The Court rejects a request for a new hearing on the principled petition against the punitive home demolition policy, submitted by HaMoked and seven other human rights organizations. The Court rules that there is no place for renewed discussion of the organizations' claims, stating that "this proceeding was intended for clear and detailed rulings by the Court, and not for questions that the Court does not discuss". In conclusion, the Court repeats its statements from the principled petition, that "there is no doubt that the issue of punitive home demolitions raises 'difficult questions' and sometimes even 'a moral dilemma'" and that "the State has a duty to continue to examine the efficacy of the described policy".
The Court rejects a request for a new hearing on the principled petition against the punitive home demolition policy, submitted by HaMoked and seven other human rights organizations. The Court rules that there is no place for renewed discussion of the organizations' claims, stating that "this proceeding was intended for clear and detailed rulings by the Court, and not for questions that the Court does not discuss". In conclusion, the Court repeats its statements from the principled petition, that "there is no doubt that the issue of punitive home demolitions raises 'difficult questions' and sometimes even 'a moral dilemma'" and that "the State has a duty to continue to examine the efficacy of the described policy".
