, and its terms outlined in the Treaty of Sèvres on August 10, 1920. The Mandate’s terms were finalized and unanimously approved on July 24, 1922, by the Council of the League of Nations, which was comprised at that time of 51 countries, and became operational on September 29, 1923.

    http://www.cfr.org/israel/san-remo-resolution/p15248

    The San Remo Mandate Resolution gave the Jews all the land of Israel (Palestine – the name that the Romans called the land of Israel) and the Arabs took Syria Lebanon Jordan and Iraq the film (not an Israeli) proves that the Jewish settlements, on their historical land, has always been legal !!!

    http://www.youtube.com/embed/BmMmJ46O-3Q?rel=0

    The Lodge-Fish Resolution of September 21, 1922, was a Joint Resolution passed by both houses of the U.S. Congress and signed by President Warren Harding, endorsing the Balfour Declaration with slight variations. This made the text of the Joint Resolution part of the law of the United States until this very day.

    “Resolved by the Senate and House of representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the United states of America favors the establishment in Palestine of a national Home for the Jewish people…”

    confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine — anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea:

    Under American Law when a joint resolution is passed by both the Senate and the House of Representatives in an identical form and then signed by the President, it becomes the Law of the U.S.

    7. Both the Lodge-Fish Resolution and the Anglo American Convention underwent the above noted process (see point 6). Therefore reconstituting Palestine as a National Homeland for the Jewish People worldwide and recognizing their historical connection to the land became part of US LAW.

    Any attempt to negate the Jewish people’s right to Palestine — Eretz-Israel — and to deny them access and control in the area designated for the Jewish people by the League of Nations is an actionable infringement of both international law and the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, paragraph 2 of the United States Constitution), which dictates that Treaties “shall be the supreme Law of the Land”.

    http://www.think-israel.org/belman.israelownssamariajudea.html

    https://books.google.co.il/books?id=yqk3XE196GsC&pg=PA198&lpg=PA198&dq=The+Lodge+-+Fish+Joint+Resolution+67+of+September+21,+1922&source=bl&ots=tFDZtTv-pK&sig=G-6JGRclIjmQlv479Ay5WtStJys&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjxotylndXQAhVBshQKHZw6AaYQ6AEIGDAA#v=onepage&q=The%20Lodge%20-%20Fish%20Joint%20Resolution%2067%20of%20September%2021%2C%201922&f=false

    http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/Mandate-12-07-11.pdf

    ARTICLE 6 of the Montevideo Convention

    The recognition of a state merely signifies that the state which recognizes it accepts the personality of the other with all the rights and duties determined by international law. Recognition is unconditional and irrevocable.

    http://www.cfr.org/sovereignty/montevideo-convention-rights-duties-states/p15897

    UN Charter of 26.6.1945

    http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/unchart.htm#art77

    Article 80

    1. Except as may be agreed upon in individual trusteeship agreements, made under Articles 77, 79, and 81, placing each territory under the trusteeship system, and until such agreements have been concluded, nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectively be parties.

    ICC Clarifications on the above issue: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/?sum=296&code=nam&p1=3&p2=4&case=53&k=a7&p3=5

    The last resolution of the League Assembly and Article 80, paragraph 1, of the United Nations Charter maintained the obligations of mandatories. The International Court of Justice has consistently recognized that the Mandate survived the demise of the League, and South Africa also admitted as much for a number of years. Thus the supervisory element, which is an essential part of the Mandate, was bound to survive. The United Nations suggested a system of supervision which would not exceed that which applied under the mandates system, but this proposal was rejected by South Africa.

    Resolutions by the General Assembly and the Security Council

    Armistice Agreement of 1949

    http://www.knesset.gov.il/process/docs/armistice_jordan_eng.htm

    Article 6

    9. The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in articles V and VI of this Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.

    http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/mandate_for_palestine/MandateN2%20-%2010-29-07-English.pdf

    Jewish legal rights under international law are codified in Article 70 (1) (B) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and doctrine of estoppel.

    Let me make this loud and clear to all ignorant people who have no understanding of international law:

    No UN resolution can override Israel’s existing legal rights and title of sovereignty over any region of the Land of Israel based on the following earlier acts of International Law: The Jan Smuts Resolution of January 30, 1919, Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, including the Treaty of Versailles of June 28, 1919, the San Remo Resolution of April 25, 1920, the Mandate for Palestine as confirmed on July 24, 1922 and the Franco-British Convention of December 23, 1920, all of which recognized the historical connection of the Jewish People with the Land of Israel.

    The Arabs have already received their lands under the Mandate system. It does not include “Palestine”.

    Should you require references, I will gladly send them.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here