The Lesson Learned

Rightly or wrongly, Migron was brought down, literally, because the court would not accept their claim to land ownership.

I still do not know exactly what parcels were purchased by Migron, what parcels were perhaps land awarded to the Arabs gratis - and therefore, the Jordanian occupation being illegal, there was no true ownership transferred, especially as their was no land development - or if the Arabs had falsified their documentation or whether Migron was 100% in the wrong on this matter.

In any case, I hope that all will be extra careful in the future and the fact that the Hebron purchase eventually was recognized is a sign that not all is corrupt despite the inexcusable actions of the Defense Ministry at the time and the continuing efforts of evil forces from within the judicial and legal frameworks of the Civil Administration of the Ministry of Justice.

In any case, here's an ad for the new Meromei Elkanah project and I have pointed out the clarification which reads:

The project has full legal accompaniment from the offices of lawyer of notary Elhanan Vinitzky and advice from Avraham Shvut.

I trust all will go well.

^

Haaretz's Freudian Slip

In a story on the attempts of Migron residents to purchase land from Arabs (and yes, that's odd since there was an earlier claim that the land belonged to them), I caught this in Haaretz:

Cuurrently, Migron residents are asking for the public’s health in the campaign entitled “4 amot [a halakhic term, measurement of 2 meters] for 400 shekels” in order to fund further purchases.

Really:

Health?  Like in sanity?

That the sane thing to do is have Jews residing on land in the Jewish national homeland.

^

Announced: 80% of Migron Land Purchased by Jewish Residents

The heads of the Migron community will claim on August 1 before Israel's High Court for Justice that they do not have to move.

The Arutz 7 Hebrew site (at this moment) is announcing that 80% of the land in dispute has now been bought from the Arab owners for several hundreds of thousands of dollars from an American-Jewish philanthropist.


________________

UPDATE


MKs Elkin & Eldad demand that the government inform HCJ that there's no need to move.  (link in Hebrew)

More details here.

Of course, someone will ask: if they claimed the land wasn't owned, from whom did they buy it?


^

Let's Get Legal About Migron

From a legal opinion offered by Howard Grief on the Migron Affair:

...Under the prevailing rules of international law, as embodied in Articles 42, 52 and 55 of the 1907 Hague Regulations, Jordan, as the Occupying Power of Judea and Samaria, being lands that were earmarked for the Jewish National Home and State under the Balfour Declaration, San Remo Resolution, the Franco-British Boundary Convention of December 23, 1920 and the Mandate for Palestine, which Jordan had re-named the “West Bank”, had no legal authority to grant to its citizens or subjects parcels of land that did not legally belong to it... ...Since Jordan was only the administrator or usufructuary of Judea and Samaria, it was never the legal owner or sovereign of this land. Hence, King Hussein’s land grant to various of his subjects has no legal validity or basis in international law, in the law of Palestine during the Mandate period, nor in Israeli law today...Under these circumstances, it was incumbent on the Government and the Supreme Court to carry out a thorough inquiry to determine whether the deeds of ownership held by the Arab Petitioners, which they had received from Jordan, were indeed valid, a duty neither discharged or even considered. Moreover, it was wrong for the Government to rely only on the questionable and unproven findings of the Sasson Report for proof of ownership. The Petitioners themselves were obliged to prove their ownership to the satisfaction of the Government and the Court. Prior to King Hussein’s land grant in Judea and Samaria, the land where Migron is located was not privately owned...To repeat: Migron was therefore never “private Arab property”, a fact of immense importance in determining the legality of the settlement...It is true that ownership of land may eventually be acquired by prescription, unless interrupted by protest by the actual owner, through continuous possession of the land by squatters who originally had no right or title to the land. However, in the Migron case the alleged Arab owners never truly possessed the land in the sense required for prescription, since the land was never cultivated or farmed by them, but rather lay fallow or unploughed and was no more than unused vacant land until the Migron community was established in 1999...

