On November 11, 2015, the military issued to additional orders for the punitive demolition of two homes in Jabal al Mukabber Neighborhood in east Jerusalem, in which resided two suspects in the attack on October 13, 2015, in Armon HaNatziv Neighborhood in Jerusalem, in which three people had been killed.
On November 15, 2015, HaMoked filed
four objections to demolition orders issued by the military; two on behalf of the two targeted families, one on behalf of the neighbors in one of the cases, and another on behalf of the house owner in the second case.
One order targets an apartment, located on the middle floor of three story building, in which one on the suspects lived with his parents and his two brothers with their families. On the top and bottom floors, two additional brothers live with their families. In the family’s objection, HaMoked asserted that there was no indication that the suspect’s family members had known about his plan to carry out an attack; and that the demolition of the apartment would gravely harm ten innocent people – an act of collective punishment prohibited under international law. On this issue, HaMoked asserted that “the State’s contempt of this prohibition in international law is entirely incomprehensible”. HaMoked urged the military to cancel the demolition order, or at least, consider narrowing its scope so that only the suspect’s own room would be sealed. In the objection on behalf of the other occupants of the building, HaMoked stressed that the demolition might harm 16 more people – including children, aside from the harm to the occupants of the targeted apartment.
Another demolition order was issued for a rented apartment in which the suspect had lived with his parents and siblings. The family moved out of the apartment shortly after the attack upon the demand of the property owner. HaMoked filed two objections to the demolition order: one on behalf of the family and one on behalf of the property owner. In the objection on behalf of the family, HaMoked noted that the demolition order was issued after the family had already quit the apartment which, as stated, it did not own, in which the family had a lived for just a year or two. Additionally, in the military’s notice of intent to demolish, the apartment’s location was wrongly defined as being on the first floor of the building, whereas the suspect’s family had lived on the second floor. Moreover, HaMoked noted that said notice was delivered to the relevant parties in Hebrew only, without an Arabic translation. HaMoked stressed that “the excuse cannot be accepted that it is sufficient that the notice is given to the legal representatives who will then brief the family about the procedure”. In the objection of behalf of the property owner, who lives himself I the building, HaMoked stressed that “harming an unrelated person and an apartment not owned by the suspect’s family is completely futile, also from your position” – this, in light of the justices comments in the recent judgment issued on HaMoked’s petitions against six punitive demolition orders. HaMoked now argued that demolition the apartment was unbalanced and would necessarily cause severe harm to innocent people.
