PA - is sovereign rules Israeli Court

A far reaching ruling was made in an Israeli civil court that could potentially have massive consequences, locally and internationally.

The Association of the Society of Elon Moreh Seminary claim to have purchased land in an area of the West Bank under full PA control (A area).The deal was voided by the village sheikh and the college sued the sheikh (and Israel) in the Israeli civil District Court for their money to be returned claiming the sheikh lacked the authority.The claim was the sheikh falsely declared that people agreeing to sell village land to the society indeed owned the land. After the society paid for the land, it emerged that the sheikh's affidavit was false.

The Judge Boaz Okon ( Judge and registrar of the Israeli Supreme Court ) yesterday (23/4/06) ruled that because the PA was vested with certain powers held by sovereign entities, it was not obligated to follow Israeli law and that the Israeli courts have no power to enforce their verdicts inside Palestinian territories. This was clearer after the 2005 Gaza disengagement. Judge Boaz Okon said "One sovereign state does not rule over another sovereign state and does not put it on trial." a curious parallel with the current case where tortured UK citizens seek redress in Uk courts for being tortured in Saudi Arabia.

If this ruling is upheld by the Israel Supreme Court, it constitutes a landmark decision that would over 120 lawsuits worth billions of shekels filed by private individuals, companies and victims of terrorism since the outbreak of the second intifada.

Okun was specific.."The application of this rule has nothing to do with the answer to the question of whether the PA is a state. It is sufficient to say that it is a sovereign body, or a quasi-sovereign body that imposes its authority on an area regarded by Israel as outside Israel. The application of immunity to the PA is also derived from a reading of the aims of the [1995 Oslo] Interim Agreement [between Israel and the PLO] as well as the [Israeli] law implementing the interim agreement."

Okun also rejected the plaintiff's demand to sue the Israeli government.

This ruling contradicts several rulings handed down by the Jerusalem and Tel Aviv district courts that said the PA could be sued by private individuals. The PA has appealed these decisions to the Supreme Court, which has not yet handed down a decision on the matter.

If the Supreme Court rejects the PA appeal, it will also automatically overturn Okun's ruling.

Judge Okun also made a ground breaking decision in January 2006 in the Tel Aviv District Court when he ruled that the state could not declare Palestinian land which was abandoned following the 1967 war as "land under Israel's effective sovereignty." For more details of the illegal land grab read the lengthy and detailed piece in the Guradian. Jan 31st 2005.

The ruling states that declaring lands owned by West Bank Palestinians as "absentee property" was illegal and no longer in effect.The Absentee Property Law could not be applied to West Bank lands abandoned by Palestinians during the 1967 Six Day War.

This followed Attorney General Menachem Mazuz decision in February 2005 which cancelled a June 2004 governmental decision made by two ministers (Natan Sharansky and Zevulun Orlev) to apply the absentee property law to tens of thousands of dunams of Palestinian property in East Jerusalem.

In a letter to Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mazuz wrote that Netanyahu must order an immediate halt to the application of the absentee property law to properties owned by West Bank residents in East Jerusalem.

If you want to read about how Judge Okun has been influenced by the Government when the Barry Chamish author of "Who shot Itzak Rabin" sued a bookseller for libel....read more here.