Security Prisoner
Security Detainee
Administrative Detainee

HaMoked – Center for the Defence of the Individual petitioned the HCJ to instruct the military to provide the family of the man who carried out the attack at "Merkaz Harav" Yeshiva with the plans for the demolition of his home as well as the report of the Shani Committee which examined the use of house demolitions as a deterrent: The Court ruled that the State must respond in 30 days and issued an Interim Order instructing that the home is not to be demolished until further notice

As soon as the media published the intention to demolish the home of the man who carried out the attack at "Merkaz Harav" Yeshiva in March of this year, under Regulation 119 of the Defence (Emergency) Regulations – 1945, HaMoked contacted the Military Advocate General in an appeal against the intended demolition. In its letter, HaMoked mentioned that the State had declared in the past that Regulation 119 would not be used and that in any case, before any such powers were exercised the right of appeal would be given. On 6 August 2008, GOC Central Command declared that he intended to demolish the second and third floors in the four story house occupied by the family.

On 13 August 2008, HaMoked submitted an objection to the military's decision to demolish the home and claimed that a military committee (the Shani Committee), which was established that in order to examine the use of Regulation 119, reached the conclusion that home demolitions do not act as a deterrent, but rather increase friction and hatred. HaMoked also mentioned that Regulation 119 does not conform to Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty since it is no more than a punitive regulation and since the punishment harms only the relatives of a person without any evidence that they were connected to his actions. HaMoked estimates that the decision was made in response to a public need for vengeance.

After the military rejected the objection, HaMoked requested, inter-alia, the Shani Committee report and the plan for the demolition since it was unclear how the home would remain standing and how the family could continue to live in it if Israel demolished the two middle floors. The State Attorney's office informed HaMoked that there was no intention of handing over the demolition plan and that a response on the Shani Committee report would be provided at a later date.

HaMoked stressed that the Petitioner had a right to receive the findings of the military committee which examined the use of Regulation 119 less than three years ago, mainly because at the time, the findings had a direct impact on the military's decision to stop using the Regulation. HaMoked also stressed the Petitioners' right to submit an opinion on the demolition plan, particularly in light of the concern that it would be impossible to continue dwelling in the building.

Following HaMoked's petition, the Court issued an Interim Order instructing the State to refrain from demolishing the home and respond to the petition within 30 days.

To view the Court's decision dated 2 September 2008 (in Hebrew)

To view the petition dated 2 September 2008

To view the objection to the decision to demolish the home dated 13 August 2008

To view the decision to demolish the home dated 6 August 2008 (02) 627 1698   (02) 627 6317

red-id | רד אינטראקטיב