1503 PEI'ITION: LARGE.SCALE

ISRAEL EXPROPRIAf,ION OF PALBSTINIAN PROPERTY IN ISRAEL

I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 This Petition broughtunderECOSOCResolution is 1503by BADILResource Center for Palestinian Residency_ RefugeeRights(BADIL)and the Centeron Housing ald Rights and Evictions (COHRE)on behalf of individuals and groups of Patestinian ownersof land expropriated lsrael in violationof international by law. gROlL,based in Bethlehem, Palestine and COHRE, based in Geneva, are independentnongovernmental organizations. COHRE is mandatedto promoteand piotect housing rightsthroughout world,and BADILis mandated promoteprotection the to and rights-based durablesolutions Palestinian for refugees. Both organizations' programmatic work seeks the enforcement and application internationally of recognizedhuman rights. 1-2 The named Petitioners here are: The Committeeof the UprootedResidentsof Kafr "CUB"), Bir'im (hereinafter and Abdullah Asad Shibliand two other landholders the in area known today as Shibli,lsrael. CUB is an organization representing former the residentsof a now destroyed PalestinianChristianvillage located neai the lsraelLebanon border.CUB was established 1987withthe miisionof returning former in the residentsof Kafr Bir'im to their lands and to obtainingrestitution all thlir property of wrongfullyconfiscated lsrael. AbdullahAsad Shibfiand the two other landholders by are membersof a Bedouintribe,Arab As-Subieh, who currentlyreside with other membersof their tribe in the villageof Shiblilocatedat the foot of Mt. Tabornear Lake Tiberias lsrael. in They heldproperty the area surrounding in Shiblibeforethe creation of the State of lsraeland for some time thereafter.Since1948,however, the lsraeli governmenthas engagedin a processof graduallyconfiscating lands owned by the Bedouins ArabAs-subieh of including landsbelonging toAbdullihAsad Shibliand the two other landholders. Once confiscated, Bedouinlands are nationalized the and turnedover for settlement and development restricted personsof Jewishorigin. to 1.3 Petitioners here approach the Human RightsCouncil as a forum of last resortto obtain a fair hearingand authoritative legal conclusions about their propertyrights under international because although law, citizens lsrael- they cannotobtainan of adequate,fair and effectiveremedy for the wrongfultakings under lsrael'sdomestic law. Land confiscation continues the case of Shibli,and the ongoingdenialof the in right to restitution the peopleof Kafr Bir'im createsnew generations internally of of displacedpeopleand refugees. The continuing violation the Petitioners' of rightsto their land underinternational incurscumulative law damageand threatens survival the of theirfamilies and communities. 1.4The petitionbroughtfonrvard here is also a matterof urgency, because:

a

i) Petitioners'rights to remain and reside on their land is threatened by an lsraeti government plan aimedat expropriating largetractsof Palestinian land in the Naqab (also known as the Negev)and the Galileewith the declaredobjectiveof boosting the Jewishpopulation these areas by 2015. Human Rightsorganizations in have warnedthat the plan is not basedon the principles equalityand ;ultice in resource of allocationand discriminates against Palestinian citizensof-lsraei. On 1 February 2007 for instance,about 50 houses belongingto the family of Tarabin El-Sane'e livingnear a Jewishtown were destroyedby the InteriorMinisiryand the policein the Naqab.(See for instanceWeekly Reviewof the Arab Association Human Rights for available http://www.arabh org). at ra.

II. THE PETITION ADMISSIBLE IS The Petition fulfills criteria Resolution 2000/3 of the Economic the of and SocialCouncil. and is admissible underthe commission's 1503procedure. Petitionis not anonymous 2.1 Petitioners CUB and AbdullahAsad Shibli and the two other landholders have identified themselves beingthe victimsof allegedviolations the Stateof lsraelof as by human rightsand humanitarian which directlyaffecttheir respective law familiesand communities numbering some 5,500 persons.The violations allegedby the named petitioners alonemeetthe admissibility requirements the 1503procedure. for

Facts are credible and reliably attested 2.2 Petitionershave direct and reliable knowledge of the violations alleged. Their testimonyabout the factualbackground and the recordof their cases Js litigated for throughthe lsraelicourtsis attachedas Annex 1 & L whichform an integralpart if tnis petition.Theil testimonyof confiscation and destructionof Palestinianhousing and propertywithin lsraeli territoryis corroborated reportsfrom Special Rappo-rleurs by (E/CN.4/2003/5/Add.1, 12 June 2002; Pinheiro (E/CN.4/Sub.2/2l04t22tAdd.1); Concluding Observations of UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies

ElC.12l1lAdd.9A,23 May 2003) and the works of independent legal scholars. The experttestimony the lawyerwho has handledthe case of Asad AbdullahShiblias of well as dozensof similarcasesis attachedas Annex 3. The scholarly researchfindings of independent experts lsraeliland law policyin the contextof lsiaet'sexpropriation on schemeare included Exhibits Annex3. Moreover, as in humanrightsorganizatibns, ", well as various lsraeli governmentalbodies created to facilitateani legalize the expropriation Palestinian of Arab land including the Custodianof Absenteeslproperty (CAP) and the Development Authority, have fully documented these land expropriations. Although in many cases, Palestinianproperty records were lost or destroyed, the United NationsConciliation Commission Palestine(UNCCp) has for reconstructed land registration a databaseof some 1.5 millionPalestinian holdings

(CERD/C/304/Add.45, March 30 1ee8; CCPR/C/79/Add.g3, Alsust 1ee8; 18 q ElC.12l1lAdd.27, December 1998;EtC.12l1l\dd.69, Augusr2a14; 31

againstwhich the recordsof CAP and the Development Authoritymay be compared. Furthermore, the lsraeli courts and governmentbodies who opposed petitionersin lsraeli courts have not contestedthe petitioners' contentions of'propertyconfiscation and destruction, only the legalityof theseacts.The Commission but shouldhave no difficulty findingthe facts allegedby petitioners be credibleand reliably in to attested.

2.3 Petitioners havedescribedincidents propertyconfiscation of and destruction lsrael by whichhaveresulted the cumulative in lossof over30,000dunams(30 kmz)of landand in forceddisplacement some 5,000persons. of The durationof the violations lover fifty years and continuing today),the amountof tand confiscated, numberof people the directlyaffected,and the state of lsrael's refusalto provide adequate relief to the victimscharacterize these violations gross.The fact that petitioners, as cases are also representative dozens of similar cases pubtishedin the records of the lsraeti of Supreme Courtand documented localand international by humanrightsorganizations (see paragraphs - 4.13 below)and of a largegroupof unnamed 4.4 victim-- original Palestinian landholders dispossessed since rcq}Lnd their descendants-- well as as the resulting statelessness into which many displacedPalestinians forced,are are additionalindicatorsof the existenceof a consistentpattern of gross violations of humanrightsand humanitarian law. 2.4 lsrael has profferedvariousjustifications its land confiscations for includingmilitary ' necessity, abandonment property, of failureto register title,and publicneed. pLtitioners show that these defenses, anatyzed in Oetail along with the substantive legal violations,are insufficient precludea finding of a cJnsistentpattern of gross and to reliably attested violations humanrightsand humanitarian of taw.