Get them to a court. ^

Migron and Israel's Supreme Court

Israel Harel writes of "the gaping chasm that exists between the facts and the interpretations given them" in connection with Migron's legal aspects:

...Migron residents begged the High Court not to automatically accept Peace Now's petition, but to instead await the outcome of a magistrate's court case that was then considering the question of the land's ownership. But Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch did not accede to the request submitted in their name by then-advocate Hanan Melcer. Had she shown the restraint expected of a Supreme Court justice, and certainly of its president, she would have prevented a growing segment of the public (which no doubt breathed a sigh of relief upon her retirement earlier this week ) from feeling that the court is deeply and essentially biased toward the left side of the political map.

Melcer, today a Supreme Court justice, put together a well-argued document that proved the land on which Migron was built did not belong to the plaintiffs. But in any case, since the question of the land's ownership was being reviewed by the magistrate's court, which has the tools to examine the title deeds, the High Court should have refrained from issuing a ruling before the magistrate's court had issued its decision.

But Beinisch pushed for it. And now, months after she issued her ruling that Migron should be uprooted, the plaintiffs have withdrawn their suit and the perversion of justice in her ruling has been laid bare.

Thus it was to rescue the High Court, not to defend justice, that Benny Begin entered the picture. After the prosecution concluded that "the plaintiffs have no right to the land," one would have expected that the High Court of Justice to have the courage, or the honesty, to cancel its deceptive, biased ruling. But since it did not, Begin decided to try to extricate it from the legal and public imbroglio in which it found itself. It was for the court's sake more than for Migron's that Begin has worked so assiduously over the past few months.

^

Former GSS Head Perry Reveals Ignorance

In an article on Migron, I found this:-

Jacob Perry, a former director of Israel's Shin Bet internal security service and a member of the opposition Kadima party, said the practice had "led to a big, big problem today."


Perry believes the Migron families should be forcibly removed, just as 8,500 Jews were ejected from Gaza in 2005 in a unilateral disengagement that still stirs furious resentment in the settlement camp.

"It can be dealt with. It will cost a lot of effort, but hopefully not a lot of blood," he said. "The majority of Israelis are against illegal settlements. If our leaders take a decision there will be huge support from the Israeli public."

But I already posted that that claim is wrong from last month's Peace Index:-

a large majority (76%) preferring that Israel remain a country with a Jewish majority, with one-quarter preferring that Israel continue to rule all of the Land of Israel west of the Jordan. Asked how they would respond if they knew that "continued Israeli rule over the West Bank would lead to one state for Jews and Arabs in the entire Land of Israel that would not have a Jewish majority,” the majority (63%) answered that in this case they would oppose continued rule in the territories.


That sounds bad, yes?  But consider this

However, the majority (54%) did not agree with the claim that continued rule in the territories will result in a country without a Jewish majority...[they believe] that continued rule in the territories will not prevent Israel from remaining a Jewish and democratic state. In other words, the public indeed prefers that Israel be a Jewish state over continued rule over the whole Land of Israel, but most of it does not believe there is a contradiction between the two objectives.

^

My Interview on Migron on IBA English TV News

Here:



^

The Migron 'No-Proof' Incident || Bibi UPDATE!!

(UPDATE below)

From my friend, Dr. Haim Shine in Israel Hayom:-

High atop a hill in the land given to the tribe of Benjamin, just where Saul's army once prepared for war with the Philistines, the outpost of Migron was built in 1999...What they did, as Zionists and pioneers, was reminiscent of the glory days of the early Zionist settlement movement.

This rocky hill, uninhabited since the days of Saul and David and whose soil has not been cultivated -- even sheep and cows have not grazed it -- became the home of Jewish settlers Jews. The homeland once again proved that it was waiting with eternal patience for the return of its sons. Women and children carried the weight of the entire nation on their gentle shoulders.



...Though Palestinian ownership of the land has not been established, the evacuation orders have already been issued. The State Prosecutor's Office has turned land that was never claimed by anyone into private land. I am convinced that had the same criteria been applied to the lands settled in the early days of Zionism and the establishment of Israel, legal proceedings would still be underway on the matter of Ramat Aviv, Raanana, Ramat Hasharon and many neighborhoods in Jerusalem.

