AIC - Residency & Refugee Rights Project, International Day of Human Rights, 10 December 1996 
This report is based on meetings with Issa al Khdour, Director General/Bethlehem Interior Ministry (8-10-96) and with the Civil Affairs Committee of the PA (Ramallah, 17-10-96, Khaled Salim/Committee for Population Affairs, Muhammad Shqeir/Population Registration-Lost IDs, Hassan Abu Hashish/Family Reunification, Visit Permits) and on AIC field research conducted in 1996. Information provided to the AIC by the PA Interior Ministry describes the situation on the ground. PA Interior Ministry offices are a major address approached by Palestinian residents seeking family reunification, visitor’s permits, ID cards, etc. for local residents. The example of Bethlehem is representative of all other West Bank districts, with the possible exemption of Hebron which is still under Israeli control. PA agenda and strategies of coordination and negotiations with the Israeli side are the arena of the Palestinian Civic Affairs Committee (CAC). Thus, the CAC is a source of background information on the ongoing negotiations which have created the new reality in which both, the PA Interior Ministry and Palestinian residents are forced to act. 

1. Family Reunification: Married in 1995 - United in 2001? 
The procedure of family reunification in the West Bank has come to a standstill since the hand-over of authority to the PA. As of November 1996, the Israeli authorities are exclusively handling family reunification applications which were submitted before the November 1995 hand-over to the PA. All Israeli answers to applications reaching the Bethlehem Ministry thus concern applications from before November 1995. In violation of all promises and agreements in the multilateral and bilateral talks, the Israeli Civil Administration, formerly responsible for this matter, did not provide the PA Ministry with records of these old pending applications. The latter has made efforts to compensate for the missing records by copying and compiling the responses arriving to individual applicants from the Israeli side. In this way, the Bethlehem Ministry has obtained a partial list of these pre-November `95 applications and the pattern of Israeli responses: 

Israeli response to family reunification applications (Bethlehem district, 11-95 to 11-96) 

preliminary positive                                                    6 (1 dated 92, 2 dated 94, 4 dated 95) 
positive, waiting for result of individual investigation    314 (17 from `94 quota, 105 from `95 quota,  
                                                                                    192 unknown) 
refused                                                                    42 
received ID                                                             220* 

*list submitted by Israel and the PA Interior Ministry; Note: the total number of pending pre-November `95 applications is unknown. 

The Israeli DCO-Bethlehem has so far refused to accept any family reunification application dating from 1996. Varying explanations for the halt of family reunification procedures are offered by the parties involved. According to the Bethlehem Interior Ministry, Palestinian liaison officers were informed by the Israeli side that “there is a quota which is full, and in fact it will remain full until the year 2000.” Since the PA Ministry is thus unable to transfer family reunification applications collected from the people to the Israeli DCO, it has taken the drastic decision to stop collecting family reunification applications completely, in order to avoid creating wrong expectations among people. 
The CAC, on the other hand, stated that it never received official Israeli notice of the fact that quota for family reunification were full until the year 2000, but it confirmed that Israel is currently handling only pre-1995 applications. Also CAC personnel are dedicating efforts to facilitate the completion of procedures concerning old applications, i.e. mainly those cases which already received positive Israeli answers to their applications, but have not yet been issued ID cards. 
A third explanation, supported also by the Israeli side, holds that the problem originates in the rejection by the PA, of the Israeli quota allocated to family reunification (2,000 annually). In protest against the Israeli unwillingness to raise the quota, the PA decided - at the time of the 1995 hand-over - not to collect any new family reunification applications, a step which is perceived to pressure Israel to change or abolish the quota system. Thus, whenever local offices of the PA Interior Ministry not informed of, or in disagreement with this PA strategy, try to transfer applications to the Israeli side, the latter would refuse to receive these applications. 
Whatever the exact reason for the problem, the lives of Palestinian residents in the PA areas are strongly effected by the clear bottom line of the matters described above, i.e. the fact that there is no family reunification for newly-wed couples. Whoever married a non-resident spouse after November 1995, is confronted with the fact that s/he will not be able to unite with her/his wife/husband until the turn of the millennium, and even then not for sure. It is important to remember here that the crisis of family reunification in the 1967 occupied territories as such is not new. But whereas in the past, the Israeli Civil Administration was prepared to accept an unlimited number of applications - thus maintaining people’s hopes for a rapid positive answer - the sustenance of (false)hope is now no longer a major Israeli concern. 