2-5 Petitioners also show that they haveengagedin a legalstruggle will with the Stateof lsrael since its establishment retaintheir iand, includirig to hearingsof their cases by the lsraeli SupremeCourt.Additionaleffortsfor domestij remeOyOVthe Kafr Bir'im displaced foreclosed the 2003 decisionof the SupremeCourt in tne case of are by lqrit (Sbattet al. v. Sfafeof lsrael,HC 840/97,2003).lnthis decision, Supreme the Court accepted the government's position that members of the internally displaced Palestinian community who are alsocitizens lsraelshouldnot be allowed returnto of to their lands and homes inside lsrael and should not be providedrestitution their of properties becausethis wouldset a legalprecedent miliionsof palestinian for refugees whose claims are to be resotvedin future politicalnegotiations. Hundredsof other casesof land expropriations appealed the lsraeliSup6me Courtwith similaifactual to bases as the Petitioners' cases have also been unsuccessful because restitution of Palestinianproperty is effectivelyprecluded by lsrael's current legal regime. (For fin-dings relevantresearch.seq Annex 3.) Despitethe former viiiagers;repeated of effortsto return to their lands and to obtain restitution their properties, of the lsraeli government, includingthe executive, the legislative and the judicial branches,has

failedto providean adequate, and effectiveremedyfor the wrongs sufferedby the fair former villagers.Domesticlegal remediesare, moreover,ineffective with regaiOto most other pre-1948Palestinian propertyownerswho, as refugees,have no sianding in lsrael'scourts. 2.6 In additionto challenges made before the lsraeli SupremeGourt,CUB has also sought review and an effectiveremedy before KnessetCommitteesand a specially created governmentalministerialcommittee.These efforts were also to no avaii, although 1994-1995CUB had submitted seriesof concrete in a proposals how the for restitution the land of the Kafr Bir'imdisplaced of could be affected withoutharmingthe well-being the small numberof Jewishsettlerscurrently of livingon Kafr Bir'imlanJ. 2.7 The Commission shouldfind that the petitioners have made extensive and good faith effortsto regaintheir lands by complying with lsraeliland laws and challenging land expropriations the lsraelicourtsystem,withoutobtaining in fair,adequateand effbctive remedies. No petitionspendingunder other complaintmechanisms 2.8 As describedabove, petitioners have exhaustedall domestic remedies.Petitioners also have not submitteda petitionunder any other complaintmechanisms the of United Nationsand its specialized bodies,nor do petitioners have claims pending under other mechanismswith jurisdiction over lsrael. Moreover,no other similar petition is currently pending with the United Nations on the subject matter of this petition,i.e. large scale expropriation Palestinian propertyin lsrael. Having limited of their requestfor redressof the allegedviolations this Commission's to 1503 procedure, the Commission shouldfind theirpetition admissible.

the UnitedNations
2.9 Petitioners'claims not politically are motivated. purpose Petitioners'claims to The of is determine rightsand remedies the under international of formerPalestinian law Arab ownersand possessors housingand propertywho were livingin the territory of which becamethe State of lsrael in 1948,whose housingand propertywere subsequenfly and continueto be - expropriated, confiscated, destroyedby the State of lsraet. or Although Palestinians should have the same rights as all other human beings to housingand property, petitioners internally the as personsand memberi of a displaced discriminated minorityin lsrael (see Concluding Observations the Human Rights of TreatyBodieslisted in paragraph 2.2 above),and as refugeesand statelesspersons, lack a state willingor able to guarantee such rights.They also lack an international protectionmechanismor entity that can guaranteesuch rights in the absenceof the state responsible do so. lsrael'srefusalto guaranteesuch rightsis manifestin the to gross violationscomplainedof here, to which the lsraeli legal system has been complicit. The Councilshouldfind the petitioners' purposeis not potitically motivated, but consistent with the objectiveand fundamental principles the United Nations of Charter.

EXPROPRIATION ISRAEL.AND CONSEQUENCES IN III. BACKGROUND PROPERTY TO TO PETITIONERS of Expropriations Committee the UprootedResidents Kafr Bir'im("CUB"): of 3.1 Petitioner. "legalized" lsraelilaws and regulations: underthe following Emergency Regulations . . . Article 125of the Defense(Emergency) Regulations 1945, of Emergency Regulations(Security Zones) of 1949, and other Emergency Regulations (Validation Acts and Compensation) 1953 LandAcquisition of Law

the military governmentapparatusand legislation Using emergencyregulations, passedby the Knesset legalizeextra-legal to actionstaken by the lsraelimilitary, lsrael the Palestinian inhabitants from their villageof Kafr Bir'im in wrongfullyevacuated their homesand property, well afterthe armedconflict 1948.In 1951,lsraeldestroyed between lsrael and Arab states had ceased.lsrael then confiscated the land of Kafr Until today,vast areas of the Bir'im in 1953 and turned it over to Jewish settlements. land are used by Jewish settlements grazinga small numberof cattle.A smaller for part of the land is currently used as a naturereseryeand a nationalpark maintained by (e.9.JewishNational organizations Fund). the stateand para-state Land expropriation under various provisionsof lsrael's land scheme has had dire for theirdescendants theircommunities. and In consequences the namedPetitioners, the lost over 12,000 dunams the case of KafrBir'im, villagers not only landconstituting (12 kmz),their homes,use of theiragricultural grazingland as the sole meansof and livelihoods, but they also lost an entire communityof many of the inhabitants The villagers relationships when they were evacuated and their villagewas destroyed. of Kafr Bir'im reliedon their community preservetheir history,identity, to and cultural Christians Palestine. Today,when the formervillagersand in heritageas Palestinian their descendants to maintaintheir connection their villageby worshiping try to on at holidaysand occasions the villagechurchand by buryingtheir dead in the village graveyard,they are forced to pass a sign claimingthat the site was once a Jewish history,identity, Today,the former village,negatingthe villagers' and culturalheritage. residents Kafr Bir'im and their descendants of numberaround2500 persons.They displacedpersonsin lsrael and as refugeesin Lebanon continueto live as internally are forced to live in the and elsewhere.Many of the villagersand their descendants homesand on the propertyof other refugeesknowingthat the priceof their stayingon is who fled the fighting the land of theirancestors beingpaid by theirformerneighbors in 1948. Additionalefforts for domestic legal remedy are foreclosedby the 2003 decisionof the SupremeCourt in the case of lqrit (see above, point 2.5). A more of of detaileddescription the facts and backgrpund this case is providedin the Affidavit Abdalla. of of Afif lbrahim Secretary the CUB. included Annex 1. For legalanalysis as of lsrael'slaws appliedto this case,see below,SectionlV.

