Petition to cancel the classification of numerous Palestinians as "security precluded": HaMoked, ACRI and PHR petition the HCJ against the severe and arbitrary violations of the human rights of numerous residents of the Territories, who are blacklisted by the Israel Security Agency (ISA) as "security precluded" or "ISA precluded". The blacklisting is carried out without due process, a clear factual foundation and without the right of appeal.
On October 5, 2006, HaMoked, the Association of Civil Rights in Israel and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel petitioned the High Court of Justice against the severe and arbitrary violations of the human rights of numerous residents of the Territories, who are blacklisted by the ISA as "security precluded" or "ISA precluded". Their blacklisting is carried out without due process, a clear factual foundation and without the right of appeal.
Residents of the OPT thus blacklisted are likely to come across a wide range of restrictions on their ability to travel within and out of the OPT, including arbitrary rejections of their requests for permits to enter Israel, travel abroad and enter their lands, located beyond the separation wall. Thus, for example, a resident designated as "ISA precluded", is liable to be sent back while attempting to travel abroad, with no advance warning, and without taking to account the purpose of trip, even if it is accompanying a relative who requires medical treatment, obtaining medical treatment oneself, or traveling in order to get engaged or married, complete studies and so forth. Also rejected are patients' requests for permits to enter Israel for vital medical treatment. In some instances permits were eventually granted, but only due to intervention of human rights organization or private attorneys, and after months of delay in receiving the vital medical treatment.
According to the information available to the petitioners, in the past five years more than 70% of the state's decisions which were challenged in petitions to the HCJ were retracted and the travel restrictions were eventually lifted. In many cases, the restriction was lifted even prior to a hearing of the petition in court, which demonstrates the utter inadequacy and the arbitrary nature of the decision process on ISA preclusions. The petition argues that the security authorities have been well aware of this systematic failure, as well as its grave repercussions, which entail severe and unjust injury to the internationally protected human rights of thousands of people. Nonetheless, the security agencies have not yet seen fit to correct these fundamental flaws.
In addition to the above listed flaws in designating residents as "ISA precluded", other flaws exist, such as the authorities' avoidance to set a time limit on the validity of the ban or at least put it under periodic review. Moreover, the ban is often inappropriately used to coerce individuals to collaborate with the security agencies or as punishment for refusing to do so. Indeed, many who had met ISA representatives state that the interrogators made their travel abroad or the requested permit for it subject to their agreeing to provide intelligence or serve as collaborators with the ISA. At times, the condition was made explicit, at others, by statements such as "if you help us out, we’ll help you meet your wife and children who are in Jordan".
The HCJ instructed the state to respond to the petition within 60 days.