Israeli court halts settlement works

Press, 22 June 1979, Page 5

Israeli court halts settlement works

NZPA-Reuter Jerusalem Israel’s High Court of Justice has halted work on a controversial Jewish settlement which was being rushed up on Arab land in defiance of international opinion. Responding to an appeal from dispossessed Arab landowners, the court issued a temporary injunction forbidding further work on the Elon Moreh hilltop site in the heavily populated heartland of the occupied Jordan West Bank. The 80 ha site was seized on June 7 in a joint swoop by Jewish settlers and Israeli occupation forces who served requisition orders saying the land was needed for “security purposes.” The court ruling gave the Israeli Government a month to define these security purposes and to give reasons why the seizure orders should not be cancelled. The order was a set-back — though possibly only a temporary one — for the Government of the Prime Minister (Mr Menachem Begin). It had thrown wholehearted support behind the Elon Moreh take-over.

In the openly proclaimed philosophy of Mr Begin and many of his Cabinet Ministers. mass Jewish settlement on the Elon Moreh pattern is counted the surest way of perpetuating Israeli control over a land regarded as divinely bestowed on the Jewish people. The abrupt eviction of the Arab residents, served with requisition orders only hours before Jewish settlers rushed in with bulldozers, inflamed Arab and other foreign opinion. Such criticism was brushed aside by Mr Begin even though the Elon Moreh exercise was opposed by two key Cabinet colleagues, the Defence Minister (Mr Ezer Weizman) and the Foreign Minister (Mr Moshe Dayan). In delivering the ruling, the presiding judge (Mr Moshe Landau) sharply criticised the Government for improper implementation of the requisition order. Judge Landau said he understood “the anger and bitter feelings” of the ousted landowners.

The ruling was largely on

technical grounds. The three judges decided the landowners should have had longer notice of eviction and the Government should have made out a better case for the security needs. Judge Landau said that the Israeli Chief of Staff (Lieu-tenant-General Rafael Eitan) should have made a sworn declaration that the requisitioned ground had military importance. General Eitan had contented himself with a letter setting out his case. Judge Landau said the Chief of Staff did not enjoy exemption from ordinary legal processes.

A lawyer representing the 17 Arab plaintiffs produced evidence from a former Chief of Staff, Lieutenant-General Haim Bar-Lev.

The former general said he could not see any military importance in Elon Moreh, against either guerrilla warfare or full-scale military attack.

In fact, General Bar-Lev testified, Israeli forces would have to be diverted to the defence of Elon Moreh if hostilities broke out.