A woman from East Jerusalem who is a permanent Israeli resident married a Palestinian from the Gaza Strip in 2002. From then on she visited him regularly through military permits of entry to Gaza, issued in the framework of the “
divided families procedure”.
In December 2006, the woman wanted to visit her husband, after she had not met him for six months. Her husband’s application for a Gaza entry permit for her was approved. But when the woman came to Erez Crossing, the soldiers prevented her from entering Gaza. The reason the military gave for preventing the couple from meeting was the existence of security information allegedly concerning second- or third-degree relatives of her husband.
This same happened the second time round: the woman applied via HaMoked for a permit; the military approved the woman’s entry to Gaza; but, again, when she arrived at the crossing, the soldiers prevented her from entering Gaza on the same “security grounds”. And thus also the third time round (!): written approval was given by the military, but the soldiers at the crossing prevented the woman from entering Gaza.
On May 1, 2007,
HaMoked petitioned the High Court of Justice (HCJ) to instruct the military to allow the woman to visit her husband in Gaza. HaMoked argued that in imposing restrictions on the woman on the basis of information concerning her husband’s relatives, the military was disregarding the woman’s rights to personal autonomy and freedom of choosing how to live. Infringing on the liberty of a person who did not jeopardize state security was necessarily disproportionate and contrary to the principle of limiting a person’s freedom only due to a threat emanating directly from her/him. HaMoked added that the violation of the woman’s right to family life was critical in this case, given that the husband could not enter Israel because of Israeli policy; hence the woman’s visits to Gaza were the only way the couple could ever meet.
The military insisted that the material it held substantiated the ban. Having seen the classified material, the court advised HaMoked to delete the petition.
In March 2009,
HaMoked again petitioned the HCJ – after the military had been preventing the couple from meeting for two whole years. Again, following the ex parte presentation of classified material, the petition was deleted.
The woman continued to live in forced separation from her husband, without any possibility of getting the security ban against her cancelled.
In January 2012, HaMoked applied to the military yet again to request that the woman be issued an entry permit for Gaza. After its five-year long persistent refusal do to so, the military announced it would issue the woman with the requested permit, allowing her to enter the Gaza Strip. Apparently the “weighty security considerations” against the woman’s entry to Gaza had simply vanished and the “substantial security risk” involved disappeared.
In early March 2012 – six years after her last visit – the woman entered the Gaza Strip and was united with her husband.
