Article74 Magazine

A memorandum prepared for the roundtable conducted by SHAML Center by the Project for Palestinian Residency & Refugee Rights/Alternative Information Center, November 18, 1995  

1. Summary Argument  

Although the re-instatement of ID cards revoked by the Israeli authorities from Palestinian residents of the 1967 occupied territories has been formally on the agenda of the political negotiations since the Madrid conference, absolutely no progress has been made. 
This paper argues that “lost IDs” should be treated in the negotiations as an issue independent of the ongoing talks on the return of the 1967 displaced persons. Priority should be given to the immediate establishment of the joint Israeli-Palestinian Committee and to the clarification of procedures for the re-instatement of the resident status of all persons included in this category (as provided by Article 28/3 of the Taba Agreement). 
Since Israel continues to revoke ID cards of Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem in the interim period and since the resident status of East Jerusalemites is not protected by any of the current political agreements, special efforts must be made to protect the residency rights of Jerusalemites whether they live in the surrounding West Bank or abroad. 

2. Israeli Regulations Concerning the Revocation of ID Cards and Means of Appeal 

2.1 West Bank and Gaza Strip: Israeli military orders do not explicitly define who is a resident of the occupied West Bank/Gaza Strip. The concept of residency is defined implicitly in the military orders pertaining to ID cards and infiltrators. It has been Israeli policy to revoke ID cards of persons who traveled abroad without renewing their re-entry visa within a set period of time (after three years for persons who left with an exit permit via the bridges to Jordan, after one year for persons who left via the Israeli airport with a laissez-passer). 
Once an ID card is revoked, the decision can be appealed to the “Latecomers Committee”, a special body established by the Israeli civil administration in the 1990s. The appeal must include official documents proving strong reasons for the person’s absence (e.g. medical reports, university documents). 
It is important to state here that the Israeli authorities/Latecomers Committee does not accept absence for economic reasons (work abroad) as adequate justification and that marriage to a non-resident abroad and the number of children in the family negatively influence the applicant’s chance of re-admission. 

The fact that exit permits issued by the PNA since May 1994 do not set a deadline for the person’s return is an achievement which prevents the revocation of ID cards in the future. However, none of the agreements between the PLO and Israel have so far solved the issue of ID cards revoked in the past. 

2.2 East Jerusalem: Palestinian inhabitants of occupied and annexed East Jerusalem are subject to Israeli law. Israeli law defines Palestinians living in East Jerusalem as “permanent residents” (and not as citizens). Regulation 11 of the Law of Entry to Israel (1952) states that if a permanent resident: 
a) lives outside of Israel for more than seven years 
b) becomes a permanent resident of another country 
c) applies for citizenship in another country 
s/he will lose her/his status as permanent resident of Israel. 

Regulation 11 is applied both to Palestinian Jerusalemites who travel abroad and to those who move outside the city boundaries to live in the surrounding West Bank or in the Gaza Strip. (Note: while revocations of East Jerusalem ID cards of persons who live abroad were confirmed by the Israeli supreme court - see the case of Mubarak Awad and Fathiyeh Shekaki - the revocation of East Jerusalem ID cards of persons who moved to the West Bank have not yet been tested, mainly due to the reluctance of lawyers to create a dangerous precedent.) 
Once a Jerusalemite’s ID card is revoked, s/he can appeal the decision to the Interior Ministry either in person or through a lawyer. As in the case of 2.1, official documents must be presented. The success of the appeal also depends on the length of the period of absence. Appeals of revocations which date back more than seven years have no chance of success, due to Regulation 11. 

3. Scope of and Reasons for the Problem 

3.1 Remarks Concerning Data 
Israel has not issued its official figures of lost IDs in the West Bank (excluding East Jerusalem) and the Gaza Strip, despite promises made in the framework of the multilateral negotiations. The Israeli Interior Ministry has refused to provide the corresponding figure for East Jerusalem. (The AIC is currently preparing a high court petition on this matter in cooperation with the Israeli Coalition for the Freedom of Information.) 
Jordan possesses only partial data, which are not easily accessible (systematic registration of persons crossing the bridge started only in 1983, data for 1967 - 83 are missing). 

