On 8 December, the High Court of Justice heard a petition filed by HaMoked: Center for the Defense of the Individual on behalf of four children who were born in Ramallah and still live there, yet as a result of a registration error, they appear as residents of Gaza in Israel's copy of the population registry. Under pressure from the Court, the State admitted there was an error in the children’s registration, withdrew from its previous position, and agreed to change its records according to a notification sent by the Palestinian Authority המוקד להגנת הפרט
30.12.2008
On 8 December, the High Court of Justice heard a petition filed by HaMoked: Center for the Defense of the Individual on behalf of four children who were born in Ramallah and still live there, yet as a result of a registration error, they appear as residents of Gaza in Israel's copy of the population registry. Under pressure from the Court, the State admitted there was an error in the children’s registration, withdrew from its previous position, and agreed to change its records according to a notification sent by the Palestinian Authority
Print Print
Share

In the interim agreement between Israel and the PLO (the Oslo Accords), powers relating to the management of the population registry were transferred to the Palestinian Authority (PA), including the power to register children and update  addresses. In order to ensure Israel has an accurate copy of the population registry, the Palestinian side was to retroactively notify the Israeli side of every change it made. In 2000, Israel decided to "freeze" updating changes of address between the West Bank and Gaza Strip in its copy of the population registry. The information included in the population registry at the time was not examined or reviewed, but frozen as it was, with no possibility of change, amendment or appeal. Following the freeze, Palestinians whose addresses had been changed only in the original Palestinian registry faced many difficulties, to the extent that the Palestinian side had no choice but to cease updating the original population registry also. 

The children-petitioners were born in the Ramallah area, have lived there ever since, and were registered in the population registry accordingly. Yet in Israel's copy of the population registry, the children mistakenly appear as residents of Rafah in Gaza. The error was discovered when the children's father tried to change the family's address within the West Bank.  When the family discovered the mistake, they contacted the Palestinian Ministry of the Interior, which then sent the Israeli side several notices of the error, as required by the procedure laid out in the Oslo Accords. However, the Israeli side refused to correct the error, claiming that the Palestinian side must submit "a detailed request stating that the original record was erroneous, and explaining why this mistake warrants correcting." The military repeated this demand in its response to the petition. HaMoked claimed that the demand was absurd: the error was discovered in Israel's copy of the registry, and the Palestinian side could not be expected to account for and explain a mistake which did not exist in its copy of the registry. 

During the hearing, the State admitted that a mistake had been made in its copy of the registry, but insisted that the Palestinian side submit a detailed request to amend the error. HaMoked again questioned how the Palestinian side could clarify an error that did not exist, as it appeared only on Israel's copy of the population registry. The attorney for the State insisted that the Palestinian side must submit a detailed request, since the document it sent previously was only a notice of change of address.  The Justices were bewildered by the State's insistence: if both sides acknowledge the error, why should it not it be corrected? They wondered just what it was that the State was so worried about. Justice Danziger asked the attorney for the State: "After you have examined the matter, without having been asked to do so, and were persuaded of its validity, why quibble about a document entitled "notice" instead of ’request’?" Following the Justices' comments, the State was forced to withdraw from its previous position and announce that the notice sent previously by the Palestinian side would suffice, although it still insisted that the notice be re-sent. The Court ruled that this agreement would be given the force of a judgment. 

To view the judgment dated 8 December 2008 (Hebrew) 

To view the petitioners' response dated 22 May 2008 (Hebrew) 

To view the State's response dated 18 May 2008 (Hebrew)

משפט ישראלי - מסמכים אחרים


משפט ישראלי - כתבי בי דין


משפט ישראלי - חקיקה


משפט ישראלי - פסיקה


משפט בינלאומי וזר - מסמכים אחרים


משפט בינלאומי וזר - אמנות וחקיקה


משפט בינלאומי וזר - פסיקה


ספרות - עדכונים


ספרות - פסיקה במבחן


ספרות - ספרים


ספרות - מאמרים


ספרות - שונות


ספרות - דוחות