Ahmed Olaik Shibli.and Abdullah Asad Shibli.MahmudAhmed Oakley. 3.2 Petitioners residing Shibli.lsrael: in othermembers the Bedouin of tribeof ArabAs-Subieh "legalized Expropriations underthe followinglsraelilaws: Settlementof Title Operationsand Land Registration . . . . . The Law of Limitation 1958 Basic. Law-lsrael Lands 1960 lsraelLandLaw 1969 for Ordinance 1943 of Land (Acquisition PublicPurposes) (Validation Acts and Compensation) 1953 Law LandAcquisition of

the and In the case of AsadAbdullah Shibli, two otherlandholders, the formerBedouin of the and tribalcommunity ArabAs-Subieh, tribewent fromowning/holding usingover 18,000dunams(18 kmz)of land,to beingforcedto live on smallparcelson a stripof today land at the foot of Mt. Tabor,now knownas the villageof Shibli.The community, fromthe inability work theirlandsor of has suffered to consisting some 3,000persons, graze their livestock. Some of its membersdo not even own the land on which they built homes. The community has been forcedto changeits way of life to the detriment to of their history, identity, and culturalheritage.Land belonging the Bedouinof tribe of Arab As-Subiehcontinuesto be confiscatedtoday through the use of other legal for 1943, mechanisms including Ordinance lsrael'sLand (Acquisition PublicPurposes) is of and the economic and socialsurvival the community threatened. While their rights to hold and use their land would have been protectedunder the the OttomanLand Code and were respectedby the BritishMandateauthorities, State of lsrael forced the evacuationof the tribe of Arab As-Subiehfrom most of its lands leavingthem with only a strip of land huggingthe foot of Mt. Tabor,knowntoday as the use. Some of the property the villageof Shibli,to build homesand for agricultural of tribe Arab As-Subiehwas confiscatedunder the Absentees'PropertyLaw after some during the Arab-lsraeli War of 1948. In the membersof the tribe fled from hostilities in then instituted landsettlement operations earlyto mid-1980s, lsraeligovernment the the the area of including and surrounding area knowntoday as the villageof Shibli individual to their knowing well that most Bedouins lsraelhad neverregistered in title property that they held and cultivated.These operations resulted in the further the dispossession the Bedouinof Arab As-Subieh including confiscation property of of Asad Shibliand two otherlandholders whichhad been held and belonging Abdullah to by A of cultivated them and their familiesfor generations. more detaileddescription the facts and background this case is providedin the Affidavitof AbdullahAsad Shibli of For legal analysis lsrael'slaws appliedto this of included Annex 2 to this petition. as case,see below,SectionlV. of that were incorporated 3.3 GeneralBackground: the 9 districts MandatePalestine In villages were destroyed. the five districts into fsrael,77 percent the Palestinian of Of partiallyincorporated into lsrael,74 percentof the villageswere destroyed. addition In and expropriated Palestinian housingand to the outright destruction, lsraeldestroyed propertythrougha numberof legal measuresenactedby the lsraeli government.By

the end of 1948,within the state of lsrael,approximately per cent of Palestinian70 owned land had been seized,65 per cent of Palestinian housinghad been destroyed, and 32 per cent of the remainingPalestinian housing was expropriated the Stateof by lsrael for the benefit of its Jewish population.The UNCCP estimatedthat, as of September 1950, 73,000 Palestinian houses and 7,800 premises, such as warehouses,workshops and offices, had come under the control of the lsraeli Custodian AbsenteeProperty.By 1967, an estimated150,000homes had been of (TerryRempel:"Housingand PropertyRestitution, expropriated from Palestinians. The PalestinianCase", in: Refurning Home,: Housing and Property RestitutionRightsof Refugees and Displaced Persons; edited by Scott Leckie; TransnationalPublishers, 2Q03:p.275- 317). Following the 1948 war, lsraelwas in controlof 20,600km2of land,but the stateand privateJewishownershad legaltitleto no morethan 2,800km2. The State of lsrael, by means of its land regime, subsequentlyexpropriatedand confiscated some 17,000km2of land mostlyownedby PalestinianArabs. 2001, it By was estimatedthat lsrael had confiscated almost 80 percent of the land owned by Palestinians lsraeli in territory.(SeealsotheAffidavit Hussein of Abu Hussein attached as Annex 3 tqlhjs*Belitiqn more detailson thesedata as well as analysisof lsrael's for land laws directly relevant the Petitioners' to cases.) IV. ISRAEL'SSCHEMEOF LAND EXPROPRIATION. DESTRUCTION PETITIONERS' OF PROPERTYAND HOUSINGCONSTITUTE CONSISTENT PATTERNOF GROSS A VIOLATIONS INTERNATIONAL OF LAW FROM1948TO THIS DAY Israel'scontinuingexpropriationand destructionof petitioners'prope(v and housing violate Israel'sobligationsunder binding human righb and humanitarianlaw treaties propertyare governedby 4.1 The acts of the State of lsrael in expropriating Palestinian international and their legalityis not affectedby their characterization law under lsraeli domestic law.As a memberof the UnitedNations, lsraelis obligated upholdcertain to inalienable rightsand freedomsof all human beingsas embodiedin the Universal Declarationon Human Rights ('UDHR"). Furthermore,lsrael has ratified the International Covenanton Economic.Social.and CulturalRights ("CESCR"), the International Covenant on Civil and PoliticalRights ("CCPR'), the International Convention the Elimination All Forms of Racial Discrimination (.CERD"), on of the Conventionon the Eliminationof All Forms of Discrimination against Women ("CEDAW'),the Conventionon the Rights of the Child ("CRC"),the Convention ('1951 Refugee Relating the Statusof Refugees to Convention"), the Convention and Relatingto the Status of StatelessPersons('1954 Statelessness Convention"). As notedabove,lsraelis also a partyto the GenevaConvention Relative the Protection to of CivilianPersonsin Time of War (GenevalV), which applies in times of armed conflictand was applicable a matterof customary to lsrael'sland expropriations as law duringthe stateof hostilities. 4.2 Havingratified lsraelis boundto upholdand respecttheir provisions these treaties, with regardto all persons,regardless their nationality.Concerning accession of its to the humanrightstreaties, only reservation the lsraelhas made relatingto propertyand housingrightsis to Article16 of CEDAWregarding equality men and womenas the of to, inter alia, propertyrights. lsrael has expressedits reservation only so far as the lsraelilaws governing certainreligious communities conflicts with Article16.Although