2. Visitor’s Permits: Israel Refuses Implementation of the Taba Agreement 
Originally, the Taba (Oslo II) Agreement had promised a somewhat less restrictive situation in regard to visitor’s permits issued for Palestinian relatives of residents in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Annex III/Article 28/13 stated that visitor’s permits would be issued throughout the year (not only in the summer season), that applications could be submitted by any relative or friend (not only “first degree” relatives), and that visitor’s permits would allow the holder to enter East Jerusalem and Israel. 
However, Palestinian visitors lucky enough to obtain a visitor’s permit, have not been permitted to leave the Gaza Strip or to pass the Israeli checkpoints separating East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank. This has prevented thousands from visiting relatives in Jerusalem or from realizing their dream of praying at the al-Aqsa mosque. According to the CAC, the Israeli chief negotiator on civil affairs, Oren Shahor informed the PA immediately after the signing of the Taba Agreement (September 1995) - in writing - that Israel would not implement this provision of Article 28/13. Since then, CAC negotiators have been trying to obtain an Israeli compromise by offering various new formula (e.g. a special Israel entry visa attached to the visitor’s permit) - but to no avail. PA Interior Ministry staff in Bethlehem expressed the feeling that this Israeli policy was part of a broader Israeli scheme, i.e. to prove to the people that the PA is inefficient: Visitor’s permits issued via the PA do not allow access to East Jerusalem and Israel, its holders are subject to the Israeli imposed military closure, while persons coming from Jordan on an Israel-issued tourist visa are permitted to move freely and even allowed to cross the checkpoints in their private cars. 
The only category of “visitors” not encountering problems according to all Palestinian sources are spouses of Palestinian residents covered by the November 1992 Israeli High Court Agreement. Israel continues to renew their six-month visitor’s permits as in the past. However, many of them have not yet received permanent resident status and ID cards, although an 1994 Israeli policy statement explicitly announced such a step. 
In order to avoid additional pile-up of visitor’s permit applications in its offices, the Bethlehem Ministry decided to accept no more than a quota of 100 applications per week. Israel’s handling of visitor’s permit applications is similar in other districts, with the exception of Hebron. There, visitor’s permits are being issued even in times when procedures are stopped elsewhere - this could be to show people that the situation is better in areas where Israel is still handling such affairs. 

The processing of visitor’s permit applications by Israel has remained disappointingly slow throughout 1996. 
Since the November 1995 hand-over, the situation in the Bethlehem District has been as follows: 

Applications collected by the Int. Ministry    3,400 
Approved by Israel                                     1,400 
Refused by Israel                                         300 
Still pending with Israel*                                300 
Stored at the Interior Ministry**                   1,400 

* 300 visitor's permits applications have been pending with the Israeli DCO since April 1996; between mid-August and October 1996, Israel has not processed applications at all. 
** Therefore, visitor's permit applications are piling up at the PA Interior Ministry, and the latter has stopped transferring them to the Israeli DCO. 

3. Expired Visitor’s Permits: Israeli Pressure on the PA 
In March 1996, only three months after the hand-over of civil affairs to the PA, Israel informed the Bethlehem Interior Ministry of 960 persons who were allegedly staying in the area after their visitor’s permit had expired. This although the Cairo Agreement provides for three-month visitor’s permits issued by Israel to be extended by the PA for an additional four months without requiring Israeli consent. In general, the issue of “illegally present” visitors is regularly raised by the Israeli side in joint meetings at all levels. Israel claims that a total of 30,000 persons with expired visit permits are currently staying in the West Vank and Gaza Strip, and has been requesting action to be taken by the PA. 
The CAC, on the other hand, has been trying to counter Israeli pressure by preparing detailed case lists based on field research. According to the CAC, the findings show that many of the allegedly illegal over-stayers have either left the country, obtained other types of visas (students, investors) or have been registered as residents. So it would seem that the Israeli figures are exaggerated. 

4. Foreigners Encounter Problems Renewing their Visa via the PA 
The Bethlehem Interior Ministry has also stated that the Israeli DCO refuses to accept applications for visa extension by foreigners residing in the PA areas. Thus, holders of foreign passports can either try to obtain a renewal directly from the Israeli Interior Ministry but, if refused, are forced to leave the country. According to the CAC, this matter was raised in a recent joint meeting and the Israeli side agreed to return to the former procedure, i.e. to process visa applications transferred to them by the regional Palestinian CAC offices. 

5. Student and Worker’s Visas Issued via the PA - An Option for Few 
According to the Israeli-Palestinian Agreements, the PA is authorized to process applications for special one-year visas for persons studying or working in the PA areas. Such visas could solve the problem of many, Palestinians and foreigners, who have difficulties in renewing their regular visitor’s permits or visas (see 3. and 4. above). 
The CAC has filed applications for professionals working in PA institutions, investors and employees in the private sector (large enterprises only), and local and international NGOs. According to the current procedure, applicants must enter on a regular visitor’s permit or visa, and then submit a work permit application to the local Palestinian Interior Ministry offices. These applications are then transferred to the CAC, which negotiates each case with the Israeli side. In case of Israeli approval, a six-month visa is issued and renewed once for another six months. If the applicant holds a visa which permits entry to East Jerusalem/Israel, his/her work permit will also permit crossing the Israeli checkpoints; if the original visitor’s permit is restricted to the PA areas, the attached work permit does not entitle to enter Jerusalem/Israel. Since the 1995 hand-over of civil affairs in the West Bank, the CAC is confronted with numerous applications by persons claiming to fit this category and is forced to decide each case alone. In order to establish transparent procedures, the CAC calls for the introduction of an “investor’s certificate” which should be designed jointly by Israel, the PA Ministry for Economy and Trade, and the CAC. 

