Security Prisoner
Security Detainee
Administrative Detainee

COURT WATCH - Administrative Law

(1-6 of 6)
Sort By Order by Display Results per page

The Status of West Bank Assets Owned by Jews Prior to 1948: HCJ 3036/03 Shlomo Valero v. The State of Israel (Judgment of February 6, 2011)
Criticism  |  3103/06   |  1.7.2012  |  Adv. Yotam Ben Hillel
HCJ 3103/06 Sholomo Valero v. The State of Israel concerns the fate of assets in Hebron which were purportedly purchased by Moshe Valero, a Jewish man, in 1935. Valero passed away in 1945 and his property was divided between his three children. The petitioners in this case were two of his children and the heirs of the third.As is known, beginning in 1948, the West Bank was under the control of ...
Fighting Auto Theft in Israel: MApp 4506/08 ‘Ajaj v. State of Israel (Judgment of May 1, 2008); MCrimApp 4343/08 ‘Ajaj v. State of Israel (Judgment of June 29, 2008)
Criticism  |  4506/08, 4343/08  |  1.12.2011  |  Adv. Yossi Wolfson
One of the central tenets of the laws of occupation is that the discretion of the military commander of an occupied territory is constricted by two magnetic poles: the military needs of the occupying power on one hand and the interests of the population of the occupied territory on the other. The Supreme Court of Israel has ruled time and again that the military commander may not take into acco...
Open-Fire Regulations: CA 7995/02 Military Commander in the Judea and Samaria Area v. Sha’anubi (Judgment of September 25, 2007)
Criticism  |  7995/02  |  10.9.2011  |  Adv. Yossi Wolfson
It is commonly accepted that law enforcement agencies have the authority to use force in order to apprehend suspected offenders. This authority is far reaching: it does not concern self-defense or stopping the commission of an offense, nor use of force in order to enforce a served judgment. This is a secondary power which is adjunct to the power to imprison an individual for the purpose of clar...
The Interpretation of the Geneva Convention by the Justices of the Supreme Court: HCJ 253/88 Sajdiya v. Minister of Defense (Judgment of November 8, 1988)
Criticism  |  253/88   |  1.4.2011  |  Adv. Yossi Wolfson
In the beginning of the first intifada, Israel conducted mass arrests in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). Many detainees were transferred to a special holding facility built far away in Ktzi'ot, in the Negev region, inside Israel.In the Sajdiya judgment, the Supreme Court reviewed a number of issues relating to the prison camp. The court instructed the military to resolve the issue o...
Suppression of Political Activity in the Occupied Palestinian Territories: HCJ 660/88 In’ash al-Usra Association v. IDF Commander in the Judea and Samaria Area (Judgment of October 11, 1989)
Criticism  |  660/88  |  1.3.2011  |  Adv. Yossi Wolfson
Forced military rule naturally arouses political resistance among those it subjugates. Hence, it inherently involves suppressing the political life of the subjugated population. In fact, suppression or manipulation of the political life is a necessary condition for the survival of oppression. Though this is self-evident, it is odd to see how a court in a self-professed democracy implements it w...
Settlement with Impunity: HCJ 6492/08 SHA’AL – Peace Now for Israel Educational Enterprises v. IDF Commander in the West Bank (Judgment of January 14, 2009)
Criticism  |  6492/08  |  15.2.2010  |  Adv. Yossi Wolfson
One of the important characteristics of occupation under international law is its temporariness. An occupying power is prohibited from introducing permanent changes in an occupied territory. Therefore, as far as the Supreme Court of Israel is concerned, all the changes Israel made in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are only temporary: the settlements, the separation wall, the military camp... (02) 627 1698   (02) 627 6317

red-id | רד אינטראקטיב