Therefore all data currently handled are estimates. 

3.2 Expiry of exit permits: Residents of the 1967 occupied territories who left with an Israel-issued exit permit via the bridge crossings to Jordan or via the Raffah border crossing to Egypt and did not succeed in renewing their permit after the period of three years required by Israel lost their right to re-enter the country. The number of Palestinians who lost their resident status in the 1967 occupied territories in this fashion is estimated to be at 80,000, the large majority of whom are currently living in Jordan. 

3.3. Expiry of “laissez passer”: Residents of the 1967 occupied territories could travel abroad via the Israeli airport, if they were issued a “laissez passer”. This travel document was valid for one year; it could be renewed at Israeli embassies abroad. It has been the policy of the Israeli embassies not to renew the travel document if the holder took on permanent residency in another country (e.g. holds a green card in the US), and to deliberately misinform applicants about the renewal procedures. The number of Palestinians who lost their resident status in this manner is estimated at 20,000. 

4. “Lost IDs” in the Political Negotiations  

4.1 Even in 1992 Israel had agreed to discuss the issue of lost IDs in the framework of the Multilateral Working Group on Refugee Affairs. The Israeli delegation had also agreed to provide all data pertaining to this matter to the Palestinian side. However, the issue was never raised in a serious fashion. 

4.2 DOP-Cairo-Taba: Both the DOP and the Cairo Agreement did not mention “lost IDs” explicitly. The Taba Agreement, however, contains an explicit - although vague - reference: “A Joint Committee will be established to solve the reissuance of identity cards to those residents who have lost their identity cards” (Article 28/3). 

4.3 In autumn 1994, the Jordanian delegation handed over a list of 6,250 persons whose residency rights were revoked to the Israeli side as a test case. Until now, Israel has not responded to this initiative. 

5. Recommendations to the Palestinian Negotiators   

a) Given the uncompromising Israeli position in the negotiations on the repatriation of the 1967 displaced persons and the total lack of progress on this level, it is tactically unwise to include the case of “lost IDs” among the category of `67 displaced persons. 

b) Solving the problem of lost IDs by including part of the persons concerned in the PA lists of persons returning (which are usually approved by Israel) is a partial and problematic solution. It will deprive a major part of this group of their right to return, it gives rise to favoritism and will contribute to the obscurity of the process of repatriation. 

c) “Lost IDs” is a case with a definite chance for a political success for the Palestinian negotiators because: 
- their number is limited; 
- their original status as residents of the 1967 occupied territories is clear (even in  Israeli terms); 
- Israel has agreed, since the start of the political negotiations, to a separate solution of  this problem. 

Based on the above, the human rights organizations, members of the Israeli-Palestinian Coalition for Family Reunification, regard this issue as one requiring a rapid, separate and categoric solution. Palestinian negotiators could place pressure on the Israeli side in the following ways:  

- Insisting upon the immediate establishment of the Joint Committee as provided by the  Taba Agreement, Article 28/3. 

- Formulating a clear strategy and procedures for the Palestinian representatives in the  Joint Committee in cooperation with human rights organizations and expert lawyers  in this matter. 

- All persons whose ID cards were revoked have a right to participate in the elections  of the Palestinian Council. In order to guarantee their participation, the Palestinian  side must make all efforts to lead to the establishment of the Joint Committee at the  earliest possible date and to obtain - at least - the Israeli concession that such persons  wishing to be listed in the election registry be issued special visit permits. 

- Since the Israeli side will exclude East Jerusalem lost IDs from any future arrangement in the Joint Committee (Taba Agreement), separate and additional channels must be developed to deal with the revocation of ID cards in East Jerusalem, both in the past and at present. The reinstatement of lost IDs is NOT a matter pertaining to the future political solution of the question of Jerusalem (final status negotiations), but clearly a matter of basic human rights. 
In order to prevent the massive revocation of ID cards from Palestinian Jerusalemites living in the West Bank or abroad in the interim period, Palestinian negotiators must raise the demand for the freeze of their residency status until the issue is resolved in the final status negotiations.