In February 2013, a Palestinian resident of Nablus called the local District Coordination Office (DCO), in order to find out whether a decision had been made on his objection to a travel ban against him. The soldier who answered the call told him his objection had been denied for "security reasons", and added, as a side note, that according to the information on the DCO computer, the preclusion was valid until 2099 (!). In this offhand manner, without providing reasons, the man was told that he would not be able to leave his country for the rest of his life.
On September 17, 2013,
HaMoked petitioned the HCJ with a demand to instruct the military to allow the man to travel to Jordan for his daughter's wedding. HaMoked argued that the absolute travel ban imposed on the man constituted an extreme injury to his dignity and liberty and that preventing his travel abroad was a violation of his basic rights to freedom of movement and family life, which are international legal norms and are also deeply entrenched in Israeli law.
HaMoked wishes to recall that when a person's liberty is denied, including when this is done for security reasons, the restriction must be imposed for a predetermined period of time, and in a proportionate manner. Restricting an individual's movement "from now on", without providing the grounds for the decision, is patently disproportionate and incongruent with Israel's legal obligation, as the occupying power in the OPT, to ensure the normal lives of the residents and to safeguard their rights.
