You are on page 1of 19

At Israel's Will: The Permit Policy in the West Bank

Policy Paper - Physicians for Human Rights-Israel

Author: Hadas Ziv


Research: Ibrahim Habib, Salah Haj-Yehya, Miri Weingarten, Hadas Ziv

September 2003

Two roads in the West Bank: on the right a rickety and blocked Palestinian road, and on
the left a settler road. Photographs by: Shmuel Golan and Shabtai Gold (right to left).

1
She pushed the familiar forms towards him. 'Fill in the forms and take them to E-5. Have
your tickets and reservation slips with you.' She glanced over K's shoulder to the man behind him.
'Yes?'
'No,' said K, struggling to regain her attention, 'I already applied for the permit. All I want
to know is, has the permit come?'
'Before you can have a permit you must have a reservation! Have you got a reservation?
When is it for?'
'August eighteenth. But my mother–'
'August eighteenth is a month away! If you applied for a permit and the permit is granted,
the permit will come, the permit will be sent to your address! Next!'
'But that is what I want to know! Because if the permit isn't going to come I must make
other plans. My mother is sick-'
The policewoman slapped the counter to still him. 'Don't waste my time. I am telling you
for the last time, if the permit is granted the permit will come…'

J. M. COETZEE, 'Life & Times of Michael K'

2
A Short History of Israeli policies in the Occupied Territories – Restrictions on
Freedom of Movement

1967: Israel occupies the Sinai peninsula, the Gaza strip, the West Bank (including East
Jerusalem) and the Golan heights and establishes military rule in the West Bank and Gaza
Strip. A first Jewish settlement is founded in Kfar Etzion. East Jerusalem is annexed to
Israel.
1973-5: Gush Emmunim, the Jewish settlers' movement, leads a campaign to found
settlements in the Nablus region, culminating in an agreement with Defense Minister
Shimon Peres, whereby the settlers are allowed to reside in the military camp at Kadum.
Two years later this outpost becomes the settlement Kedumim.
1981: The Israeli "Civil Administration" is established in order to address the civil affairs
of the Palestinian residents of the Occupied Territories.
December 1987: Intifada breaks out. The Israeli security apparatus employs short-term
curfews as a means to control the uprising.
1991: In January, during the Gulf War, Israel imposes a protracted general curfew in
extensive areas of the Occupied Territories. In the same month the general permission to
enter Israel is cancelled and residents of the Occupied Territories are requested to procure
exit permits in order to enter Israel. This policy, termed "general closure", involves the
separation of the Occupied Territories from Israel. A system of staffed army checkpoints
is erected at crossing points. After the end of the Gulf War Palestinians and Israelis meet
at the Madrid Summit.
1993: In March a general closure is imposed on all the Occupied Territories following
several knifing attacks in Israel. Movement between the northern and southern parts of
the West Bank, and between the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem is
severely restricted. Persons allowed to move do so subject to the issuing of a permit by
the Israeli Civil Administration.
1996: "Internal closure" is imposed for the first time in the Occupied Territories,
following the events of the "Hasmoneans Tunnel": Restrictions on movement between
villages and regions within the Occupied Territories themselves are added to the general
prohibition on entering Israel.

3
1998: Internal closure is imposed on Hebron preventing passage of Palestinian residents
between the two parts of the city.
2000: Following the outbreak of violence in September 2000 all restrictions previously
employed – general closure, internal closure and curfew – are employed with increased
severity throughout the Occupied Territories. Beyond increased restrictions in each of
these components, the Israeli policy now add systematic physical blockage of routes and
residential areas within the Occupied Territories, in the form of unstaffed physical
barriers. In parallel, a bureaucratic mechanism, termed "blockade permits" (Heb. Heiter
Be-Keter) is put into practice: Palestinian residents are obliged to apply in person for
permits to the Israeli Civil Administration in order to be allowed to move between
villages and towns within the Occupied Territories.

