Secularism is a Women’s IssueHome > Uncategorised > Israel: Israeli Supreme Court upholds law to revoke citizenship for those (...)
Israel: Israeli Supreme Court upholds law to revoke citizenship for those who commit a “breach of loyalty”
Friday 29 July 2022, by
Israeli Supreme Court upholds law to revoke citizenship for those who commit a “breach of loyalty”
Some predict that the decision, which declares that it is legal for the government to revoke citizenship for a “breach of loyalty,” will be applied exclusively to Palestinian citizens of Israel
July 27, 2022
by Peoples Dispatch
Photo: President of Israeli Supreme Court, Esther Hayut, 2020 (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)
On July 21, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that it was legal for the government to revoke citizenship of those who “committed an act that constitutes a breach of loyalty in the State of Israel”. This decision is drawing concern from human rights defenders, who predict that the ruling will be used to target Palestinian citizens of Israel.
The decision came after Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), filed two different appeals for cases of Palestinian citizens of Israel who were convicted of being involved in acts that resulted in the death of Israeli citizens. Adalah and ACRI’s 2017 appeal against the Haifa District Court, which revoked the citizenship of Alaa Zayoud, a Palestinian citizen of Israel, was escalated to the Supreme Court, leading to the July 21 decision. The 2017 ruling to strip Zayoud’s citizenship was based on the 2008 Nationality Law, which outlines “breach of loyalty” as a range of offenses including terrorism and treason.
While the Supreme Court decided to accept Adalah and ACRI’s appeals for the two individual cases in question, it stated that there was “no constitutional defect” in the legal framework that allowed for revocation of citizenship to be used as punishment in cases that constituted “breach of loyalty,” even if “the individual becomes stateless” as a consequence of the revocation. The court went on to say that if the revocation does indeed result in statelessness, the Ministry of the Interior would have to provide alternative permanent residency status to the individual.
In a joint statement, Adalah and ACRI declared that the “decision is dangerous as it paves the way for the use of an illegitimate law that violates international law.” The organizations explained that the Supreme Court acknowledged in its ruling, “no such law exists in any other country in the world,” and go on to predict that the ruling will allow the law to be applied “exclusively against Palestinian citizens of Israel.” As attorney Oded Feller of ACRI told Reuters, “there are many cases of Jews in Israel who took part in terror and not even once has the interior ministry thought to appeal to revoke their citizenship.” Adalah and ACRI revealed that ever since the Israeli government enacted the 2008 Nationality Law, “the possibility of revocation of citizenship was considered in 31 cases, none of which involved a Jewish-Israeli citizen.”
The Ministry of Interior released a statement to Israeli newspaper Haaretz on current Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked’s position regarding the ruling: “although [Shaked] can only regret that the court ruled that terrorists must be given alternative status, she will use all of the tools at her disposal to revoke the citizenship of accursed terrorists—now all the more so.”
The offer of permanent residence for those who face statelessness as a result of citizenship revocations also raises questions about the unstable nature of this status for Palestinians, with some suggesting that it could be used to further expand Israel’s ethnic cleansing efforts. Amnesty International reported that over 14,000 Palestinians have been stripped of permanent residence rights in East Jerusalem alone since 1967, forcibly displacing them from the city.
The conclusions reached by the Supreme Court’s ruling point to the centrality of unequal citizenship status in Israel’s apartheid system, which is not only limited to the occupied Palestinians territories (oPt), but also affects Palestinian citizens of Israel in 1948 Palestine (Israel proper). In 2018, the “Jewish Nation” law codified Jewish supremacy amongst Israeli citizens, asserting that “Israel is the historic homeland of the Jewish people and that they have an exclusive right to national self-determination in it.” The court’s ruling last week serves to enable the differential treatment that is essential for maintaining the apartheid system.