True, Jewish settlements should not be built on private land, with or without government support. But in order for land to be classified as private, proof of ownership must be presented, and no such proof has been provided for most of the land on which Migron was built...

UPDATE

Government Offers Compromise Agreement on the Evacuation of the Structures at Migron
(Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier today (Sunday), 22.1.12, at the weekly Cabinet meeting, said that according to a High Court of Justice decision, the structures at Migron must be evacuated by 31.3.12. Due to its desire to honor the Court's decision by agreement and peacefully, the Government proposes the following compromise: Migron residents' permanent homes will be built near the current site, on state lands the planning for which will be arranged. Upon the conclusion of the construction, the residents will move to the permanent site. The site will be evacuated and handed over to the Judea and Samaria Civil Administration. The Government calls on the residents of Migron to agree to the proffered compromise and thus allow the Government to soon request that the Court approve the arrangement.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said that, "This is a good proposal. It does not solve all of the problems, but it does resolve the problem of Migron."

Not bad.  We can work with that.
^

Last Night's Emergency Meeting on The Arrangement Law

You can see me below attending the emergency meeting with MK Uri Ariel to discuss methods of political advocacy to improve the chances of the new bill that would achieve an equitable arrangement for the outposts on former state lands that had been awarded to Arabs during the period of the illegal Jordanian occupation and were unused - and also bring the situation in line with the legal practice in Israel whereby compensation is the norm rather than destruction of property.

Photo credits: Miriam-Feyge Bunimovitch

^

Likud Pro-Migron Ad and A Chance to Win 1 Million Shekels

Two internal divisions within Likud, not Feiglin's group, combined to place the ad below in the Haartez daily three days the past week, Thursday, Friday and Sunday, running over two-thirds of a page (I estimate the direct cost at at least 150,000 NUS not including its production)

In the name of Machaneh Leumi in Likud and Halikud Sheli, it calls on PM Netanyahu to decide to bring the new law establishing an "arrangement" for the new outpost commuhities regarding their legal standing.

So far, the campaign has not succeeded. But there's hope:

If the government does not legalize Migron, then the legislature will, Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin said during a visit to the outpost on Thursday

A new one promises one million shekels if you can prove who owns the land the community sits on:

The community of Mirgon on Monday offered a million shekels to anyone who can prove they own the land on which the community was established. Migron's secretariat says they will pay cold, hard cash to anyone who can successfully prove they own the land in court as a means of calling what they say is a bluff by Peace Now aimed at destroying their homes.

^

Migron Campaign Site

It's in Hebrew but it's the Migron Internet campaign site:

^

Migron Ad Signed by Rabbis

The advert calling on the government to stay the destruction of Jewihs communities such as Migron:

The land was never worked and no one ever complained until a few years ago at the initiative of leftists that the land was privately-owned. Even now there is no proof of private ownership. Moving Migron is no solution. The government assisted the development.

Previous initiative.

^

Outpost Campaign Targets Minister Hershkowitz

A new poster has been spotted on the issue of the dismantlement expected of Givat Assaf and other communities built on land the late King Hussein distributed to certain local residents to curry their favor and upon which nothing had been built nor had any agriculutral use been made of that land:

It asks that Minister Hershkowitz be pressured to inform PM Netanyahu that his party will leave the government before any dismantlement occurs, not after.

He seems to be getting the message. So does his party comrade, Uri Ohrbach. And their faction member Michael ben-Ari tore into Benny Begin today.

Netanyahu, however, seems determined to have his coalition break up:

After announcing his intention to set up a team that would examine the possibility of retroactively legalizing construction in some West Bank outposts, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday, "The effort should focus on bolstering the communities, not clashing with the law. It is forbidden to build on anyone's private land."

..."We must build in accordance with the law, thus strengthening the Land of Israel. There is no contradiction between the (settlement enterprise) and upholding the law," Netanyahu added.

Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar said he objects to the destruction of outposts in the West Bank because, according to him, there is "no proof of ownership and because the structures were erected by the state in good faith.  The homes were built by the government, and destroying them would be the wrong solution," he added.

