On May 23, 2018, the Appeals Tribunal issued
a precedential judgment, cancelling the Ministry of Interior's decision to deport the mother of a teenager who is suspected of stabbing a Border Police officer in Jerusalem in 2015. The Tribunal ruled that the Minister of Interior exceeded his authority when revoking the woman's status due to "parental responsibility" for her son's actions. The judgment stated that the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law does not grant the Minister of Interior authority to deport a person living in East Jerusalem lawfully for the sole purpose of deterring others, and to punish them for another person's actions.
On July 4, 2018, the State submitted an
appeal of the judgment, claiming that the Tribunal was mistaken in "limiting the Minister of Interior's wide discretion", and in its statement that the Ministry of Interior must grant a permit to a person who meets the formal criteria for status as part of family unification processes. The State claimed that the Minister of Interior's discretion in this area is not limited only to instances where the person poses a direct or indirect security threat, but rather he is permitted, and required, to take other issues into consideration.
The State claimed that in the present case, the woman created an environment that shaped her son's personality, and it is unreasonable for the State "to grant a stay permit to a person under whose parental responsibility and oversight an act of terror was committed, and who later denied the event and chose not to condemn it, behavior that harms the values of the State of Israel and its sovereignty." The State went even further, claiming "that a person wishing to reside in Israel… has a basic duty to ensure that anyone under her responsibility does not harm the security of the State, its citizens and its sovereignty, and is obligated to respect the principles of the State of Israel".
This appeal, along with other recent cases, suggests that the State is attempting to establish a new form of collective punishment, through which the most basic rights of relatives of people who committed attacks, or are suspected of doing so, will be denied, even in instances where they had no knowledge of the intended act. HaMoked is battling this new phenomenon, and will continue to represent the mother and others harmed by the policy in their legal battles for their, and their families', basic rights.
