Not discriminatory to give benefits to only some east Jerusalem Palestinians, court rules

National Labor Court endorses controversial government decision to extend certain benefits to Arabs who, prior to 2004, were Israeli residents.

October 18, 2013 00:27
1 minute read.
East Jerusalem.

east Jerusalem 370. (photo credit: Wikimedia Commons)


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

The National Labor Court on Thursday endorsed a controversial government decision made in April to extend certain benefits to Arabs who, prior to 2004, were Israeli residents – but not citizens – living in areas such as Sur Bahir in east Jerusalem on the Israeli side of the West Bank security barrier, while not extending them to Arabs who moved to the area after 2004.

The court said that the distinction was logical because the state was solving an issue for Arabs who were in the area before 2004, since the barrier created logistical issues for them to have access to Palestinian hospitals, but not for Arabs who moved to the area after 2004, already knowing that the barrier was there.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.

Attorney-General Yehuda Weinstein said in April that the residents, who are in a legal “no-man’s-land” by virtue of living in an area still defined by most of the world as the disputed West Bank, but on the Israeli side of the barrier, had sued Israel for certain benefits and services, such as health insurance.

Israel began erecting the barrier in 2002, during the second intifada, and it has been credited with heavily reducing terrorist attacks emanating from the West Bank.

The barrier has been criticized by the International Court of Justice and other international players and states and has led to rampant litigation before the High Court of Justice to resolve many direct and indirect logistical problems that it created.

Among other things, said a Justice Ministry spokesman, Weinstein’s announcement was designed to address one of these logistical problems: a legal “no-man’s land” where some Arabs were unable to access their prior health-care centers and other services in the Palestinian Authority areas, but, until now, also had no right to the services in Israel since they were only residents and not citizens.

Weinstein’s executive decision permits these Arabs on the Israeli side of the barrier to get the care and services they need in Israel, where they do not need to cross the barrier.

Before Weinstein’s April decision, it was unclear what these Arabs’ rights were, as they are Israeli residents but not citizens.

Related Content

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
August 31, 2014
Prime minister to Channel 1: I’ll be running again in next election

By Gil Stern Stern HOFFMAN