In an earlier petition filed by HaMoked, the petitioner was permitted to travel from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank in order to marry her fiancé, now her husband, despite the opposition of the state. The court noted the need to find an efficient solution to the difficult situation, particularly since it was never alleged that there were any security issues regarding the petitioner. In accordance with the court’s decision, the petitioner and her family traveled to the West Bank, after undertaking that her family would return to the Gaza Strip after two weeks. The court ruled that the petitioner could continue to stay with her husband in their home, and that she should apply to register her current place of residence in the Population Registry.
As agreed by the parties, the petitioner informed the Palestinian Interior Ministry of her address in Tulkarm and, the same day, the Palestinian Population Registry was updated with the new information. The Palestinian Authority forwarded notification of the change of address to the Israeli side, and stated in a letter on its behalf that the change of address had been made in accordance with Section 28 of the Interim Agreement. After Israel refused to recognize the change of address, HaMoked submitted a supplementary notice explaining the law, on the one hand, and the actual practice, on the other, relating to changes of addresses for residents of the Territories.
Since the original relief was rendered redundant, HaMoked deleted the initial petition and filed a second one on 21 January 2008 again demanding that the petitioner’s address be updated. HaMoked further demands that the military reveal the source of its claim that the authority for registration of a change of address was not transferred to the Palestinian side, despite the content of the Interim Agreement. In the petition HaMoked asks the court to order the state to publish the agreement between itself and the Palestinian Authority regulating the updating of the address of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to the West Bank, if such an agreement exists.
HaMoked argues that the military must act in accordance with Military Proclamation No. 7 which, among other aspects, applies the procedure established in Section 28 of Appendix III to the Interim Accord. According to Section 28, the Palestinian side must report to the Israeli side on the updating of the registered address of a resident of the PA, in order to ensure that the Israeli side holds a precise copy of the Palestinian original. It should be emphasized that Section 28 refers consistently to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as a single territorial unit for the purpose of updating the registered address. The military argues that Section 6(B) of Proclamation No. 7 leaves it absolute authority for any purpose, even if this authority has never been formalized in an order. The military’s claim is spurious, since it is evident that the purpose of Section 6(B) is not to create authority ex nihilo. Even if the military was of the opinion that it continues to hold the authority to change addresses, HaMoked argues that it should have published an explicit order regulating this matter.