lsrael has maintaineda state of emergency since 1948 and declared a state of emergency underArticle 4(1) of the CCPR,the only article fromwhichit claimsto have derogatedis that of Article9 of the CCPR, not relevantto our discussion here. lsrael's declaration a stateof emergency of does not meet the tests requiredby Art. 4(1) of the CCPR, in that the stateof 'emergency' permanent, emergency not immediate is the is so as to justify use of the emergencymeasurestaken, and the measuresthemselves are not proportional the emergency. to The main purposeof such actions,and the reasonsthat lsrael has failed to remedythe actions,is solely to discriminate against non-Jewishconstituencies the State of lsrael concerningtheir propertyrights.As of such, all derogationsfor a 'state of emergency'have been used for an improper purpose discriminatory underArticle 4(1). The discriminatorypurposeand effect of Israel'sland expropriationand destrudion violate its treatv obligations 4.3 The treatiesto which lsrael is a party explicitly forbid discrimination the basis of on race,nationality, protection rights.The CERD, religion, and the discriminatory of Article 5, prohibitsracialdiscrimination and guarantees equalitybeforethe law as to (a) the rightto equaltreatment (dxi) the rightto freedomof residence beforetribunals, withina state, (dxii) the right to leave and return to one's country,(dXv) the right to own propertyalone as well as in association with others,(dXvi)the right to inherit,and (e) the rightto housing. Furthermore, UDHRArticle7, CCPRArticle2(1\, and CESCR the Article 2(2), which protect the right to housing,all guaranteethe nondiscriminatory protection rightsenshrinedin those conventions. of More generally, CERDArticle 1(3) forbids any nationality-based discrimination. Such discrimination also forbidden is underGenevalV,Article33 (see below, point4.17). 4.4 lsrael'sEmergency Regulations have been used to expelArabsfrom their property, to close their propertyand the surrounding area off for "securityreasons,"and then to "abandoned" "uncultivated," subsequently declare sameproperty the or thus permitting confiscation the state.The seriesof attemptsin court by the Arab villagersof lqrit by and Kafr Bir'im (HC 64/51, HC 195/51,HC 141181, 840197) regaintheir land HC to demonstrates the government that and the lsraeliSupremeCourtwill take numerous measuresto thwartvalid legalchallenges expropriations to basedon securityconcerns that no longerexist.These emergencyregulations have never been used to evacuate Jewishcommunities and expropriate their property. 4.5 lsrael'sAbsentees'PropertyLaw has been used to confiscatepropertybelongingto citizensat war with lsrael or Palestinian Arabs who stayed, even for short period of time, in territorycontrolledby such states.The law appliesfrom 29 November1947 (UNGAR181 Palestine Partition Resolution) untilthe day the Stateof Emergency will be lifted by lsrael. Such persons are declared "absentees",and their property is "absenteeproperty" designated and transferred the Custodian AbsenteeProperty to of (CAP),usuallywithoutnotification this designation the propertyholders.The CAP of to is authorized sell and transferabsenteepropertyonly to the Development to Authority (DA), the state agencyestablished the lsraeligovernment conjunction by in with the enactmentof the Absentees'PropertyLaw to "legalize"the confiscation. When an absenteedesignationis challengedin court, regardlessof whether the technical

requirements the law are met, the transferof ownershipby the CAP to the DA is of deemed made in good faith and irrevocable. There are no exceptions involuntary for abandonment inheritance, or unless the propertybelongsto a Jew. PrivateJewish propertyis not confiscated underthis law. lsraelhas not endedthe Stateof Emergency and the law is applieduntiltoday. 4.6 Part of the landsof ArabAs-Subeih(e.9. CAP and DevelopmentAuthority S. Shredi v. and SalehM. Shibli, 463/89decidedon 2-10-1991) HC and the landsof Al Jish where many of the villagers Kafr Bir'imwere resettled of againsttheir wish,were confiscated under the Absentees'PropertyLaw. Numerousadditional cases of confiscation under the Absentees'PropertyLaw are on file with human rightsorganizations and lawyers, including:MuhammadHabab v. CAP, HC 54158;CAP and DA v. Heirsof Toraiya A. Mousa, HC 3747190 decided on 28-7-1992;HusseinA. Diab v. CAP and DA, HC 1397190 decidedon 28-12-1992;Hassan S. Danarish CAP, DA, et al., HC 415189 v. decidedon 26-10-1993; and, Mikora Farm Ltd v. Ali Younes,HC 1ogl87 decidedon 29-9-1993.To the best of our knowledge,no Palestinianpropertyowner has ever challenged this law successfully and regained ownership, with the exception special of cases not relevant this petition. for Even limitedPalestinian claims,broughtunderthe 1991 Basic Law: Human Dignityand Freedom,for equal access and use of land confiscatedunder the Absentees' Property Law have resulted only in very partial success(e.9. Qa'adanand ACRI vs DA, 1995).For more detailedlegal analysisof lsrael'sAbsentees'PropertyLaw see Annex 3. Affidavitof HusseinAbu Husseinand relevantExhibits. pertaining land registration 4.7 lsrael's laws and operations to and settlement title, of including the Law of Limitation 1958,and Basic Law- lsrael Lands 1960,were and continue be usedto confiscate landsof Palestinian to the Arabswho lawfully heldland based on prescription under the OttomanLand Code. To make it virtuallyimpossible to registertitle on the basis of prescriptive rights,lsraellengthened holdingand the periodcontainedin the OttomanLand Law of 1858 from 10 to 15 yearsfor cultivation unsettledland and from 15 to 25 years for settledland. The lengthening the period of of prescriptionwas then applied retroactively that vested rights of Palestinian so landholders were effectively canceled. lsrael then froze the countingof time towards the periodfor prescription five years,and announced the most denselypopulated for in Palestinian areas where Palestinians had not registered title, that it would begin settlementof title and land registration operationsthere. The announcement of settlementof title operations tolled the time for acquisition title by prescription in of that no moretime couldbe countedto accrueprescription rights- and openedthe door for lsrael to confiscate more Palestinian land. Even in the unusualcase when a Palestinian Arab was somehowable to prove holdingand cultivation the requisite for prescription period,the lsraeliSupremeCourt interpreted land laws in restrictive the ways in favor of state ownershipand createdproceduralbarriersand standardsthat were exceedingly difficult Palestinian for landholders meet. Finally, to the abilityof Palestinian Arabs to claim title by prescription settledland was abolished in altogether afterthe lsraeliSupreme Courtinterpreted lsrael'sBasicLaw-lsrael Landsto prohibit suchacquisition titlein landsdeemedto belongto the state. of 4.8 Petitioner Abdullah Asad Shibliis directlyaffectedby these laws ( The Stateof lsraelv. Abdullah As'ad Shibli, HC 520/89 decided on 6 March 1992).Also affected are

