On November 26, 2014, about a week after the attack in which five Israeli citizens were killed by two men from Jabal al-Mukabber, it was reported in the media that the Minister of Interior had revoked the Israeli stay-permit of the widow of one of the assailants. The woman, the mother of three minors who are permanent Israeli residents, is originally a resident of the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) and has been undergoing a process of family unification in Israel since 2009.
Immediately thereupon, HaMoked sent an
urgent letter to the Minister of Interior, demanding to know if the reports were true and accurate. HaMoked noted that if so, this constituted deficient conduct, given that the woman had not been notified about the intent to revoke her stay-permit, and had only learnt about it from the media; moreover, that if so, the procedure preceding the revocation decision had been severely flawed, as the decision had been made without first granting the right to present her case, and ostensibly, without duly weighing the woman's particular circumstances.
On November 28, 2014, before any response arrived, the woman was informed that she was expected to arrive at the Russian Compound police station on November 30, 2014, to receive an order for immediate removal from the country issued against her. However, on the morning of November 30, 2014, when the woman's lawyer arrived to collect the order on her behalf, one of the police officers at the station told him that there was no formal order for delivery, and that the woman had been summoned so it could be explained to her that the permit-revocation notice – a notice she had not yet received – immediately rendered her presence in Israel illegal. At 14:40, this police officer also phoned HaMoked, and announced that unless the woman went immediately to the Russian Compound police station, he would "come to her".
At 15:11, after repeatedly contacting the Ministry in an attempt to ascertain whether a final decision had been made in the woman's case, HaMoked received a letter –
dated November 25, 2014 – with
a notification announcing the Minister of Interior's decision to revoke the woman's Israeli stay-permit. The notice stated, inter alia, that the family unit had “ceased to exist” following the husband’s death; and as “almost” all of the woman's relatives were residents of the OPT, there was no impediment to her returning to live there with her family.
Concerned that the removal of the woman would be initiated immediately, without allowing her the opportunity to challenge the decision behind the expulsion, HaMoked filed an
urgent petition to the High Court of Justice (HCJ) to instruct the state not to expel the woman until full exhaustion of her rights before the court.
HaMoked stressed that no security allegation was raised against the woman, and her presence in Jerusalem was not alleged to be dangerous or constitute a threat to public security. Consequently, it seemed that the woman had fallen victim to a summary procedure for nothing she had done, solely to satisfy the authorities' desire to show “results”. HaMoked went on to argue that the revocation decision entirely ignores the existence of the minor children, and that it would lead to one of two alternatives – tearing the mother away from her three young children or deporting the children who are permanent Israeli residents to the OPT along with their mother – both constituting a severe violation of the children's rights and contrary to the principle of the child's best interests. Finally, HaMoked noted that in these difficult times, when emotions run high, senior cabinet ministers should act responsibly, use due discretion, and refrain from taking extreme measures against the innocent.
Following the petition, the court issued a temporary injunction prohibiting the removal of the woman pending another decision. The state has been asked to deliver its response to the petition until 10:00 a.m., December 3, 2014.
