HCJ leaves in place harmful procedure restricting the right to family unification in the West Bank: State claims internal review underway

On May 10, 2023, HaMoked, represented by Attorney Yotam Ben Hillel, filed a petition to the High Court of Justice (HCJ) on behalf of Palestinian families in the West Bank in which one spouse holds foreign citizenship, demanding amendment or revision of the “Procedure for Entry and Stay of Foreigners in the Judea and Samaria Area”. This procedure was ostensibly intended to regulate the entry into the West Bank of nationals from countries maintaining diplomatic relations with Israel, as well as their stay and the process for acquiring permanent status. However, the petition argued, the procedure, which came into effect on October 20, 2022, entrenches Israel’s longstanding unlawful policy of preventing family unification in the oPt, leaving foreign spouses in legal limbo without the ability to arrange their status, and severely harming the functioning of academic institutions in the West Bank and the Palestinian economy. The petition emphasized that under international law, Israel must not apply considerations in occupied territory – including in matters of immigration – unless they are for the benefit of the local population or based on security needs.

In its preliminary response dated June 23, 2024, the State argued that the petition was overly broad and included multiple petitioners, lacked a concrete factual basis, and should therefore be dismissed outright or alternatively deleted while preserving the option to file individual petitions in each case. The State further noted that the procedure was being implemented on a trial basis for approximately two years, until October 20, 2024, after which a decision would be made regarding its continued application. On October 31, 2024, the State announced that the procedure would remain in place without changes, even after the trial period ended.

Accordingly, in their response dated December 24, 2024, the petitioners requested that the Court schedule a hearing without delay, stressing that the matter had repeatedly been brought before the Court over the past decade, and that it was time for a decision, as "the cycles of objections and amendments, and objections to amendments, have been exhausted."

A hearing was finally held on September 30, 2025, and focused solely on the threshold issues raised by the state over a year earlier. The Court recommended that the petitioners withdraw the petition while preserving the parties’ arguments – and so it was. In its brief judgment dated September 30, 2025, the Court noted the State’s declaration that it is conducting an internal review of the procedure, expected to conclude by the end of 2025, and noted that “the petitioners may, at their discretion, submit to the respondents any difficulties or issues in the procedure, as they see fit”.