landowners,in numerous other residentsof Arab al-Shibliand other Palestinian et particularPalestinian Bedouin,including:Sa/imAl al-Hawashli al. v. Sfafe of lsrael, HC 218174decidedon 15-5-1984:Ahmad Y. Saleh v. Sfafe of lsrael, HC 149181 decidedon 2-9-1984;ShabeebHamzehv. Sfafeof lsrael,HC 265/83decidedon 6-111985; MuhammadA. Al-Wakeli et al. v. The State of lsrael, DA and lLA, HC 84183 Sfafe of lsraelv. Heirsof AbdullahM. Rahal,HC decidedbetween28-2 and6-10-1983; Abu SulubBedouinv. lLA, HC 518/86,and others. decidedon 16-10-1986; 265183 involve Current lsraeli land settlementoperations,in particularin the Naqab/Negev, laws. land under cover of prescription of expropriations yet more Palestinian ongoing Private Jewish land owners are not affectedby these laws and operations,because For they cannot usuallyclaim title based on prescription. more detailedlegal analysis Exhibits. Abu Hussein and relevant of see and findings, Annex3. Affidavit Hussein 1943 for Ordinance to 4.9 lsraelcontinues employthe Land (Acquisition PublicPurposes) landownersin order to importantland owned by Palestinian to confiscatestrategically housing, and use. The lsraeliSupremeCourt has given furtherJewishdevelopment, and of wide latitudein the application the PublicPurposeOrdinance the government of has shown almost completedeferenceto the governmentdeterminations what, where and when to confiscate property. In practice, this has meant that the so Arab land solelyfor Jewishsettlement long as it claims government may expropriate under Examples the dispossession of for a "publicpurpose." is that the confiscation town of Nazareth(Committeefor Defenseof the these laws includethe Palestinian Land of Nazaretha.o. vs The Ministerof Finance a.o., HC 30/55 decided Confiscated on 22-7-1955)and numerousothers, such as. Fatmeh H. Gara vs DA, HC 816/81 decided on 21-1 and 21-3-1985;Makhoul vs The Minister of Finance, HC 2739195 decided on 12-3-1996;and, Mazen H. Z. Nusseibehv. The Minister of Finance, HC for Confiscation public purposehas affectedonly a decidedon 12-11-1995. 4466194 of small numberof Jewishpropertyowners,becauseprivateownership land by Jewish see Annex3. and findings, legalanalysis is individuals rare in lsrael.For moredetailed Abu Husseinand attachedExhibits. Affidavitof Hussein violatestreaty obligations and destruclion oflsrael's land expropriations The arbitrariness with the home and 4.10 The treatiesto which lsrael is a partyforbid arbitraryinterference property. Article 17 of the UDHR obligateslsrael to protectthe right to own property, depriveanyoneof his with others,and not to arbitrarily and individually in association protect Article17(1)of the CCPRandArticle16(1)of the CRC likewise or her property. with the home.Althoughpartiesmay derogatefrom these againstarbitraryinterference may the threatening life of the nation,derogations articlesduringtimes of emergency discrimination. not involve land and other propertyunder the Public Purpose 4.11 Often when lsrael confiscated for therewas otherland available the alleged as Ordinance, in the case of Nazareth, public purpose. Instead of expropriatingother available land, lsraeli officials if were arbitrary, not discriminatory.Nor Arab land. Such expropriations expropriated and propertydestructionmet the limits of necessityrequiredby have expropriations both the CCPR's derogationprincipleand Geneva lV. lf lsraeli officialsclosed off an area of land, confiscatedproperty,or expelled residentson the basis of legitimate

t0

securityconcerns,lsraeliofficialsshould have returnedthat propertyand housingto former Arab residentsas soon as those security concerns ceased to exist. The experience the Kafr Bir'im villagersshows that even after the state declassified of a 'securityzone', such declassification never involvedrestitutionof the land to its has legitimate formerowners. Rather,lsraelconfiscated Palestinian land on the pretextof public purposeor necessity, and then turned it over for Jewish settlementor related use. Thus, since the confiscations and destruction were arbitraryto accomplisha purpose, discriminatory they are prohibited underthe treatiesdiscussedhere. Israel's expropriationsand destructionof prope4v and its subsequentfailure to provide restitution, compensdion. and/or alternative housing and property violate its treatv obligations to recognize the right of all persons to adequate standardsof living and housing. 4.12 The treatiesto which lsrael is a party obligatestates to recognizethe right of all personsto an adequatestandardof living for that person and for his or her family, including right to adequatehousingand to the continuous the improvement living of conditions. These obligations embodiedin UDHRArticle25 and CESCRArticle are 11(1).CEDAWArticle 14(2Xh)and CRC Article27(3) place a higherburdenon the state not only to recognizebut also to strive to ensure these rights for women and children.The Sub-Commission the Protection on and Promotionof Human Rights recently reaffirmedthe universal applicabilityof the right to adequate housing, particularly returningrefugeesand displacedpersons.The Sub-Commission for also confirmedthat laws of abandonment were a seriousimpediment the right of return to and reintegration refugeesand internally of displacedpersons.Althoughthe treaties recognize that statesmay have limitedfinancialabilityto providefor these rights,they requirea good faith effort at providingthe highestattainablestandardsand prohibit degradation housing of and otherlivingconditions. 4.13 Together, four types of lsraeliland laws and the rulingsof the lsraeliSupreme the Court havedeniedPalestinian Arabs the rightto housing,propertyownership, freedom of residence, and inheritance.Land expropriatedfrom Palestinian owners was transformed into "lsraelLand" under lsrael'sBasic Law (1960).Such land is owned and held by the state (Development Authority, lsrael LandAdministration, others) and (WorldZionistOrganizations, and para-state JewishNationalFund and their affiliates) agencies which,undertheir statutes, hold and developland for the exclusive benefitof the Jewish people. No similar laws and agencies operate to protect Palestinian propertyownership,or to hold and developland for Palestinian Arabs ln the war of 1948,lsraelgainedcontrolof over 20.6 million (20,600km2)of land in former dunurns Palestine, howeverthe Stateand privateJewishownerscombinedhad legaltitle to no morethan 2,800km2.Sincethen,the Stateof lsraelhas expropriated some 1,288,000 dunums (1,288 km2)of Palestinian land by means of the combinedapplication of emergency regulations and the Land Acquisition (Validation of Acts and Compensation)Law Applicationof the Absentees' Property Law resulted in the expropriation an additional of four to five milliondunams (4,000- 5,000 km2).The LandAcquisition PublicPurposeOrdinance, perthe ILA's 1993 repod,resulted for as in the expropriation 1.85million of dunams(1,850km2) privately of heldland,the major part of which was taken from Palestinians. Followingland settlementof title and registration operations,Palestinian Arabs are left with only approximately per cent 3