After denying passage of Palestinians into Israel and reserving the right to deny passage
between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and between both regions and East Jerusalem
or other countries, Israel now erected checkpoints and barriers within the West Bank and
the Gaza Strip. These checkpoints divide each area into several 'geographical cells', and
constitute part of the policy of fragmentation implemented by the state of Israel with
regard to the Occupied Territories and their Palestinian residents. The West Bank is
dissected into northern and southern blocs (with Jerusalem and its environs in between),
and is additionally divided into regions according to city-governorates: Jenin, Nablus,
Ramallah, Salfeet, Jericho, Tul Karm, Qalqilya, Bethlehem and Hebron. Each region is in
turn divided into sub-regions, which may at times constitute a single village, isolated
from all other villages and towns in its vicinity. The Gaza Strip is dissected by the Gush
Kattif checkpoint into two blocs: the southern bloc, including Rafah and Khan Younis –
which in turn includes the completely isolated Mawasi area – and the northern bloc,
which includes Deir Al-Balah, Gaza and Jabalia. At times the Gaza Strip is divided into
three regions by blocking Salah a-Din street, next to the settlement Netzarim. In such
cases the residents of Deir al Blah are obliged to reach Gaza via the coast – which is also
blocked at times.
In addition, Israel is in the process of constructing a complex of fences and barriers,
known in Israel as "the separation fence" and in the Occupied Territories as "the wall".

4
This system is located east of the 1967 borders and within the Occupied Territories. The
declared objective of this complex is to constitute a physical obstacle preventing entry of
Palestinians into Israel. However, the route of the fence, determined with a view to
including as many settlements as possible on its western side, forms isolated Palestinian
enclaves within the West Bank. For example, the city of Qalqilya is completely
surrounded by a wall, with only one gate in the northeast. Passage via this gate is also
controlled by the Israeli military. In the area of Baqa a-Sharqiya and Nazlat Issa two
parallel fences have been erected, one on the 1967 border and the other east of it. As a
result, several Palestinian villages are trapped between the two fences.
Israel's increased control of all passages and routes within the Occupied Territories,
together with the immense financial investment in the construction of the barrier complex
lead us to the assumption that these are not temporary measures, but aim to
perpetuate a policy of 'separation with control'. These physical measures are
accompanied by the bureaucratic mechanism of "blockade permits", which grant
Palestinian residents the "right" to move from one specific location to another within the
Occupied Territories, or in other words the freedom to move within a "geographical cell"
defined by the Israeli Civil Administration.
This paper will provide a general description of the restrictions and their consequences.
However, we will focus specifically on the bureaucratic aspects of the permits policy
within the West Bank, rather than on the physical barriers. This is because the permits
system gives a false sense of leniency or humanity to what is essentially an oppressive
policy. It is important to remember that the permits system is not a relief within the
general context of the closures policy, but the very means whereby that policy can
continue to exist.

Introduction
This policy paper deals with the permits policy within the West Bank (or "blockade
permits", as defined by the Israeli army). As a starting point it should be noted that the
name itself is misleading, since the need for a permit occurs where there is a prohibition.
Our discussion should first question the legitimacy of restrictions on movement within
the West Bank. Israeli-issued permits are an essential and central component of this

5
policy. To a great extent, these permits and the readiness of many sectors in Palestinian
society to request them are the strongest evidence for the depth of oppression that
Palestinian society experiences, and for the internalization of this oppression.

