Since 2003, the Israeli military has employed a
permit regime in the parts of the West Bank that have been trapped between the separation wall and the Green Line, an area referred to by the military as the “seam zone”. Any Palestinian who lives in this area or wishes to enter it, must obtain, in advance, a military permit in order to do so. The process is long and arduous and the long wait often results in considerable financial losses. Despite the great need for speedy processing of such applications, and despite the court’s instructions on this issue, the military’s processing protocols fail to respond to the rights and needs of the Palestinian population and the military often has difficulty meeting its own requirements.
On April 2, 2013,
HaMoked petitioned the HCJ to instruct the military to issue a two-year seam zone entry permit to a Palestinian man from the village of Zawiya, so that he may tend to his lands located there. HaMoked also asked the court to instruct the military to keep to the timetables stipulated in the protocols on processing and responding to applications.
The army granted the man a permit before the petition was heard, but only for six months, after which he would have to submit another application and go through the long and arduous process once more.
In a letter to HaMoked from May 29, 2013, the state argued that the military had the power to issue a permit for shorter durations than the two years stipulated in the protocol. The state said that the applicant was the brother of a prisoner who had been convicted of the murder of an Israeli and that therefore, a decision was made not to issue him a two-year permit at that time for “security reasons”. HaMoked argued that the fact that the man’s brother was a convicted killer was irrelevant and did not constitute sufficient grounds for the restricted duration of the permit.
In the judgment, issued on October 17, 2013, the court ruled that that the military was entitled to issue seam zone entry permits for durations shorter than two years and opted not to intervene with respect to this issue. The court did, however, criticize the military’s slow processing of permit applications, stressing that given the army’s refusal to admit renewal applications filed earlier than three weeks prior to the expiration of an existing permit, it was particularly necessary to make sure responses are given within two weeks of the time the application is received by the Israeli DCO. The court also found that a procedure allowing applicants to follow up on their applications and make sure they are received by the right officials should be introduced.