tl

(600 - 700 km2)of the land in lsrael.lsrael'sland regimethus constitutes violation a of the Palestinianpeople's right to self-determination. Acts of arbitraryinterference in individual PalestinianArab housing and property rights has moreover resulted in nationality-, race-, and religiously-based discrimination. expellingPetitioners By from their land and expropriating destroying and their housingand property, lsraelhas also infringedupon the petitioners' rightsto housing.Cuttingoff accessto petitioners' fields and other sourcesof their livelihood has deprivedthem of their means of survivaland severelydiminished their standardsof living.Furthermore, lsrael has not offeredfair, adequateand effectiverestitution and compensation. lsrael'sland regimeand policies thus constitute egregious violations its treatyobligations. of Israel's expropriationsand destructionof housingand propeqv have unlawfully createdone of the world's largest populations of refugeesand statelesspersons in contraventionof Israel'streaty obligations. personsand internally 4.14 Palestinians refugees, as stateless personsshould displaced be protected underall applicable human rightsstandards and instruments; however, the prevalent interpretations the so-called'exclusion of clauses'inthe 1951 Refugee Convention, the UNHCR Statute, and the 1954 Convention StatelessPersons on have effectively excludedPalestinians from many of the essentialprotections those of conventions. Nevertheless, objectand purposeof these Conventions to alleviate the is persons,to allowthem to enjoy fundamental the plightof refugeesand stateless rights and freedomswithout discrimination, and to prevent the social and humanitarian problems surroundingrefugeesand statelesspersons from becominga source of tension betweenstates.lsrael'sexpropriations and destruction petitioners' of housing and propertyhave been the main cause of, and continueto contribute substantially to the creationand continuedplight of millionsof Palestinian refugeesand stateless persons in contravention the spirit and purposeof the 1951 RefugeeConvention of and 1954Convention the Statusof Stateless on Persons.

Israel'sexpropriationand destructionof petitioners'prope4v and housing violated Israel's obligationsunder customaryinternationallaw from the date they conmenced. 4.15 lsrael'stakingof Palestinian landwas a mattergovernedby customary international law, ab initio. The principles underlyingthe illegality of lsrael's expropriationof Palestinian land as a matterof customarylaw, and the concomitant Palestinian rights to reparationsfor wrongful taking, have only strengthenedover time as the key customarynorms have been codifiedin treatiesthat lsrael has signedand ratified.By 1948, there was no doubt that forced expulsionwas prohibitedas a war crime. (Charterof the International MilitaryTribunal,lMT, Aug., 1945).Aside from forced preventing expulsion, customary also prohibited law returnof refugees, and the taking or destructionof refugee property.The Hague Regulations, which established principles customary long before1948,definedsuch takingor destruction "pillage". as The norm of non-discrimination nationality in rights,rightsto returnto one's country prior to 1948. The international and housing rights were also clearly established humanitarian law, law of state succession/nationality and the human rights law law principles underpinning rightof returnand the relatedrightsto property the restitution of refugeeswere accepted,undertaken, and enforcedby states and the international

t2

community well prior to the Palestinian refugeecrisis.Thus, UN GeneralAssembly Resolution194(lll),the key Resolution affirmingthese rightsfor Palestinian refugees, was based firmly on state obligation,opinio juris and state practicethat had made thesebinding normsby the time UNGAR194was passed. In the early period ofstate-building.Israelviolatedthe prohibition on forcedexpulsion.and the principles of statesuccession and non-discriminationb], its discriminator),application of housing and prope4v rights practice, 416 International usuallyenforcedby peaceagreements, to allow inhabitants is of a territory the time of changein sovereignty acquirethe nationality, thereby at to and the protection, the successorstate. This was the practicein the breakup of the of formerSovietUnionand formerYugoslavia. Furthermore, denationalization basedon race or ethnicity prohibited only undergeneralprinciples non-discrimination is not of embodied the humanrightstreaties in citedabove,but also undercustomary and law the principles and charters international of military tribunals which definepersecution grounds a crimeagainst basedon racial, religious, political or as humanity. 4.17 The historical recordclearlyestablishes that the vast majorityof Palestinian refugees displacedbetween 1948-1950became refugeesas a result of forced expulsionby ZionisUlsraeli forces. (See, for example:Benny Morris, The Bifth of the Palestinian RefugeeProblem1947- 1949,Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1987:Benni Morris, /srae/'sBorder Wars, 1949 - 1956,Oxford:ClarendonPress, 1993; Salman Abu Sitta, From Refugees Citizensat Home, London:PalestineLand Societyand to PalestinianReturn Center, 2001.) lsrael's actions and legislation, which stripped indigenous Palestinian Arabs of their housingand property and turnedthem over to agenciesproviding the housingand settlement Jewishimmigrants, for of violated the customarynormsof humanitarian and principles state succession law of and failedto recognize equality all those livingin the territory the of that becamelsrael.Expulsion, land laws and policiesemployedby the State of lsraeland para-state agenciesduring state succession and continuing today have resulted in systematic and gross discriminatory application housingand propertyrights to such a degree as to be of characterized a crimeagainst as humanity. Israel's expropridion and destruction of Arab housing and property under ernergenc), regulationsduring statesuccession amountedto unlawful collective penalties.pillage and unlawful confiscation (No. lV) Respecting Lawsand Customs War on Land 4.18 The HagueConvention the of ("HaguelV') has long been considered customary international applicable law during periodsof international armed conflict. This was firmly established when the Allied ForceschargedGermanofficialsresponsible the atrocities \ Alr/llwith violations for of of Hague lV despiteGermanynot having ratifiedthe Convention. Furthermore, both HaguelV and the GenevaConvention Relative the Protection Civilian to of Persons in Time of War (GenevalV) are now considered customaryinternational law. lsrael itself has confirmedthis custom by justifyingmany of its expropriations and much of its propertydestruction the necessityprincipleslisted in Hague lV Article 23(g) and on GenevalV Article147. HaguelV Article50 and GenevalV Article33 forbidscollective

13

penalties,including attackson property.Protocoll, Articles4(2Xb\ and 75 of Geneva lV repeatthese prohibitions penalties, affirmthat the prohibitions againstcollective but apply at all times,both duringwar and in times of peace.Privatepropertyis protected from confiscation under Hague lV Article46. Pillageof any propertyis also prohibited under Hague lV Articles 28 and 47. Geneva lV defines wanton and unnecessary destruction property a grave breach,for which reparations of as shouldbe provided. 4.19 lt is clearthat lsrael's aim in expropriating destroying and property, Palestinian during the periodfrom 1948 to the 1950s,was to expel and transferthe Arab populationin order to settlethe Jewish populationin the area. Therefore, the prohibitions against expulsionand transferof the inhabitants an area by the occupying of force duringwar time embodiedin Hague lV Article 23(g) and Geneva lV Article 147 apply. Although lsrael has justifiedmuch of its land expropriation, particularly under the emergency regulations, being"necessary" "proportional" measures, actionsdid not as and war its meet either the necessityor proportionality requirements Hague lV Article 23(g). of Even if such an argumentcould be made prior to the signing of the Armistice Agreements 1949,it was inapplicable of once theseagreements terminated hostilities. The evacuation the residentsof Kafr Bir'im under such EmergencyRegulations of in 1949,the destruction the villageand expropriations land well after the armistice of of agreement with Lebanon was signed,and the transferof these landsfor use by Jewish settlementsillustrates illegalpolicy employedby lsrael at that time. lsrael'searly the land laws, particularly EmergencyRegulations the and the Absentees'PropertyLaw were intendedto, and effectuated, lsrael'splan to permanently dispossess Palestinian Arabs in lsrael.lsrael'sexpropriation destruction Arab land and propertyamount and of to unlawfulcollectivepenaltieson the Palestinian Arab populationin lsrael and has been to such a degree as to constitutepillage,for which lsrael owes reparations. Population transfer also a crimeagainsthumanity is basedon Article7(1) of the Rome Statute the International of Criminal Court.