Israeli restrictions on Palestinian movement violate all areas of life. Farmers can’t reach
their lands and sell products, disposal vehicles can’t clear the garbage, doctors can’t reach
their clinics, and vaccination cars are unable to reach the villages. With no freedom of
movement teachers and pupils can’t attend schools and universities regularly, employees
are absent from work and people can’t visit their relatives. In spite of the fact that PHR-
Israel focuses on the struggle to ensure free passage for all medical teams, ambulances
and patients between towns and villages in the West Bank, it is clear to all that just as it is
impossible to maintain a logical and reasonable medical system with no freedom of
movement and sharing of resources, in the same manner maintenance of an economic
system, an educational system and family life are equally impossible. In fact – it is
impossible to live with these restrictions.
The state of Israel is entitled to restrict entrance to its territory (although here too, we
think that there are some commitments towards the Palestinian population for which
Israel is responsible). However, it has no right to erect roadblocks and prevent the
freedom of movement of Palestinian residents to and from their own cities and villages.
The policy of prevention of freedom of movement within the West Bank has created
economic paralysis and the gradual disintegration of the daily life-patterns of
Palestinians. The security consideration cited to justify this policy would seem to be
merely a pretext for a system of humiliation and violation of human rights, since there is
no doubt that a healthy person smuggling explosives with harmful intentions can cross
ditches and mountains and will not bother to apply for a permit or pass through a
checkpoint, whereas these same obstacles prevent the movement of the weak, the elderly,
the disabled and the sick. In implementing this policy the state of Israel deviates from the
balance it claims to maintain, between its needs for security and the humanitarian needs
of the Palestinians.

6
In addition, while Israel invests considerable efforts – budgetary and others – in order to
enable freedom of movement for its Jewish citizens in the occupied territories (building
by-pass roads, blocking Palestinian roads), it encloses and blocks the Palestinians. This
fact indicates that the policy of Israel in the occupied territories is based on severe
discrimination between the Jewish residents of the occupying state and the Palestinians in
the occupied territories. In this way Israel is doubly unjust: not only is it violating the
norms of the Geneva Convention, according to which the occupying power is prohibited
from transferring members of its own civilian population to the territories it has occupied,
but it has turned this transfer into the main reason for restricting the freedom of
movement of the Palestinian residents of the occupied territories and for violating their
rights.

In our opinion the occupation itself constitutes a severe violation of a variety of human
rights. But since the state of Israel claims that it is possible to maintain the occupation
with integrity, it should enable all residents of the occupied territories – Palestinian and
Jewish alike – equal freedom of movement. We must emphasize that any criticism
appearing in this report on the efficiency of the permits system them does not imply that
we accept the permits policy in any way, but is intended to demonstrate that the permits
were never planned to provide practical relief but to serve as a fig leaf for a policy of
paralysis.

Freedom of Movement and Health


It is evident, that the realization of the right to health is influenced by many factors:
housing, nutrition, waste disposal and sewage systems, financial income, access to
potable water and electricity, and access to medical facilities. All these factors are
influenced by the occupation, besides the direct impact of the armed conflict on the
health of Palestinian residents.
Since September 2000 the restriction Israel has imposed on Freedom of Movement have
caused grave damage to the ability of the Palestinian health system to function. Every
health system functions based on the assumption that there is free passage of patients,
doctors and relief teams. Efficient management of health services entails distribution of

7
functions among different units, which specialize in different fields. Modern health
management aims to specialization of specific units in specific services. If it were not so
each medical center would be obliged to provide all medical services available in that
country. Such a reality would not be feasible, and it is clear that sharing of specialized
facilities, and referral from one unit to another, is an efficient and necessary system. This
is the case in Israel and in any other balanced health system. Prevention of passage of
civilians between different centers of population undermines this assumption. The
permits system cannot solve the problem, since it involves procedures which are so
protracted as to paralyze the passage of patients, personnel, medicines and expertise.
For example, a West Bank doctor who is works at a hospital in East Jerusalem and
possesses a permit for entry into Israel for this purpose was requested to provide expert
advice at a hospital in the city of Nablus in the West Bank. When he reached Hawarra
checkpoint at the southern outskirts of Nablus he was told that the permit he holds is only
valid for entry into Jerusalem. If he want to enter Nablus, said the Civil Administration,
he must apply for a "blockade permit" to enter Nablus. All our claims to the effect that if
he was found eligible for entry into Israel there was no logic in denying his entry into
Nablus were in vain, and the doctor was obliged to return.