6. What About the Achievements of the Taba Agreement? 
A positive aspect of the September 1995 Taba (Oslo II) Agreement was the fact that it provided - for the first time - for the establishment of procedures for a Palestinian population registry, which - it was hoped - would contribute to securing the residency rights of those already living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. 

6.1. ”Election IDs” Not Yet Issued 
Article II (“The Right to Vote and the Electoral Register”) provides that all persons able to document their presence in the country for a consecutive period of three or four years are permitted to register for the Palestinian elections and would be issued ID cards in the future (Paragraph 1/g/1,2). 
In the short period between December 1995 and the January 20, 1996 Palestinian elections, the CAC collected 4,500 applications for such ID cards. 1,000 additional applications reached the CAC after the election deadline, and Israel has so far rejected to include them in the original contingent. By November 1996, none of the applicants had yet received his/her ID card. 

6.2. Child Registration by the PA - Fees Collected by Israel 
Annex III/Article 28/12 provides that the PA has the right to register newborn children who have at least one resident Palestinian parent without Israeli interference. 
The implementation of this provision was obstructed for months by the fact that Israel and the PA could not agree on the fees to be collected for the registration of Palestinian children by their parents. The so-called stamp dispute originated in the fact that the PA Interior Ministry lacked the technical facilities and know-how to process application data, so Israel continued to fulfill this task. Israel thus claims that it has the right to collect the fees it used to collect in the past, which were higher than those proposed by the PA. As of November 1996, the “stamp dispute” continues, although a compromise between the PA and Israel enables Palestinian residents to register their children: child registration is free of charge within 10 days of birth (according to the Israeli military regulation); later registrations require payment of a fine set by Israel (NIS 71 - 121). 
Moreover, as of November 1996, the PA has failed to take advantage of the most recent Israeli military order on child registration issued only several months before hand-over of authority to the PA. (Military order # 1421, January 17, 1995, provides that Palestinian children can be registered by their parents until the age of 18 and not 16 as stated in the previous Israeli order and the Taba agreement.) 
Despite efforts by human rights organizations, the PA Interior Ministry continues to limit child registration at the age of 16. 

6.3. Holders of “lost IDs” Still Awaiting Repatriation 
Annex III/Article 28/3 provides that “ a Joint Committee will be established to solve the re-issuance of identity cards to those residents who have lost their identity cards.” 
Consequently, the CAC prepared for future negotiations with Israel by disseminating special registration forms for the estimated 100,000 West Bank and Gaza residents whose ID cards were revoked based on Israeli military regulations in the past. These forms were transferred to the local PA Interior Ministry offices, and the Bethlehem Ministry confirms that it is currently collecting applications by all those wishing to regain their ID cards. 
However, no Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on this matter have taken place throughout 1996. A first attempt by the CAC to raise this issue was blocked by the Israeli negotiators who claimed - taking advantage of the vague wording of the Taba Agreement - that Article 28/3 did not refer at all to persons whose resident status was canceled, but to persons who physically lost their IDs (in the street, the bus, etc.). Although the CAC succeeded in refuting this argument, valuable time was lost and negotiations have not been renewed. 

6.4. Issuance of Palestinian ID Cards Delayed 
Annex III/Article 28/4 states that the PA will issue new identity cards with new serial numbers one year after the signing of the Agreement, i.e. by September 1996. The new identification numbers and the numbering code are to be transferred to the Israeli authorities. 
By November 1996, new Palestinian ID cards have not yet been issued. Prototypes of the new ID card were designed by the CAC, but negotiations with Israel about the serial numbering system have not been have not been completed. And, whereas one year ago, the CAC was expecting to receive wide-scale authority over population registration (a Palestinian census was mentioned, which would allow the PA to include all those who did not succeed in registering as residents by other means), increasing experience with Israeli interpretations of the terms of the Agreements seem to have lowered expectations to the level of pragmatic realism. 
Thus, by the end of 1996, the CAC expects to issue new ID cards only to Palestinian residents already holding old, Israel-issued ID cards - a measure which does not require a census. In the meantime, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip suffer from new Israeli restrictions pertaining to their old ID cards: Israel now requires that persons wishing to travel via the Jordan bridge crossings as well as persons wishing to acquire an Israel entry permit must first obtain - and pay for - a new (Israel-issued) ID card if the old one was issued before 1985. The CAC is optimistic that this problem will be solved in the near future (by 1 January 1997), after which all Palestinian residents of the PA areas will be required to travel on their Palestinian passport (:travel to Jordan on an Israel-issued exit permit and the Jordanian passport will then no longer be possible). After all, explains the CAC, the trouble with the old Israeli IDs will encourage people to use Palestinian passports - a development which is positive in PA terms. (By November 1996, the PA Interior Ministry in Bethlehem has issued 17,000 PA passports. The total number of eligible residents in the district is 180,000.)