Knesset members Miri Regev and Yariv Levin also criticized Netanyahu's remarks, with Levin claiming that "judicial elements are dictating a political viewpoint that is preventing the government from governing. There is a simple solution to the problem, and the government must not destroy (outposts)."

Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz said during the meeting, "(The State) builds homes, a Palestinian casts doubt (over their legality) and someone petitions the High Court of Justice. It is enough that someone casts the slightest doubt for the State to become defensive and seal the communities' fate."

Netanyahu responded by saying: "Why must I destroy these homes? Is it required (from a legal standpoint)? I can offer compensation."

Steinitz continued to say that "we are making families miserable – not for a peace agreement and not for justice. It is morally and legally wrong. As someone who has researched the events at Amona – we will be subjecting ourselves to unnecessary tension and division."

We wait.

^

More Pictures Of Migron Destruction

Thanks to Gemma Blech:-


Here.


^

Political Attack on the Likud

The Benyamin Region Residents Action Committee has published a sharp political advert against Likud Ministers as a result of their inability - or unwillingness - to protect the Migron community which suffered the destruction of three houses last Sunday, this in addition to their web banner campaign against IDF officers.

Here's the advert:

translation:

My House, My Way - The Likud, That's Correct:

The heads of (left to right, first photoshopped picture) of Benny Begin, Limor Livnat, Bogie Yaalon and Bibi Netanyahu appear and in the bopttom picture, you can see the heads of (l-r) Yisrael Katz and Gideon Sa'ar.

The Action Committee is head by my former battalion commander, Col. (Reserve) Yitzhak Shedmi from Neveh Tzuf and the operations coordinator is Shai Karov.

My sources indicate a major push-back that will be felt by Likud senior politicos from the thousands of registered Likud party members that have joined over the past three years, organized by my neighbors Shevach Shtern and Natan Engelsman.

^

A Girl in the Hands of The Police at Migron

This picture:-

is a screensnap from this clip of the destruction at Migron:

So, far only in Hebrew but several pictures are worth a million words.

And read all of Emily Amrousi:

If you attack the IDF, you're not a Zionist

It's hard to think of a dumber criminal act than vandalizing IDF property. Those very same jeeps, vandalized overnight Tuesday in an apparent "price tag" attack, will speed to a settlement the minute residents fear a terrorist may have penetrated the fence. Those punctured tires could have saved lives. The base is home to soldiers who are our sons and part of the settlement movement. If you lash out at the IDF, you are not a Zionist and not one of us...

^

Bad Translation; Worse Political Bias

This report by Chaim Levinson of Haaretz is remarkable for two things:  its bad translation (probably due to a rush job during the night but still, doesn't Haaretz have proofreaders?) and its media bias.

First, the bad translation higlighted in red - I found four and one syntanx goof:

Israel demolishes three illegal houses in West Bank Settlement

A force of some one-thousand police officers descended on the West Bank settlement Migron tonight to enforce a court order to demolish three illegal buildings erected during the past year.

A nightly drama in the West Bank, as a force of about one-thousand police officers demolishes three buildings in the West Bank settlement Migron, 14 kilometers north of Jerusalem. Around 200 settlers assembled and tried to make their way to the condemned buildings, hoping to stop the bulldozers in their tracks.

The incident began an hour past midnight, when approximately one-thousand police officers arrived at the settlement, and started emptying the buildings of their contents. While this was taking place, Regavim, a settlers' advocacy group, petitioned the Supreme Court, asking for a court injunction stopping the demolition. Justice Neil Hendel, who heard the petition, granted the advocacy group a 12-hour stay, halting the demolition.

This pause turned out to be short-lived as a few hours later, the Supreme Court issued another order, this one sanctioning the demolition and ordering the previous injunction void.

The three buildings, built during the passing year, were ordered to be destroyed by the Supreme Court, following a petition issued by Yesh Din, an Israeli human rights group. The state initially said it would comply with the court ruling by mid-July, and then later postponed the demolition to an unspecified date during September.