V. PETITIONERS INSISTTHAT ISRAEL BE OBLIGATED TO PROVIDEREPARATION TO PETITIONERS FOR ITS ILLEGAL LAND EXPROPRIATIONS.UNDER BINDING PRINCIPLES RESTITUTION OF AND COMPENSATION International law Requires Restitution as the Rernedyfor the Wrongful Taking of Properqv 5.1 Restitution propertyand--only of when restitution impossible-compensation lost is for or damaged property,are the required form of reparationfor persons who have sufferedviolations their housingand propertyrights. Recently, of this Commission adopted the "Basic Principlesand Guidelineson the Right to a Remedy and Reparations Victimsof Violations International for of HumanRightsand Humanitarian -LaW,"developed in accordance with Resolution 1999/33 affirming the right to restitution and compensation.Article 21 obliges states to provide restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and guarantees non-repetition victimsof of to international human rights and humanitarian law violations.Ariicle22 establishes restitution, including returnof propertyand the returnto one's placeof residence, as the requiredmethod of reparation. Article 23 underscores that states should provide compensation only as a second preference to restitution for damage that is econom icallyassessable.

T4

law is 5.2 The principlethat restitution the requiredremedyfor violationsof international Justice Courtof International since 1928,in the Permanent has beenfirmlyentrenched (PCf decision,Chozow Factory (lndemnity)Case. ln Chorzow Factory,the PCIJ J) must be mad*that is, return that for wrongfulpropertytaking,restitution established of the propertyitselfto the victim-in order to undo the harm causedby the violation, equal to the were not possibleshoulda state pay compensation and only if restitution this principlehas been codifiedin The International Most recently, value of restitution. which elaborate on a state's Law Commission'sArticles on State Responsibility, wrongfulacts.Articles36 and 37(1) for obligations providerestitution internationally to state that restitutionis the required reparationfor property.taking,in order to reis that existedbeforethe wrongfulact, and compensation to be the situation establish possible. These principles are paid only to the extent that restitution not materially is Article29(2). Displacement, on in repeated the U.N.GuidingPrinciples Internal 5.3 Whetherlsrael'sinitialpropertytakingwas wrongfulunder treaty or customarylaw at as the time is now irrelevant, long as the violationcontinuesto the present.The jurisprudence significant on has developed Courtof HumanRights(ECIHR) European the principlethat states are liable for rights violationsthat began before the state violation. as humanrightsinstruments, long as thereis a continuing ratified applicable (1993). See a/so, and See Papamichalopoulos Others v. Greece. 18/1992J363/437 (1996), in which the ECIHR, in a closely Loizidou v. Turkey. 40/1993/435/514 propertyclaims,held that Turkeywas liable for analogouscase to these Palestinian propertyconfiscations almosttwo decadesbeforeTurkeybecamesubjectto occurring (ECHR) provisions under which The EuropeanConvention the Court'sjurisdiction. identicalto the provisionsof the human these cases have been decidedare almost rightstreatiescited above to which lsrael is bound.Very similarto Art. 17(1)of the ICCPR,Art. 8 of the ECHR providesthat everyonehas the right to respectfor private and familylife,home,and correspondence. 5.4 Recently,other United Nations bodies have affirmed the rignts of victims of specificallyrestitution. The U.N. Subinternationallaw violationsto reparations, the of and Promotion Human Rights reaffirmed right of all on Commission Protection refugees and displaced persons to return to their homes and places of habitual in 1998/26. lt elementof reconciliation its Resolution as residence an indispensable "free and fair also urged all states to develop judicial mechanismsto ensure the on of exerciseof the right to returnto one's home."The Committee the Elimination of the highlighted relevance CERD Article5 obligingstatesto RacialDiscrimination displaced to and internally protectthe rightto housing withoutdiscrimination refugees the confirmed rightsof all such persons its Recommendation 22. The Committee No. in personsto returnto their homes,if they shouldso choose,have their propertyrestored for that cannotbe restored. to them,and be compensated any property

international consensus criminal courtsalsodemonstrate of 5.5 The statutes international Article75 of the as for the goal of restitution the primarymeansof victims'reparations. CriminalCourt, Article 105 of the lnternational Rome Statute of the lnternational Criminal 23 and Yugoslavia, Article of the lnternational for Criminal Tribunal the Former includingthe Tribunalfor Rwanda all give their courts power to provide restitution, to and compensation victims. returnof property,

t5

/

t

\

5.6 Many voluntaryrepatriation agreements have impliedor explicitly affirmedthe right of returningrefugeesand internally displacedpersonsto restitution housing,land and of property. The 1991 agreement government betweenthe UNHCR and Guatemalan bound the government do "all in its power to guarantee" to that returneeswho had owned or held landwould be able to recoverand registerthat land,and that only upon the agreement of the returnee may he or she receive compensationrather than restitution. The 1994 agreementfor the return of refugees and displacedpersons providedfor returnees get betweenAbkhazia,Georgia,and the RussianFederation to back both movable and immovableproperty,and to be compensatedshould that propertybe lost or non-returnable. The 1996 declaration the Liberiangovernment by on the rights of returneesspecifiedthat returneesshould have the rights to their original land restored and that the governmentwould facilitatethe restitutionof movable and immovable property to the extent possible. Other examples of repatriation agreements includingthe right to restitution housingand propertyare of those in Kosovo, Croatia, Kuwait,Angola, Rwanda, Myanmar,Mozambiqueand Zimbabwe, DRC,Afghanistan lran,Cambodia, the and Eritrea and Ethiopia, Tajikistan, and Bosniaand Hezegovina.'The 1995 DaytonAgreement that ended.the conflictin Bosnia and Hezegovina containsthe most specific incorporation restitutionand of personsof any agreement date.AnnexVl of returnrightsfor refugees and displaced to that Agreementcreatedan international mechanismto enforcethe obligations the of agreement which focused on the absolute right to restitutionof property, and compensationfor property that could not be restored - in the Bosnian case, no compensation has been paid, as the remedy for propertyclaims has uniformlybeen restitution.Of particularnote are the agreementsin Mozambique,Guatemala,and Tajikistan, which entitledreturnees repossessformer lands and homes,whetheror to possessed not they had previously officialtitle. 5.7 The Petitioners submit that the international consensuson propertyand housing personsis to restitution the contextof the returnof refugeesand internally in displaced such a degree as to make restitutionthe required form of reparationfor lsrael's violations their housingand propertyrights. of Internationalconsensus the right to restitutionin the specific context of Palestinians on 5.8 In 1948,the UNGA passedResolution 194(lll),in which the key paragraph the on problem, paragraph statesthat: resolution the refugee of 11, refugeeswishing to return to their homes and live at peacewith their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliestpracticabledate, and... compensalion should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damageto property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible..." (UNCCP) be formed 5.9 The Resolution furtherinstructs UN Conciliation a Commission to to facilitate repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation, compensation. 1950, the and In "...[T]he