Israel's policy – Doors in the Wall


First signs of the permits policy within the West Bank were apparent as early as the end
of 1996. At that time the Palestinian Authority, including its health system, refused to
apply for permits to move within the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. PHR-Israel
demanded that the IDF stop this requirement since it was a severe infringement of the
Oslo Peace Accords, according to which the occupied territories should be a single
territorial unit and its contiguity should be preserved.1 However, today the Palestinian
Authority lacks the resources and the power to lead resistance to the permits policy under

1
“In order to maintain the territorial integrity of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as a single territorial
unit, and to promote their economic growth and the demographic and geographical links between them,
both sides shall implement the provisions of this Annex, while respecting and preserving without obstacles,
normal and smooth movement of people, vehicles, and goods within the West Bank, and between the West
Bank and the Gaza Strip”. Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip,
Washington, D.C., September 28, 1995

8
closure. A Palestinian source informed us2 that, in July 2003, the Palestinian Minister for
Civil Affairs, Jamil Tarifi, issued instructions to the Palestinian District Coordination
Offices (DCOs) to apply to the Israeli DCOs for "blockade permits", for the first time
after a long period during which they abstained from applying for these requests. This
instruction came as a result of the suffering caused to the sick by not applying for these
permits and the enormous damage caused to the commercial and economic sectors. As a
result of the instruction many sectors can now apply for permits via the Palestinian
DCOs: Palestinian Government officials, tradesmen, doctors, patients, etc. The same
source explained that the large numbers of people begging the Palestinian administration
for permits for various reasons (medical, financial, etc.) has forced the Palestinian
Government to act against its own principle, according to which movement within the
occupied territories should not be under Israeli control.

Israel's policy and intentions can be demonstrated via its attitude to the separation barrier
complex currently being built within the occupied territories, east of the Green Line. The
barrier and the budgetary investments allocated to it demonstrate that Israel's ultimate
objective is not temporary separation of geographical cells, but permanent
fragmentation of the occupied territories. When Palestinian residents complained that
the barrier would separate them from their farmland and the sources of water they depend
on, the Israel army's response was that it would establish gateways at various points along
the barrier. The official site of the fence/wall www.seamzone.mod.gov.il states that
“along the barrier various types of crossing points will be posted to enable the
functioning of normal life in a controlled crossing including tens of checkpoints to allow
the movement of the farmers”. In other words, what was open will be closed, and in the
place that was closed checkpoints will be opened.

Israel's policy – which determines the policy and conduct of the security forces – was
presented to PHR-Israel in response to various complaints and High Court petitions filed
on the subject of freedom of movement within the occupied territories. The details of this
policy change from time to time, but the principle remains the same: The movement of

2
From a talk with Salah Haj –Yehya from PHR-Israel on 11th August 2003.

9
Palestinian residents in the occupied territories is prohibited, as a rule; exceptions are
ceded to people who procure permits. In some cases, and at some checkpoints, passage of
women and specific age groups is permitted for specific periods of time even without
permits.

As a rule, Palestinian residents who wish to procure a "blockade permit" may apply to the
Palestinian or Israeli DCOs.3 When applying via the Palestinian DCO the resident applies
to the Palestinian DCO, which delivers the application to the Israeli DCO. The Israeli
DCO then delivers the answer to the Palestinian DCO which in turn will deliver it to the
resident. This process occurs today mainly when the resident cannot approach the Israeli
DCO directly, for any reason.

