HaMoked in a High Court petition: allow East Jerusalemites living in as-Sawahira ash-Sharqiya to access the rest of the city via car

On May 29, 2025, HaMoked petitioned the High Court of Justice (HCJ) to have the military and the Israel Police allow all Palestinians who are permanent residents of Israel and who live in as-Sawahira ash-Sharqiya, located within the municipal borders of Jerusalem but on the other side of the Separation Barrier, to travel by car via the Sawahira checkpoint. HaMoked also demanded the publication of the procedures for handling residents’ applications to have their cars added to the list of cars permitted passage, as well as application to update the details of their cars, and the contact details of those handling such applications or objections over refusals.

Some 6,000 Jerusalemites live in the as-Sawahira ash-Sharqiya enclave created by the Separation Barrier. This area was annexed to the City of Jerusalem, and most of the people who live there have Jerusalem residency, but they must cross the Barrier checkpoint to reach the rest of the city, where they work, study, receive medical care and so on. In the petition, HaMoked noted that until recently, and based on the State’s guarantee before the HCJ (in HCJ 1073/04), most of the enclave inhabitants could cross on foot via the checkpoint 24/7 and by car in daytime.

However, HaMoked argued, many now encounter difficulties in updating the details of newly purchased cars in the list of cars permitted passage, and new residents in the enclave cannot get included in the list. Additionally, in August 2024, residents were told there was a new list of permitted cars, but many discovered their names had been dropped from it, and their applications in the matter were to no avail, including those made to the dedicated email address published at the checkpoint.

HaMoked noted that its appeals sent via this email address regarding several residents, all received a uniform laconic and obscure response whereby the applicant was not entitled to cross the checkpoint by car. This, without specifying the grounds, revealing of the criteria for approval or refusal – and in one case, even after 18 consecutive years that passage was allowed. In the uniform response it was noted that the applicant may apply to a “committee for special approval”, insofar as they have documents to justify their exception, after which, if accepted, they would receive summons to appear before the committee. However, even in this matter, no further details were given, neither how to contact the committee, nor details about its members or procedures. Until the petition was filed, applications to the committee remained unanswered and no light shed on its manner of operation.

In the petition, HaMoked argued that all of this harms the residents’ freedom of movement, contrary to the case law upon which the legality of this segment of the Separation Barrier is based. Furthermore, HaMoked argued, the authorities’ handling of applications violated their obligations to act in fairness and to make public their procedures.