Home · Articles · Testimonies

The new route of the barrier in Bil'in: The State ridicules the Court's ruling

July 21, 2008

Source : AATW Discussion List

On July 6th 2008, the State submitted to the Supreme Court an announcement concerning the route of the barrier in Bil’in. The announcement included a copy of the new appropriation order (number 14/08) for the new route of the barrier in Bil’in. In the announcement the State said that "the respondents are in the opinion that the new order upholds the Court’s ruling".

On 4th September 2007, the Supreme Court partially accepted the petition of the residents of Bil’in against the Separation Barrier. In its ruling the Court noted that the existing barrier was designed to allow the construction of the Matityahu East neighborhood in the settlement of Modi’in Illit. The Judges noted that in the eastern part of the neighborhood (phase B), construction hasn’t taken place yet, and it requires further approvals. Hence, the Court ruled, the State must not take into consideration phase B of the neighborhood while routing the barrier.

In its announcement submitted this week the State argues that "the new appropriation order is based solely on security considerations pertaining to phase A of the Matityahu East plan, and does not take into consideration construction in phase B of the plan". However, an analysis of the new route shows this argument has no factual basis.

The existing barrier in Bil’in can be divided into two sections: The first section begins in the border between the villages Saffa and Bil’in and ends (in the north) in the lonely house, the site for the weekly demonstrations. The second section begins in the lonely house and ends (in the north) in above the wadi, in the border of the villages Bil’in and Kharbata.

Both phases of the Matityahu East neighborhood are planned to be built opposite the first, southern section of the Bil’in barrier. Despite this, in the first section, the new appropriation order doesn’t change anything, and the route remains as it is now. In the second, northern section, the new appropriation order places the barrier in a more western route. However, the new route will give the village back only 26 hectares out of the approximately 200 hectares taken by the exiting route. Of these 26 hectares, about 14 hectares were devastated by the old route, and the remaining 12 hectares are planted with olive trees. The new route will take almost 15 hectares densely planted with olive trees and destroy them completely.

Today, July 9th 2008, attorney Michael Sfard who represents Bil’in submitted to Court a response on the announcement of the State. In the response, attorney Sfard asked the Court to rule that the new route chosen by the State constitutes a contempt of Court, since it violates the ruling. In his response attorney Sfard noted that:

  • The Court ruling said that the new route should leave phase B of the plan for Matityahu East on the "Palestinian" side of the barrier. But the new route leaves the entire plan – including phase B – on the "Israeli" side of the barrier, thereby allowing construction to take place also in phase B
  • The ruling ordered the State to leave, as much as possible, the cultivated lands of Bil’in on the "Palestinian" side of the barrier. In reality, the new route "gives back" only some 12 hectares of cultivated lands, for which another 15 hectares of olive groves are to be destroyed for the new barrier. In addition, some 35 hectares of cultivated lands, mostly planted with olive trees, will remain on the "Israeli" side of the new route
  • The ruling said that the new barrier should, as much as possible, be built on State lands within the plan for Matityahu East. But the new route runs completely outside the boundaries of the plan, almost completely on private Palestinian land
  • The ruling said that the new route must leave, as much as possible, the five Palestinian enclaves within the plan for Matityahu East on the "Palestinian" side of the barrier. In reality, the new route leaves all five enclaves on the "Israeli" side of the barrier

In light of the above, attorney Sfard asked the Court to take an exceptional measure and to rule already now that the new appropriation order is in violation of the Court ruling. If this request is denied, the people of Bil’in will object the new appropriation order, and if the objection is rejected, it appears that a new petition is to be filed to the Supreme Court.

Nir (July 9, 2008)