l6

UNCCP Secretariatpublished a paper on the historicalprecedentfor restitution, observing that "{thelunderlying principle paragraph sub-paragraph ...is that of 11, 1, the Palestine refugees shall be permitted... to returnto their homesand be reinstated in the possessionof the properiy which they had previouslyheld." The Secretariatalso wrote that, "whenever is established it that, under international law, the propertyof a refugee has been wrongfullyseized, sequestered, confiscated, detained by the or lsraeli Government, claimantis entitledto restitution the property, it is itilt in the of if plus indemnity damages." existence, for Resolution para. ti, ahOthe drafting 194(lll), historyleadingto its passage, was understood incorporate to what was alreadybindin! law on restitutionat the time, and as has been discussedabove, has only been strengthened incorporation humanrightsinstruments, by in internationaljurisprudence, and statepractice sincethen. 5.10 UNGAResolution 36/146C furtheraffirmed rightsof thosedisplaced hostilities the by beginning June 1967 and aftenruards returnto their homes or formei placesof in to residence. The inalienable rightof the Palestinian Peopleto returnto their homesand property was reaffirmed the GeneralAssembly 1974(Resolution by in 3236). f the Israeli-Pale remedy Israel'sviolationsof humanrights and humanitarianlaw 5.11 ln 2002, the United States brokeredthe Road Map to a PermanentTwo-State Solutionto the lsraeli-Palestinian Conflict.Similarto the earlier Oslo RccorOs, tnE Agreementdefers the issue of refugeesfor the future and simply requiresthat an "agreed, just, fair and realistic" solutionto the refugeeissue be fbund.There is no explicit reference the Agreement Resolution in to 194(lll)or the principles restitution of so prominent in virtually every other agreement between states on solutions to problemsof refugees persons. and displaced 5.12 In lightof the international consensus restitution the primary on as form of reparation for violations housingand propertyrights,the aboveframeworks inadequate of are for resolution the propefi and housingclaimsof the Petitioners theircommunities of and in lsrael.As articulated the International by Court of Justicequotingthe Chozow Factorydecision,lsrael has an obligation returnthe victimsto a siiuationsuch as to would exist had there been no violationsat atl. To deny the petitioners their right to restitutionof their propertyand housingwhile the international communityprotects these rights for other victims of similarviolations would constitute discriminatory a application fundamental of rights,prohibited under the UDHR, CERD, CESCR,and ICCPR.

VI. REQUEST FOR URGENT MEASURES. REMEDIES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Petitioners requestthe Human Rights Council to: Adopt a resolution which condemnsthe expropriation land and other propertyin lsrael,by of the State of lsrael, from the Palestinian Arab land holders and finds that ihese actioni

l7

constitutea consistentpatternof gross and reliablyattestedviolationsof human rights and fundamental freedomsunderinternational customary and treaty-based that must be halted law immediately, and that housingand propertyrestitution must be providedto the victimsas the appropriate remedyunderinternational law. Adopt a resolution urging the State of Israel to: I ) lmmediatelyrestituteand restore the lands and propertiesto the Palestinian Arab landholders the villageof Kafr Bir'im,and Shibli (ArabAs-Subieh)represented of by Petitioners here. 2) lmmediatelypay compensationto the Petitionersfor the wrongful taking, loss of income and damage to the propertiesof the Village of Kafr Bir'im and the Arab Asin Subieh, addition the required to restitution the properties of themselves. 3) Ensurethe physicalsafetyand protection Petitioners of here from any threatsor risks to themselves their familiesor denial of any of their rights resultingfrom their or bringing this Petition, the handsof any stateor non-state at entity. policies, or legislation that confiscates, 4) Cease and desist any further actions, constrains,expropriates removes from the use, title, ownership or leaseholdof or Palestinian Arabs their lands and properties, includingin the context of measures para-stateagencies (WZO, JNF, and their undertakenby the State of lsrael and affiliates). 5) Repealall lawsand regulations comprising illegal the landregime. 6) Complywith all international obligations accordance in with the obseruations issuedby the UN humanrightstreatybodies,including implementation the rightof return and of housing and property restitutionof internally displaced Palestinians,"present absentees",and the land rights of Bedouin citizens (CEsCR: El9.12l1lAdd.27, paragraphs 41,42; ElC.12l1lAdd.gO, paragraph CCPR/791Add.93, paragraph 25, 43; 14); implement the right of returnfor all Palestinians and permitthem to repossess their homes in lsrael (CERD/C l304lAdd.45,paragraph 18); and reform land and nationalitylaws as well as the state's relationship with para-stateZionist agencies which discriminate against Palestinian citizens and refugees (CESCR: paragraphs 13,35; CCPR/79/Add.93, paragraph ElC.1211l\dd.27, 11, 25). Adopt a resolution: 1 . Appointing Special a Rapporteur independent or Expertto studythe question wrongful of properties lsraeland also incorporating subject lsraeliexpropriation Palestinian of in the matterof this Petitionintothe mandatesof relevant SpecialRapporteurs. 2 . Inviting the partiesto this Petitionto a hearingat the Commission, order to provide in additional information clarification. and 3 . Recommending the UnitedNationsSecurityCouncilthat it take up the questionof to wrongful lsraeli expropriation Palestinianproperty in lsrael, and resolve that such of

t8

propertybe immediately restoredunder the acceptedprinciplesof international as law para.11. required underUNGARes.194(lll), 4 . Recommending the UN GeneralAssemblythat it issue a Resolution to reaffirming the principle UNGARes. 194(lll),para. 11,clariffingthat repealof lsraet's of discriminatory land laws are required a matterof international that all Palestinian as law, Arabs,original owners of property must be restitutedof their propertieswithin lsrael, and that the recordsof the UNCCPbe made accessible Palestinian to claimantsfor the purposesof provingownership and title. 5 . Recommending the UN GeneralAssembly re-openthe UNCCPregistry take into to to to account continuing landconfiscations.

I
I I

I I I I
I

I I

l9