°°°
Photo: ISRAELI SETTLERS WAVE ISRAELI FLAGS NEAR DAMASCUS GATE DURING THE ‘FLAG MARCH’ IN JERUSALEM ON MAY 29, 2022. (PHOTO: JERIES BSSIER/APA IMAGES)
Israeli Supreme Court rules citizens can be stripped of status for ‘breach of loyalty’
Originally published: Mondoweiss on July 23, 2022 by Yumna Patel
Posted Jul 27, 2022
Israel’s Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the state can revoke the citizenship of people on the basis of “breach of loyalty,” a law that rights groups say is a dangerous and “illegitimate law.”
Such actions that could constitute a breach of loyalty or trust include anything the state finds as “terrorism”, espionage, and treason. Adalah–The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel said the law will likely be used to disproportionately target Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up 20% of the state’s population.
The ruling was made in response to two appeals filed by Adalah and Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) on behalf of Palestinian citizens of Israel who were convicted of being involved in attacks that resulted in the death of Israeli citizens.
Following their conviction, the state moved to revoke their citizenship, based on Israel’s 2008 Citizenship Law, which allows the Israeli Interior Ministry, with district court approval, to revoke citizenship based on “breach of loyalty”.
Thursday’s ruling accepted an appeal by the groups in the cases of the two Palestinian citizens of Israel in question, citing “serious procedural flaws” in their specific cases, Reuters reported.
But the court ruled that the law itself was constitutional, and could be used in other cases to strip people of their citizenship, even if such an act would leave the person stateless.
In its ruling, the court noted that there was “no constitutional defect in the arrangement that allows the revocation of the citizenship of a person who committed an act that constitutes a breach of loyalty in the State of Israel, such as: an act of terrorism; an act of treason or serious espionage; or the acquisition of citizenship or the right of permanent residency in a hostile state or in hostile territory.”
“This is so, even if as a result of the revocation of his citizenship, the individual becomes stateless, provided that if the individual becomes stateless, the Interior Minister must grant him a status of permanent residence in Israel or another designated status,” the ruling stated.
In response to the ruling, Adalah and ACRI released a joint statement, saying “the Court’s decision is very dangerous as it also upholds the constitutionality of this “breach of loyalty” law.”
“This decision paves the way for the continued use of this illegitimate law, contrary to international law. The Supreme Court reached this decision, although it acknowledged in the ruling that no such law exists in any other country in the world,” the groups said.
‘Selective & discriminatory’
In its years long fight against the policy, Adalah and ACRI have argued that it is used specifically to target Palestinian citizens of Israel, who have a population of around 2 million, and are largely treated as second-class citizens in Israel.
According to Adalah, since the Citizenship Law was amended to include the “breach of loyalty” clause in 2008, the possible revocation of citizenship was considered in 31 cases, none of which involved a Jewish-Israeli citizen.
The court’s ruling on Thursday, however, rejected the groups’ argument that the law was being used in a “selective and discriminatory manner” exclusively against Palestinian citizens of Israel. Adalah and ACRI said this was despite the fact that they provided the court with a number of “serious incidents” after 2008 in which Israeli Jewish citizens attacked Palestinians, which did not result in any requests for revocation of citizenship.
Chief Justice Esther Hayut said in her ruling that since only three requests for revocation of citizenship were submitted by the Interior Minister to Israeli courts for approval, “it is insufficient to point to a pattern of discrimination.”
The group’s slammed the decision, saying that following the Supreme Court ruling, discriminatory law “will likely be used exclusively against Palestinian citizens of Israel.”
Last year the Israeli Ministry of Interior revoked the permanent residency of Palestinian human rights lawyer Salah Hammouri from his hometown of Jerusalem, on the basis of “breach of allegiance” to the state, paving the way for Hammouri’s forced deportation.
Prisoners rights group Addameer condemned the decision at the time, saying it was the culmination of years of targeted harassment by the Israeli government against Hammouri for his human rights work, including arbitrary arrests and imprisonment.
Hammouri is currently being held in Israeli prison under administrative detention, a policy used by Israel almost exclusively against Palestinians that allows for imprisonment without charge or trial, often under “secret evidence.”
Monthly Review does not necessarily adhere to all of the views conveyed in articles republished at MR Online. Our goal is to share a variety of left perspectives that we think our readers will find interesting or useful. —Eds.
