Migron residents who bought land urged to 'resist' court order
The Supreme Court has ordered the expulsion of 50 Jewish families from the 'outpost' of Migron by August 28. That includes 17 families who have strong claims that they purchased the land on which their homes sit from the putative Arab landowners. Residents of nearby Jewish towns are urging the 17 families not to go quietly. Givat Assaf outpost residents this week called on 17 families in the nearby Migron outpost to resist a High Court of Justice mandate that they must leave their homes by August 28.There's a frequent commenter on this blog who often says that we need title surveys and ownership histories to prove our rights to the land. That's all well and good, but how do you fight back when you have all those things, you can prove that you bought the land from its putative 'rightful owners,' and the government decides to throw you out anyway?
"We the Givat Assaf residents, together with the nation of Israel will stand by your side,” they said in a letter they sent to Migron residents, which was leaked to the media Thursday.
Both outposts are located near each other, in the Binyamin Region of the West Bank.
“With Gods help, "we will be strong and be strengthened for our nation and for God's cities," they said in the letter.
In the document they made a distinction between the status of the other 33 families who live in the outpost, and a group of 17 who claim to have purchased the property on which their homes are located.
The High Court of Justice has ordered the state to evacuate the 50 outpost families next week, because their homes were built without permits on private Palestinian property.
Last month 17 Migron families petitioned the court to annul that verdict in their case, given that they have since bought the property, on which their 17 homes are located, from its Palestinian owners.
...
But the moment the state in its response to the court said that the residents had to leave even if their land was legally purchase, the situation changed significantly, the Givat Assaf residents said.
They noted that this state document set a precedent that did not bode well for future cases in which disputed land is purchased in Judea and Samaria.
The 'rule of law' in Israel is a farce. The 'Supreme Court' has no clothes, nor does it have a legal leg on which to stand. It and the government protect the rights of everyone but the country's Jewish citizenry. What could go wrong?
Labels: Judea and Samaria, Migron, outposts, Supreme Court
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 7:58 AM
3 Comments:
There's only one way to fight tyranny - and that's exactly what this is.
The 'rule of law' in Israel is a farce. The 'Supreme Court' has no clothes, nor does it have a legal leg on which to stand. It and the government protect the rights of everyone but the country's Jewish citizenry. What could go wrong?
Tch Tch, stop being so dumb Carl,
On the one hand you're desperate to see that Israel remains a client US state, and on the other hand you want the occupation to continue?
It doesn't matter if they 'legally' bought land or not, if the land is considered disputed or occupied territory, it's risky.
The residents of Migron should have known that.
If you want Israel to be a client US state, you cannot expect the US to support an illegal occupation.
Even Romney (nor Ryan for that matter) won't do that, though you pretend that he will.
On the one hand you're always moaning about Obama, and on the other hand you want the occupation to continue.
For a lawyer you're incredibly stupid, baby :)
Change the vocabulary. What county are they in. And do they have a county clerk or other public office where they take the ownership documents for filing... just a random link from a google search (the U.S. has these everywhere and they, combined with title companies, clarify soooo much in civic dealings):
http://www.jacksongov.org/content/3310/3356/3575/default.aspx
Fighting the police will not change anything, nor will it result in the rule of law that is needed.
I will say that if all this stuff is done in some office and is available for public inspection (hopefully scanned docs on a website for the remote among us), and the govt is planning to confiscate the land and create judenrein areas in land that treaties say Jews "may" live... I would want to see a legal reasoning in some plain language as to why they would do that. The people who live there may end up districted into some "county" (or "country" later) that they don't want, but would we say that is their choice by buying land there? But if the govt of Israel (via the Supreme Court) acknowledges the registered and legal purchase of lots and then says that, because these people are Jews they will have their land confiscated... if they pay them in eminent domain procedures, then I think the individuals are moot, but if the Israele govt is creating a hostile, Judenrein state with the "international community", that is something the diaspora Jewish community would want to know, for future reference.
Post a Comment
<< Home