In every application the resident must submit documents that support the request for the
permit. Doctors, patients, teachers – all must apply. The policy is clear: As a rule the
movement of Palestinians is prohibited and the expectation is that they will lead their
lives in restricted “geographical cells”. Movement outside these "cells" becomes an
exception requiring special permission. In this atmosphere, “less important" daily needs,
such as traveling to visit family members, or an excursion, are not accepted as sufficient
reason for providing a permit. Even people with demonstrable justification must face
exhausting bureaucratic procedures, at the end of which the permit may or may not be
issued.

3
In the West Bank there are 8 Israeli district coordinating offices: Nablus District – Hawarra DCO: access
to both Israeli and Palestinian DCOs in this district is subject to the approval of soldiers at various
checkpoints on the way. Tulkarem district – The Israeli DCO is located at a place that is accessible to the
town's residents (near Kaduri school). Qalqilya district – The Israeli DCO is located in Kedumim
settlement, outside the walls surrounding the town. Palestinian vehicles are not allowed to travel on the
main road leading from Qalqiliya's "fruit checkpoint" to Kedumim. Passage at this checkpoint is permitted
subject to showing the soldier documents indicating the reason for application. Ramalla district – The
Israeli DCO is located near the settlement of Beit El. Hebron district – The Israeli DCO is located on
Mount Manoach. Jericho district – The Israeli DCO is located next to the settlement of Vered Jericho.
Bethlehem district – the Israeli DCO is located on the road leading to the settlement bloc Gush Etzyon.
Jenin district – the Israeli DCO is located near the Salem checkpoint or in the army camp Dotan. It is
difficult to reach both places since earth ramps and iron gates block the roads. There are also two Israeli
representative offices in the Jerusalem district, one in the Abu Dis neighborhood and the other at a-Ram
checkpoint.

10
Permit given by the civil administration permitting passage within the West bank

Abed Haruf, a one-year-old baby, the son of Saed Haruf from the village of Odelia in the
Nablus district, was hospitalized in Nablus for 5 days while suffering from anaemia. The
father wanted to visit his baby son and tried to reach Nablus, which is situated 7 Km
away from his village. Due to the closure he was obliged to pass via Hawara checkpoint
(south of Nablus) on his way. He was not allowed to cross into Nablus since he had no
permit. He applied to the Israeli DCO at Hawara for a permit, and was refused. Members

11
of the activist organization MachsomWatch ("Checkpoint Watch") who were present at
the time applied to PHR-Israel for aid. We applied in vain to the "humanitarian hotline"
run by the Israeli Civil Administration, and next tried to ascertain the case with the office
of the "health coordinator" of the Civil Administration. It transpired that Mr. Haruf was
officially denied passage within the West Bank, due to "security reasons". Although we
frequently meet "security refusals" when trying to coordinate passage of Palestinian
patients from the Occupied Territories to Israel or other countries, this was the first time
we received a formal refusal, following a bureaucratic procedure, to allow passage within
the Occupied Territories, and even within the district in which the applicant resides. The
official who gave us the answer verified that: “usually it does not happen that a person
who needs to travel from his village to the nearest town is deprived from doing so. This is
the first time I have encountered a case like this. Usually they succeed in entering [the
town] somehow”. His words demonstrate that the army is aware of the fact that even
today some people enter the towns without requesting a permit.
Ms. Dalia Bassa, the "Health Coordinator" for the Occupied Territories on behalf of the
Israeli Civil Administration, claimed that she was unfamiliar with the case after PHR-
Israel approached the media, in spite of the fact that the official in her office addressed
PHR-Israel's appeal. She then agreed to coordinate permission for the father to reach the
hospital, but on that same day the baby was discharged. Her office promised to ensure
that the father would be allowed to accompany his son to be examined in the hospital
several days later.
The response from the office of Brigadier General Yosef Mishlav, Coordinator of
Government Operations in the Territories, avoided addressing the issue of the absurdity
of demanding permits for movement between villages and adjacent towns: “As a rule, the
movement of residents between "blockade checkpoints" is permitted for humanitarian,
medical and other needs.” Since the baby was released from hospital, Lieutenant Colonel
Shlomi Muchtar did not find "grounds for the resident’s claim" and was content with the
claim that “the continuation of care and assistance for his son will be provided subject to
binding procedures” (16 July 2003, emphasis in the original).

