The unequal legal struggle of Palestinians in East Jerusalem | DW News

East Jerusalem Evictions & The Batan Alhawa Case

Key Concepts:

• Annexation (1967): Israel’s claim of sovereignty over East Jerusalem following the Six-Day War.
• Eviction: The forced removal of Palestinian families from their homes.
• Ater Kanim: A Jewish settler organization involved in the Batan Alhawa evictions.
• Yemeni Trust (Benvvenisti Trust): A historical trust used as the legal basis for settler claims.
• 1948 War/Nakba: The displacement of Palestinians during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
• Land Restitution Rights: The right to reclaim lost property, differentially applied to Jewish Israelis and Palestinians.
• International Law Violation: The assertion that the evictions contravene international legal norms.
• Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif: A contested religious site central to the conflict.
• Discriminatory Laws: Israeli laws applied post-1967 occupation that favor Jewish claims to property.

I. The Context of Evictions in East Jerusalem

Following Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem in 1967, a pattern of evicting Palestinian families began and continues to this day. The United Nations Human Rights Office has expressed concern that these actions may constitute war crimes. The Batan Alhawa neighborhood in Silwan is a focal point of these expulsions, with over 80 families currently facing the loss of their homes. These evictions are facilitated by Jewish settler families moving into the vacated properties, fully supported by the Israeli state and its court system.

II. The Case of Kayed Rajabi & Batan Alhawa

Kayed Rajabi exemplifies the plight of Palestinian families in Batan Alhawa. He faces an eviction order for his home, where multiple generations of his family have lived. He describes the emotional toll of potentially losing a home filled with lifelong memories, expressing fear of being forcibly removed and left homeless. The neighborhood is experiencing a systematic takeover by Israeli settlers, with Palestinian families being displaced one by one. Affordable housing in East Jerusalem is scarce, making relocation nearly impossible for those evicted. Rajabi has exhausted all legal appeals, including a ruling against him by the Supreme Court.

III. The Legal Basis for Settler Claims: The Yemeni Trust

Daniel Lura, representing the settler group Ater Kanim, asserts the legal claim is based on land owned by a Yemeni Jewish trust established in the late 19th century. He states that the trust’s members were “driven out in the 1930s” and that Israeli courts have consistently ruled in favor of the trust, characterizing Palestinian residents as “illegal squatters.” Lura explicitly denies any involvement with committees or court cases, stating their role is solely to “help the trust rejuvenate their Jewish life.”

IV. Discriminatory Legal Framework & Exploitation of Laws

Sarid Miki, an Israeli human rights advocate, explains that Israeli law systematically favors Jewish claims to property lost during the 1948 war. She states, “Since the occupation of 1967, the occupation and annexation of East Jerusalem, Israeli Jews who claim they lost property in the 48 war in Jerusalem…can reclaim it…It doesn't matter that Palestinians…have lived in their homes totally legally.” This allows Jewish Israelis to reclaim properties while denying Palestinians the same right to restitution for land lost in 1948.

Amy Cohen of the NGO Amin elaborates on this, highlighting the exploitation of domestic Israeli laws applied after the occupation. These laws allow Jewish Israelis to reclaim properties allegedly owned before 1948, while denying Palestinians equivalent rights. She details the history of the Benvvenisti Trust, noting it became defunct in the 1930s and was revived by Ater Kanim, who were then appointed by the government and approved by the district court, granting them a legal platform to initiate eviction proceedings. Cohen emphasizes that Ater Kanim has no historical connection to the original trust or its beneficiaries. She states that approximately 700 Palestinians are currently threatened with eviction.

V. Current Legal Impasse & Lack of Recourse

Following October 7th, the Israeli Supreme Court has categorically denied Palestinian families the right to appeal eviction orders, effectively eliminating any remaining legal avenues for resistance. Cohen points out that if Jewish Israelis faced similar eviction threats, the Israeli government and municipality would likely intervene to find a solution. She underscores the illegality of the evictions under international law.

VI. Implications for the Future of East Jerusalem & Coexistence

Cohen emphasizes the strategic importance of Silwan, located near the Temple Mount/Haram al-Sharif, making it “prime real estate.” She argues that the evictions have significant political ramifications for any future political settlement recognizing both Israeli and Palestinian rights to Jerusalem, including the possibility of a Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem. Beyond the political implications, she highlights the humanitarian crisis, with hundreds of individuals facing the loss of homes they have lived in for decades, some being refugees from 1948, facing potential expulsion again. She characterizes the situation as a “mass injustice” and a violation of international law.

VII. Data & Statistics

• Over 80 families in Batan Alhawa are facing eviction.
• Approximately 700 Palestinians are under threat of eviction in the area.
• Families have lived in their homes for 60-70 years, with some being refugees from 1948.

Conclusion:

The evictions in Batan Alhawa represent a systematic and legally facilitated displacement of Palestinian families in East Jerusalem. Driven by discriminatory laws and the actions of settler organizations like Ater Kanim, these evictions are not simply real estate disputes but a manifestation of the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict and a significant obstacle to a just and lasting peace. The lack of legal recourse for Palestinian families, coupled with the political context and the strategic importance of the area, underscores the urgency of addressing this issue and upholding international law.