العربية
HE
العربية
HE
HaMoked routinely deals with foot-dragging by state and military authorities. In many cases, this conduct has serious and often irreversible implications for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and where urgent humanitarian needs are involved, it can be life-threatening.
Such is the case of a West Bank resident who contacted HaMoked for help exiting the country to accompany her infant son for life-saving medical treatment in Turkey. Her son suffers from a congenital liver defect, and underwent a liver transplant from a living donor, his father, at a hospital in Turkey. Following the transplant, the infant developed a life-threatening medical complication and urgently needed to return to Turkey for further treatment. One month prior to contacting HaMoked, the mother attempted twice to exit with her son via the Allenby Bridge, but was denied passage by Israeli military authorities, who control the crossing. As the delays continued, the infant’s condition deteriorated, prompting the mother to seek HaMoked’s urgent assistance.
On September 2, 2025, HaMoked contacted the Civil Administration to contest the exit ban imposed on the mother. Despite repeated reminders by HaMoked, no response was provided. On September 29, 2025, HaMoked filed an urgent court petition against the Military Commander of the West Bank, demanding an immediate response to its request to permit the mother and son’s urgent exit for medical treatment. The petition noted that since the child has no other available escort, the failure to respond to the mother’s request violated his right to basic medical care and posed a tangible threat to his life. HaMoked added that this violation was particularly severe given that the case concerned a helpless minor, whose rights require special consideration under the principle of the best interests of the child.
The State’s response revealed that a reply was sent the day before the petition was filed, rejecting the request to lift the security ban on the grounds that her husband was a Hamas operative, and therefore her exit posed a security risk. Not only was this rejection issued with significant delay, but, contrary to procedure, it was sent directly to the mother’s personal email address, despite the request having been sent via HaMoked. As for the substance of the claim, HaMoked stressed that the security restriction applied solely to the husband, and that the Civil Administration had previously permitted the mother to exit via the Allenby Bridge for similar medical treatment. HaMoked further argued that an “indirect security concern” could not justify putting the infant’s life at risk. In a so-called compromise, military officials proposed allowing the mother's exit subject to the deposit of a 50,000 NIS bond, an unreasonable sum given the family’s economic circumstances. HaMoked replied that, in practice, this demand amounted to denying the mother’s exit and proposed an alternative bond of 5,000 NIS.
After reviewing information about the mother's income, the District Court ruled on October 6, 2025, that the petitioner would be permitted to travel abroad subject to a bond of 5,000 NIS, as per HaMoked’s proposal. In its ruling, the Court held that the amount proposed by the State did not mitigate the alleged risks associated with the mother’s exit to an extent that justifies endangering the infant’s life. On December 19, 2025, five long months after the date of the original appointment, the mother and her son were finally able to leave the West Bank to receive life-saving medical treatment.
While the petition ultimately succeeded, its very necessity underscores the ineffectiveness of the existing procedures governing exit restrictions. These procedures, which allow authorities up to eight weeks to respond, are entirely unsuitable for urgent humanitarian cases. Moreover, the revised procedures adopted in 2025 eliminated any formal mechanism for emergency requests. As a result, Palestinians in the West Bank who wish to leave the country are forced to rely on lengthy legal proceedings to exercise their basic right to freedom of movement, sometimes at the cost of their health, and even their lives.