12
In response to our complaint (February 9 2003) according to which medical teams and
sick people were unable to move in the Nablus area via Hawara checkpoint we received
the answer, that – even if the reason for requesting passage is “important enough” – it
could be granted only via an official permit:
“As a rule, checkpoints are erected in Judea and Samaria as security measures…. The
civil administration offices in Judea and Samaria operate daily in an intensive way in
order to allow Palestinian populations that are not involved in terrorism to conduct a
basic life pattern.
“…It should be emphasized that in emergency cases the passage of ambulances and
patients is allowed without permits. In addition, persons suffering from chronic diseases
are allowed to go out for daily medical treatments, based on the issuing of a "blockade
permit," which is subject to application by the patients and to presentation of medical
documents.
“…The "blockade permit" is designed to enable proper movement of residents and other
sectors such as medical workers and medical teams, in light of the complex security
situation.
“… With regard to individual cases mentioned in the organization's letter, no indication
was found in an investigation we conducted, for applications by the residents or their
representatives to the DCOs concerning their passage via Hawara checkpoint4.”

This letter clarifies that “uncoordinated and spontaneous” movement will be allowed – if
it is allowed – only in "emergency cases", whose definition changes periodically:

On 12 August, following bomb attacks in the settlement town of Ariel in the West Bank
and in the town of Rosh Ha'ayin in Israel, procedures for passage of ambulances in the
Nablus area were 'tightened'. An ambulance carrying a woman suffering from a
hemorrhage and her husband, a one-month-old baby with a heart defect and a man
scheduled for heart catheterization, was making its way to hospitals in Nablus. It was
denied passage via Sal'ous checkpoint. When the ambulance driver insisted upon entering
the city with the three patients the soldiers at the checkpoint threatened to shoot the

4
Letter from Ruth Bar, Assistant to the Defense Minister, from March 26, 2003.

13
vehicle's tires. PHR-Israel applied to the "Humanitarian Hotline" run by the Israeli Civil
Administration, only to be told that “due to new instructions the checkpoints are
hermetically closed except for emergency humanitarian cases. Ambulances carrying a
patient who is not critically ill, and will not be caused irreversible harm will not be
allowed passage5." Only upon PHR-Israel's insistence were two of the patients permitted
to enter Nablus. The husband of the woman with the bleed and the catheterization
candidate were not allowed to enter and were returned to Tul Karem. PHR-Israel
complained against this policy, claiming that this sweeping prohibition contradicts
Israel's duty as an occupying power to ensure the movement of patients and doctors, and
that it is unacceptable for an entire medical system to run according to such extreme
measures, whereby patients are prevented from receiving medical care unless they are in
immediate danger of their lives.

The Villages Deir al Hatab, Salem and Azmut6 : The Way To a Permit Passes
Through the Checkpoint

The villages Azmut, Deir al Hatab and Salem are situated east of Nablus, on which they
depend for health, education, and economic livelihood. The villages have a population of
11,000 residents. The state of these villages shows in a clear way two circumstances in
which there is no possibility for residents to reach the Israeli DCO in order to apply for a
"blockade permit":

Access of these villages to the town of Nablus, a few hundred meters away, was only
possible by crossing the No. 57 road, running from north to south. However, all the roads
leading from the villages to this road were blocked by earth ramps which made it
impossible for the residents of these villages to reach the road. Moreover, parallel to the
road a trench was dug to prevent any possibility of a car crossing over. An additional
trench was dug northwest of the villages and filled with sewage, apparently in order to

5
The Humanitarian Hotline in a telephone conversation with PHR-Israel on August 12, 2003.
6
For more details on the state of these villages see: PHR-Israel: Blocked: report on a visit to the villages
Salem, Deir al Hatab and Azmut, 2.2.03

14
block any possibility of crossing even on foot to and from Nablus. Due to these physical
obstacles patients were unable to leave the village or even to make contact with the
soldiers at the staffed checkpoints that were beyond these obstacles. Hence, they could
not even submit a request to go out for urgent medical treatment, education, bringing
food, or any other purpose.

