A-G clarifies position on Ulpana outpost evacuation

June 6, 2012 23:19
1 minute read.


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Show me later Don't show it again

A statement issued by Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein’s office on Wednesday night, confirmed that the High Court of Justice ruling on the Ulpana was based on the state's notification to the court in May 2011.

In a press release it explained Weinstein's position that he presented to Netanyahu.

The state in that May notification said that it intended to execute demolition orders against the structures, Weinstein said. At the time the state said that the buildings were constructed outside the boundaries both of the Beit El settlement and of the military seizure order for the community, according to Weinstein.

The state issued its statement in response to petition to the court that it enforce the demolition order against homes that were illegally built, Weinstein said. The statement was also issued in compliance with the government policy that construction on private Palestinian property that was not seized by the state, Weinstein said.

The court, Weinstein said recorded the statement and has decided that as a result there was no reason to debate the substance of the claim. The ruling was not based on the position of the parties or the merits of the case, it said. As a result, he said, the ruling was not applicable to other cases.

Weinstein added that construction on private Palestinian property was problematic and difficult. It needed to be resolved through political leadership, Weinstein said. He advised that it was best to prevent such construction or remove it in its initial stages.

Legislation to legalize unauthorized West Bank Jewish homes was legally problematic both respect to domestic and international law, Weinstein said.

Related Content

Breaking news
August 14, 2018
Report: Netanyahu to be questioned for last time in connection to Case 4000 on Friday