About Us






Saturday, July 17, 2010
Regavim Report: Statistics Demonstrate Supreme Court Discriminates Against Right

Regavim Report: Statistics Demonstrate Supreme Court Discriminates Against

Statstics on Petitions filed with the Supreme Court 2005 - 2009 against the
law enforcement authorities in Judea and Samaria:

Percentage of petitions where a temporary injunction was issued
Right: 0% Left: 90%

Percentage of petitions where a conditional court order was issued
Right: 0% Left: 35%

Percentage of petitions where the president seated herself at the head of
the judicial panel
Right: 0% Left: 57%

Average number of days provided to the Government to respond
Right: 88 Left: 25

Average days before first hearing
Right: 389 Left: 177

Average number of hearings per petition
Right: 0.5 Left: 1.9

In recent years, and as part of the trend of the increasing involvement of
the High Court with the activities of the executive branch, a wave of
petitions against illegal construction in Judea and Samaria has washed over

Some of the petitions are presented by Leftist organizations and are
directed against Israeli settlement (henceforth: petitions of the Left) and
some come from nationalist-Zionist organizations and are directed against
illegal building in the Palestinian sector (henceforth: petitions of the

Actually, it is possible to refer to these as “mirror petitions”, since both
types are based on the same factual basis, and both raise the same legal

All the petitions are directed against the law enforcement authorities in
Judea and Samaria (the Civil Administration), and the principle claim is
that the authorities refrain from fulfilling their obligation to enforce the
law in the field of illegal construction.

In terms of the legal questions raised by the petitions, the primary issue
is for the Supreme Court to rule whether there is cause for interference in
the considerations of the executive authorities or whether their decisions
are within reasonable bounds.

If it is decided that there is cause for judicial intervention, the court
moves into the next level of investigation: investigating the matter
according to its own merits and reaching a decision according to its own

In this report you will find a summarized survey of the way that the court
relates to the many petitions that have been placed before it lately from
both sides of the political fence between the years 2005 and 2009.

The resulting picture presented in this report is enough to give sleepless
nights to anyone who values Israeli democracy.

The treatment of the petitions by the court is evaluated in this report
according to identical, objective and measurable parameters. From the
findings it is clear that while the petitions of the Left are given serious
and stringent treatment, the petitions presented by those who are identified
with the Right are treated with disregard and a lack of seriousness.

In the report, fixed parameters are employed: the length time allowed for a
response, the number of court sessions held and the span of time between
each session, the make-up of the court and the issuing of temporary court
orders and orders nisi.

The report focuses on the procedural components of the process, since these
components are present in the process even before the various issues of the
case have been investigated in depth. It is these components that reflect
the starting point and basic position from which the judges approach the
case. Because of this we cannot

The resulting picture presented in this report is enough to give sleepless
nights to anyone who values Israeli democracy.


In the course of a session regarding Supreme Court case Rahelim (Supreme
Court Case 2295/09) on April 26th, the attorney representing the
respondents, the residents of the Israeli settlements and the Shomron
Regional Council, expressed his surprise aloud in the presence of the
president of the Supreme Court and stated that he is unable to explain to
his clients why the petitions regarding illegal Palestinian construction are
rejected by reason of the state’s scale of priorities, but in the case of
Jewish construction the petitions are considered binding and valid.

The president’s response was: “I believe that the gentleman understands

In any case, whether the attorney understands why or not, we do not

What is certain is that we, and the entire public, do not understand why.

We, and most of the Israeli public, were not graced with that divine wisdom
that was granted to Her Honor. We are not wise enough, nor are we
sufficiently sagacious to understand her conduct. If Her Honor wishes to
represent us as well, those simple people who dare to hold Right-wing
opinions, she should graciously “go down to the people” and explain to us

The findings of this report indicate that we do indeed deserve an
explanation. In order that the last drop of trust in that important
institution that is still left not evaporate, the explanation had better be
good and convincing…

#1 “Equality guards government from arbitrariness”: When this principle is
violated arbitrariness overtakes the enforcement authorities, and the rule
of law is transformed from a supreme value into a political club, from a
foundation stone of proper government into an empty, worthless idea, a spade
with which to dig in order to advance a particular political agenda.

#2 “Indeed, there is no more destructive force in society than the feeling
of its members that they are being treated unfairly”: If the findings of
this report do not show “unfair treatment”: we have no idea what “unfair
treatment” is. If that is truly the case, how can we complain about the
collapse of the stature of the High Court and of the loss of the public’s
faith in this institution? The members of Israeli society, those that belong
to one side of the political divide, feel discriminated against time after
time, and indeed, there is nothing more destructive than this.

#3 “This feeling of inequality is among the worst of feelings”: And it is
seven times worse when combined with a feeling of powerlessness, since we
are speaking of the Supreme Court whose decisions cannot be appealed and it
arbitrary rulings cannot be held up to criticism of any other institution.

#4 “It harms the ties that unite society”:

The fact that there occurred, according to all the parameters that were
examined without exception, extremely discriminatory treatment – a serious
and even encouraging attitude towards the petitions of the Left, and towards
the petitions of the Right a contemptuous, not to say cynical attitude –
does not leave room for doubt regarding the clear agenda that directs
President of the Supreme Court Dorit Beinish, in this context.

The only motive that we can provide to explain this gap is an
ideological-political motive, that sees the Judea and Samaria regions as
“occupied territory” and not parts of the Homeland, that sees the State of
Israel as an “occupying power” and not as a nation returning to its land...
after two thousand years of exile and redeeming it from its desolation, and
sees the Palestinians as an “occupied and oppressed people” instead of as
enemy that desires to destroy us and expel us from our ancestral home.

This ideological and political position is legitimate within the public and
political debate in Israel, and the Israeli public has been divided over
these issues for over a generation.

However, it is wrong for the High Court to take for itself the authority to
bypass the nation, to rule and make decisions consistently favorable to one
side rather than to the other.

The acceptance of an extreme political The report before you proves this as
well as a thousand witnesses!

The fact that not one objective parameter can be found that points to the
opposite conclusion, a single parameter that can balance the distorted and
discriminatory treatment that the High Court grants the petitions coming
from the different sides of the political fence – this fact cries out to the


The Regavim Movement

A social movement for preserving Israel’s land and national properties. The
movement works to prevent illegal takeover of state lands and preserving
proper administration in all areas having to do with land policy of the
State of Israel. The movement works on the social, parliamentary and
judicial level, through publishing articles, public reports, research and
taking legal action. This work is carried out in order to advance the goals
of the movement and to bring about the returning the Zionist vision to its
leading position in setting day to day policy in the State of Israel. The
Zionist vision, as the Regavim movement sees it, is first and foremost a
Jewish vision, full of confidence and faith, but at the same time it is a
human movement, both just and ethical, that, in part, expresses itself
through virtuous behavior and the rules of proper administration.

Writing and editing: Betzalel Smotrich, Einat Korman

Search For An Article

Contact Us

POB 982 Kfar Sava
Tel 972-9-7604719
Fax 972-3-7255730
email:imra@netvision.net.il IMRA is now also on Twitter

image004.jpg (8687 bytes)