PHR-Israel, together with the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and residents of the
villages, filed a petition to the Israeli High Court of Justice against these roadblocks. The
State Attorney confirmed in his answer that the passage of residents of the villages into
Nablus was in fact denied. As a result of the petition one of the trenches preventing
access to Nablus was filled at a junction northwest of the villages (Askar), and in the
meantime a dirt track to a staffed checkpoint south of the villages (Beit Fourik) was
prepared, enabling physical access to Road 57 and from there to Nablus. The moment the
dirt track was completed, however, passage via the northwest route was once again
closed – this time by a locked iron gate. Today the residents are forced to reach Beit
Fourik checkpoint south of the villages and from there to take a taxi to Nablus. Direct
passage by vehicle is forbidden at all times.
In both cases – physical obstacles and staffed checkpoint – residents are in fact incapable
of freely reaching the Palestinian or Israeli DCOs. While physical obstacles were the
problem (from October 2002 to April 20037), residents were not able to leave the villages
in order to reach the Palestinian DCO located in Nablus, since the road was physically
blocked. Ever since access to a staffed checkpoint was enabled (from May 2003 to the
present), residents attempting to leave the villages via the iron gate at Askar junction are
directed by soldiers south to the Bet Fourik checkpoint, where they will have to
demonstrate to the soldier's satisfaction that he has a real and sufficient reason to go to
the Israeli DCO at Hawara checkpoint, located southwest of Beit Fourik checkpoint.
Even if he wants to submit the application to a Palestinian DCO office he will have to
convince the soldier to allow him to reach Nablus.

7
In April 2003 a trench was filled at Askar/Azmout junction and soldiers were posted there until the
opening of a dirt track to Bet Fourik checkpoint south of the villages, following a High Court petition filed
by some village residents, PHR-Israel and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

15
This situation is not exceptional. Similar difficulties are encountered throughout the West
Bank. For example the Palestinian residents of Hebron, and especially of Israeli
controlled Zone H2, undergo dangerous obstacles on their way to apply for permits at the
Israel DCO – on the other side of a bypass road to the south of the city, on Mount
Manoach. After passing physical obstacles, vehicles approaching the DCO may have
stones thrown at them or suffer other forms of violence from both settlers and soldiers.

All these details merely illustrate that this policy, which is morally untenable, is also
virtually impracticable. The Israeli High Court ruled not to interfere in the policy of the
security forces and in its considerations concerning the closure of the villages east of
Nablus. However, in its statement, the Court added that in spite of the fact that "no cause
was found for [the Court] to say to the respondent that the acts it has performed deviate
from what is reasonable or appropriate”, yet “the respondent could have employed other
ways to protect life”8. In this the Court contradicts the State’s claim that the “closure and
these checkpoints were employed for clear security reasons and for lack of any other
alternative”. (our emphasis)

With no checks on Israeli society these villages and towns are imprisoned in a
stranglehold policy that precludes any possibility of economic and social recovery.
Gestures, or the random opening of a dirt track, will not help. What is needed is a
comprehensive change of policy:

“The humanitarian situation will significantly improve only through a total removal of
the closures. Gestures such as construction of an alternative road through another closed
village, or the establishment of a manned checkpoint which allows only limited traffic,
may alleviate certain elements of the crises but not the underlying causes and long-term
effects of the problem”. (UNOCHA report – add reference, date)

The "blockade permits" policy and procedures were designed in the days when internal
closure was an exceptional measure. Even then the decision of the security apparatus to

