Security Prisoner
Security Detainee
Administrative Detainee

HaMoked’s objections to the impending revocation of status of four East Jerusalem residents: the denial of oral review hearings constitutes a severe violation of the right to due process

Since the Minister of Interior launched proceedings for the revocation of status of four young suspected assailants from East Jerusalem, a succession of procedural flaws in violation of the four men’s right to due process have come to light. The latest flaw to emerge was the Ministry of Interior’s refusal to hold oral review hearings to the four before final decisions in their cases. After the deadline of December 15, 2015 was set for the submission of written arguments on the four’s behalf, HaMoked demanded that oral hearings be held for the four at the same time, to allow them to present their counterclaims before final decision. In its initial response, the state refused to undertake holding oral hearings. Thereupon, on December 17, 2015, HaMoked filed an appeal to the Jerusalem District Appeals Tribunal in a bid to compel the state to hold oral review hearings, as derived from the right to due process.

HaMoked recalled that in 2009, in the context of a family unification case in which the Ministry of Interior had refused to allow a couple to respond to the security allegations raised against them, the Supreme Court (in AAA 1038/08) ruled that the Ministry of Interior must formulate a new procedure for holding review hearings and concluded that the optimal format was a combined hearing: both oral and in writing. In early 2014, following HaMoked’s insistent reminders, the Ministry of Interior amended the procedure in accordance with the court’s decision. HaMoked now noted that the refusal to hold oral hearings for the four – thus allowing them to try and offset the state’s claims and present counterclaims before the fateful decision on their status – “means causing conscious and deliberate harm to their right to due process”; furthermore, that “the greater the severity and irreversibility of the consequences of a governmental decision, so much greater is the need to allow the man thereby affected to present his objections and submit his response to the claims against him in order to try and refute them”.

Together with the appeal, HaMoked also applied for temporary and interim orders suspending all proceedings for the four pending the court’s decision.

On December 20, 2015, HaMoked was notified by the Ministry of Interior that the decision had been made to hold oral review hearings for the four men in the coming days. (02) 627 1698   (02) 627 6317

red-id | רד אינטראקטיב