Bibi opposes legalization bill

By TOVAH LAZAROFF, JPOST

The Knesset is poised to hold a preliminary reading of an outpost bill which would legalize many unauthorized West Bank Jewish homes in both outposts and settlements.

Ahead of Wednesday’s vote, National Union Party leader Ya’acov Katz, who proposed the bill, and MK Zevulun Orlev (Habayit Hayehudi) met Tuesday with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who has opposed efforts to legislate the issue of unauthorized Jewish building in the West Bank.

Netanyahu has, however, agreed to allow coalition MKs to vote their conscience Wednesday. He has not offered that option to ministers or deputy ministers who risk losing their post if they vote in favor of the bill.

It is assumed that the outpost bills can only pass if some of the ministers and deputy ministers break coalition discipline.

Katz, however, believes he does have the votes and that some of the ministers will risk Netanyahu’s wrath and vote in favor of the bill.

The timing here is critical because the High Court of Justice has ordered the state to demolish by July 1 five apartment buildings in the Ulpana outpost, located on the outskirts of the Beit El settlement, and to evacuate by August 1 the entire Migron outpost, which is home to 50 families. In addition, the state has told the court it will take down the Mitzpe Assaf outpost by July 1, which is home to 25 families.

All three outposts in the Binyamin region were constructed without the proper permits on land which the state classified as private Palestinian property.

However, in all three cases, the Ministry of Construction and Housing spent money on infrastructure; for Ulpana NIS 4.5 million, Migron NIS 4.3 million and Mitzpe Asaf NIS 600,000.

There are dozens of other outposts and hundreds of other unauthorized homes in West Bank settlements that were similarly constructed with initial nods of approval, but for whom final permits were never issued.

Katz’s legislation, if it passes, would legalize those homes and outposts. In cases where the homes and outposts were built on private Palestinian property the legislation offers to compensate the Palestinian owners.

The High Court of Justice has intervened in the issue at the request of Peace Now and Yesh Din, which petitioned the court and asked that it force the state to execute the law with respect to unauthorized construction.

Settlers and right-wing politicians fear that if the state is forced to evacuate both Ulpana and Migron, these two organizations will continue to attack the issue of unauthorized Jewish West Bank building in a piece meal fashion, one home or one outpost at a time.

They therefore have sought a global solution. For Ulpana and Migron, legislation remains the only possible options, which could save these two outposts. Authorization of Migron, Mizpe Assaf and any other independent outpost, would transform those communities into new legally recognized settlements.

May 23, 2012 | 8 Comments »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

Leave a Reply

8 Comments / 8 Comments

  1. Netanyahu is showing his true leftist face. His promises mean nothing and I don’t know which tip of his forked tongue he used to make the promises. My fear is that while Knesset members wait two weeks, he is capable of sending his YaSSam storm troopers to destroy the homes. His track record against Jews is not good while Arab build as they please on stolen land, all Bibi does is provide them with water and utilities.

  2. @Yamit,

    Your arguments are quite relevant but I humbly think that beyond our natural rights to Judea and Samaria, I see no reason why this small area should be “judenrein” as asked by leftist islamist fascist crowds whereas hundreds of thousands of arabs live peacefully in our micro Jewish State .
    Are we talking about a general agreement to implement “real peace “?

  3. Question – The article has a line in it that calls for explanation:

    All three outposts in the Binyamin region were constructed without the proper permits on land which the state classified as private Palestinian property.

    But for Israel choosing to legislate what land is private Palestinian land, thus giving credence to Palestinian claims of land ownership, what basis at international law was there at first instance, to accept that said land is Palestinian land as Palestinians claim it to be?

    The question is raised with the following in mind. Prior to WWI, the land of the region belonged as a matter of sovereign right to the Ottomon Turks. Individual property rights I presume flowed from that sovereign claim based on whatever Sharia law applied.

    After WWI, with the defeat of the Ottoman Turks, sovereign control, domain and possession ceased and rights to land presumably came into the hands of the allied powers.

    Did private property rights vested in the indiginous Arabs in the region of modern day Israel, J & S and Gaza survive?

    Did the British mandate or any subsequent League of Nations/UN Resolution stipulate that private indiginous property rights and ownership of land survive the defeat of the Ottomon Turks?

    If there was no such international legal enactment, on what basis did individual indiginous Arab property rights of ownership survive the defeat of the Ottomon Empire. In what land registry were the claims of individual Arab/Palestinians to rights of ownership of specific parcels of land, registered?

  4. @ trumpeldor:

    @Yamit,

    No way sir.
    Better than I,you know the distance between Ben Gurion airport and the “green line”and since sam7 launchers are very cheap ………….

    Got news for you; BG is already zeroed and in their range now and if they wanted to, they could shoot. So far, it’s an understood red line they haven’t crossed. Rockets from Gaza can also hit Tel Aviv, so far, another red line they have yet to cross. In the age of cheap missiles and rockets no place in issue is immune or out of range.

    Conventional weapons are a concern but they probably have or will access CBN as well. They don’t need to use them the threat is sufficient deterrent to limit Israels options politically and militarily.

  5. @Yamit,

    No way sir.
    Better than I,you know the distance between Ben Gurion airport and the “green line”and since sam7 launchers are very cheap ………….

  6. @ trumpeldor:

    They will probably allow NATO to deploy on the border between Israel and the PA. Don’t see any other way they can sell it the the Israeli public.

  7. @Yamit,

    IDF will never withdraw unless all these politicians want to receive kassams and grads over their beloved communities inside the “green line”.
    It is not a wishful thinking from me,it is just hard core reality.
    When you see all over ME,totalitarian MB or salafist minded governments settling in,Israel will have other choice than digging in within its rightful territory.

    Friendly yours from brussels, another muslim city in europe….

  8. BB would not have openly opposed and given a free vote to coalition members unless he believed he had the votes. Katz has always been wrong in his predictions because he believes what other MK’s tell him. He was Sharons right hand man and served with Sharon in the IDF and believed Sharon. That should tell anyone that Katz is a naive fool.

    I always look for the unstated motivations behind all Israeli governments actions because 9 out of ten times what seems apparent in reality isn’t.

    I have long maintained from before BB was elected and certainly from day one of his current term in Office that BB like Olmert and Sharon before him have every intention to remove all settlements outside the security fence. Approving settlements, neighborhoods and some individual homes making them legal under Israeli law would when the evacuation does come will obligate the government to compensate the owners for legally held property. Today they are not entitled to compensation because no matter how valuable or how much those dwellings are valued today they will get nothing. Getting nothing opens up another option where an offer of some compensation could be offered in exchange for peacefully vacating of those homes and properties based on government edicts without opposition by the residents. Having some residents entitled to compensation and others not, divides the residents into different statuses and instills disunity among the settlers into haves and have nots. Those who believe they are safe on the western side of the fence and those who are unsafe on the eastern side of the fence. Those believing they are secure are less likely to fight for those on the eastern side.

    The IDF for many years have shown that their primary duty is to protect the Arab residents of Shomron from the Jews and have largely dropped their protection of the Jewish settlers. When the decision is finally made and announced those who feel most threatened will grasp any offer by the government just as a means of getting out with something. When you reduce all of the Jews living over the green line from the hard core ideologists you might be left with less than 10% of the settlers who might put up a fight ( more like civil disobedience than a real fight) they won’t seek to do harm to other Jews especially against their god idol the IDF. The objective of the government is to reduce as much as possible financial future obligations they will face when they order the settlements vacated or destroyed.