Danny Dayan, the chairman of the Yesha Council of West Bank settlements, who arrived at the scene, said “the decision to demolish the houses was made by the government not the court, thus the responsibility for this futile action lay with the government. It is still not too late for the Prime Minister to reverse the decision.”  Towards the brake of dawn the task was completed, in the places where the day before houses stood, only rubble remains today.

The bias?  Oh, I thought that was more obvious.

Regavim is a settlers' advocacy group

while Yesh Din is an Israeli human rights group.

Pretty simple, is it not.  And subtle.

^

A War Over Migron

I have posted over the years a good many notices, including posters, concerning Migron.  I arrive home, and there's a new one and a new campaign.

The poster is from a group calling itself 'The Committee on Behalf of Migron' - and there's a maverick group of 'Ramat Migron' - but I am not sure this is the offiical representative:

A flyer distributed this week and signed by the Rabbi of Shiloh makes the following points:

a) the petitioners didn't know they 'owned' the land that Peace Now found for them;
b) the lands were registered 50 years ago but were kept by the Mukhtars and never transferred to the 'owners'. it was a false land deal;
c) the Jordanian Law permits a court to disavow ownership of property never attended to;
d) is property cases, where errors occur, usually substitute land is made rather than destruction of homes;
e) the government was the body that built Migron to all intents and purposes;
f) the proper court for such issues is not the High Court of Justice;
g) the original petition was withdraw after it became clear that the 'owners' were not the owners.
h) deals were agreed to years ago and not agreed to.

What will be?

The Bible notes a previous battle near the site, at I Samuel 14

1 Now it fell upon a day, that Jonathan the son of Saul said unto the young man that bore his armour: 'Come and let us go over to the Philistines' garrison, that is on yonder side. But he told not his father. 2 And Saul tarried in the uttermost part of Gibeah under the pomegranate-tree which is in Migron; and the people that were with him were about six hundred men, 3 and Ahijah, the son of Ahitub, Ichabod's brother, the son of Phinehas, the son of Eli, the priest of the LORD in Shiloh, wearing an ephod. And the people knew not that Jonathan was gone...

Will there be another war at Migron?

^

Migron Fights Back

The Migron Community, facing a decision to destroy several homes, has issued this advert in the press:-

The main point raised is that the "facts" and "proof" of private Arab ownership are wrong and false. This action can be continued for other communities.

I do recall that a compromise was offered:

The Truth Behind The Yesha Council's Discussions with The Defense Ministry


The process to which The Yesha Council will agree is one which entails leaving the Migron temporary community exactly where it is today while:


(1) land is found, no more than a few hundred meters from the current location,
(2) plans are made, filed and approved,
(3) infrastructure is built and
(4) permanent homes are erected.


Simultaneously, the verifying of the legal status of the land where the temporary Migron community resides will continue in the court system. Very likely the result will be two legal Jewish communities!


Saying No to Compromise and Surrender. Saying Yes to Building.


No compromise or surrender is being contemplated. Many, many communities in Eretz Yisrael were developed in exactly this way; with residents living in a temporary community while their permanent community is built nearby. In exactly this way Keshet was built and Elon Moreh and Kedumim and Beit El and Beit Horon…and many others. And in this way Migron can see a future realized which includes a large and growing permanent community, something not possible in their current small, restricted location.


Even better, in this case, once Migron residents have moved into their new permanent homes, the temporary site will always remain in Jewish hands, never to be occupied by Arabs, as its strategic importance is clear to all, including The Defense Ministry.

We'll wait and see.

^

That AP Migron Story: Fragile?

There's an AP story out about possible criminal and unfair practices regarding land sales in Judea and Samaria and one specifically about Migron pointing to a scam.

It involves a grandfather who died in 1961



and a signature a few years back in California.

I am waiting for the provable details.

Nevertheless, here's one excerpt from the story and can you guess what drew my attention?

A Palestinian Authority document shows that Sumarin died in 1961, when his grandson says he was around 80. The grandson and a grandnephew said the elder Sumarin was buried near a fragile olive tree in the village cemetery. From there, Migron is visible on a hilltop to the east.

That's right: the tree.

A 47 year old olive tree is anything but fragile.



Maybe the story is fragile?