Although most of the East Jerusalem population does not speak Hebrew, the committees of the National Insurance Institute (NII) determining eligibility for disability benefits, conduct nearly all of their hearings in Hebrew only. The NII does allow claimants to come with an escort who can interpret for them, but this is an unsatisfactory solution: such escorts are not professional interpreters, and are usually not highly proficient in both languages, especially in the medical and professional jargon involved.
In response to HaMoked's letter, the NII's Deputy Director of Benefit acknowledged that interpretation services should be provided to the Arabic speaking population also during medical committee hearings; she added that the NII's Executive Director had initiated a needs assessment so that the NII could make the necessary preparations.
As for 4 months, HaMoked's inquiries about progress in the assessment process remained unanswered, on November 6, 2012,
HaMoked petitioned the High Court of Justice (HCJ) to order the NII to include a professional interpreter in committees reviewing disability pension claims by East Jerusalem residents. HaMoked stressed that Arabic was an official language of the State of Israel, explained that many East Jerusalem residents were dependant on social security services, and asserted that the refusal to employ a permanent professional interpreter violated the rights of East Jerusalem residents to social security, equality and dignity.
In its response to the petition, the state asserted that the existing arrangement was sufficient and therefore the petition should be dismissed; that claimants summoned to medical committee hearings were told that they could bring with them a Hebrew speaking escort, to interpret for them; that recently, following the filing of the petition, the NII's East Jerusalem branch office began assigning an on-call employee to interpret at hearings when needed; lastly, the state said it was persisting in efforts to recruit Arabic speaking physicians to join the committee.
During the hearing of December 16, 2013, the HCJ justices criticized the state's position. The justices insisted the state representatives explain why a trained interpreter should not be permanently employed to serve in medical committee hearings. The justices also noted that the option of using an NII employee as an internal interpreter could lead to a conflict of interest. At the end of the hearing, the state was instructed to examine the issue in light of the court's remarks and to provide its response within 60 days.
In its updating notice, the state informed it had considered five possible solutions to the interpretation problem, and had chosen the option of assigning various NII employees to serve as interpreters during committee hearings.
In its response, HaMoked insisted on the inclusion of an independent professional interpreter and added that the state's chosen solution had already been dismissed as insufficient by the court. HaMoked asserted that in rejecting the other solutions due to budgetary considerations, the state was giving preference to budget issues over the rights of the Palestinian residents of Jerusalem.
Thus, on March 3, 2014,
the HCJ justices issued an order nisi instructing the state to explain why it should not include trained interpreters in hearings held by NII committee reviewing disability-benefit claims filed by East Jerusalem residents.
