العربية
HE
العربية
HE
On 5 May 2008, HaMoked submitted a petition to the Administrative Court regarding the registration of two children of a resident of the village of Sur Baher in Jerusalem in the Israeli Population Registry. The Appellant and his family have lived in the village for many years. After he married, the Appellant wished to build a new home for himself and his family on a plot of land belonging to his family in the southeast section of the village. As is the case with the other homes in the southeastern neighborhood of the village, the home of the Appellant’s family lies outside city limits – 250 meters outside the limits, to be precise.
In 1967 the area of Sur Baher was annexed and became an integral part of Jerusalem. Over the years Israel built neighborhoods around the village intended for settlement by Jews, eroding the land reserves of the village. The village was surrounded by the new neighborhoods, which impeded its development. Due to the severe shortage of land for construction, a grave housing crisis developed in the village. The only direction in which the village could expand in order to alleviate this problem even slightly was to the southeast. However, part of the village land in this area is outside the Jerusalem city limits. Until recently the municipal boundary was “virtual” in nature; no physical sign was positioned noting that the boundary passed at a given point in the village’s land.
The establishment of the Separation Barrier around Jerusalem transformed this situation. The route of the barrier was to pass close to the Jerusalem city limits, even if the result was the division of villages within the city limits. The residents of Sur Baher launched a legal battle against the plan to establish the barrier to the west of the southeastern sections of the village in order to leave the village intact. The struggle was successful and the barrier was built in such a way that the residents of the southeastern neighborhood, including the Appellants, were included “within the Jerusalem area.” The residents were also successful in their struggle against a decision by the National Insurance Institute to stop paying welfare benefits to residents living in this section of the village. In other words, the authorities recognized that all the residents of the village continue, in effect, to live inside Israel, and that they are not to be arbitrarily deprived of their rights.
Over the years the Appellant has fathered eleven children, all of whom – except two – were registered without problems in the Israeli Population Registry. However, when he went to the Interior Ministry to register his two youngest children who, like their siblings, were born in Jerusalem, he was informed that the application had been rejected since his home is outside the city limits. Thus the two youngest children, who live exclusively within the city limits, have been left without any status simply because their home lies 250 meters outside the city limits.
HaMoked argues, inter alia, that the two children should be registered in accordance with Regulation 12 of the Entry to Israel Regulations. According to this regulation, the Interior Ministry is to register as permanent residents children born in Israel to Israeli residents, provided that the children and their parents actually live inside Israel. This regulation is based on the values of the integrity of the family unit, and it is intended to prevent a parent being separated from his or her child born in Israel.