8
High Court Ruling, HCJ 2847/03.

16
restrict the movement of civilians, patients and medical personnel within their own
territories constituted a violation of the protection afforded to health facilities under
occupation. However, it is clear that when internal closure and curfew become
systematic, this violation becomes criminal, in that it causes a total paralysis of regular
daily life. The security apparatus itself is aware of the severity of the restrictions and
confesses that, when dealing with Palestinians, the declared aim of the security forces is
merely to ensure a “reasonable existence” and a “continuation of a life routine”. In
reality, these definitions obscure a reduction of this "life routine" to a bare minimum.

The IDF responds in “gestures”.


Since we are not talking about normal life, the possibility to conduct a daily life at all is
perceived by the IDF as a “gesture”. The definition of the granting of permits as a gesture
on the part of the authorities and not as the fulfilling of a basic right, leaves all the power
in the hands of the “provider”. In this way, for example, on March 23, 2003 the IDF
expressed pride of the fact that they continue their policy of providing humanitarian aid
to Palestinian populations that are not involved in terrorism. For this purpose the Israeli
army grants benefits and relief to Palestinians in order to allow them to conduct a proper
life routine. Following is a list of relief measures, updated to March 1, 2003: “In Hebron
a Palestinian woman in labor was given permission to enter the hospital in town.
Transport of office equipment to the Ministry of Education in town was coordinated. In
Nablus 7 Red Cross lorries with food were allowed to enter … In the Gaza region
passage of a woman in labor was from Mawassi to Khan Yunis was coordinated. In
addition delivery of agriculture produce to Khan Yunis was coordinated… In Judea and
Samaria transfer of 18 patients to hospitals in Israel and abroad was coordinated. Three
patients were transferred to Maqassed Hospital [in East Jerusalem – PHR], Thirteen were
transferred to Augusta Victoria hospital [in East Jerusalem – PHR] and two patients were
transferred via Allenby crossing [into Jordan – PHR]. (http:
www.idf.il/newsite/Hebrew/0323).

Summary

17
It is difficult to talk about a reasonable existence, not to mention a fair existence, when a
population of 3.5 million depends upon "humanitarian gestures". It is becoming
progressively clearer to everyone dealing with the social and economic rights of
Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories that more than anything else, the internal
closure in all its various forms of blockade, curfew and permits is the main obstacle to the
recovery of Palestinian society and all its civilian structures:
World Bank: “The sine qua non of economic stability and recovery is the lifting of
closure in its various forms, and in particular internal closure. As long as Palestinian
internal economic space remains as fragmented as it is today, and as long as the economy
remains subject to extreme unpredictability and burdensome transaction costs, the revival
of domestic economy and Palestinian welfare will continue to decay.” (WB xvii)
Moreover, the deepening and perpetuation of separation policies via creation of urban
enclaves hemmed in by fences, and their permanent isolation from areas which depend on
them for their living (e.g., the rural surroundings of the towns of Qalqilia and Tul Karem)
completely contradicts the public commitment of Israel and the international community
to the creation of a viable Palestinian state, in which territorial contiguity and freedom of
movement are ensured.

Recommendations
Palestinian and/or Israeli civil protest against the permits policy, although essential, is
unlikely in the current situation. It is even more unlikely that the Israeli government will
relinquish the use of the permits system as a fig leaf for its policy of separation with
control. We therefore urge the international community to totally reject the permits
policy in the Occupied Territories and to unequivocally demand freedom of movement
for all.

'You can't travel outside the Peninsula without a permit. Go to the checkpoint and show
them your permit and your papers. And listen to me: you want to stop on the expressway, you
pull fifty metres off the roadside. That's the regulation: fifty metres either side. Anything nearer,
you can get shot, no warning, no questions asked. Understand?'

J. M. COETZEE, 'Life & Times of Michael K'

18
Photo by: Palestine Red Crescent Society

19

You might also like