Four petitions were filed against the route of the security fence in Judea and Samaria, and were denied by Israel’s Supreme Court sitting as the High Court of Justice (“HCJ”).

Petitions against the route of the security fence in the “Azun Atma” area

 

At the end of 2008 three petitions were filed against the route of the security fence in the area of Azun Atma village.

Two of the petitions were filed by Palestinian residents, claiming that the planned route causes them disproportionate harm.

The third petition was filed by Israeli residents, claiming that the planned route does not provide them with sufficient protection from Palestinian terrorists.

On 12th December 2009, the HCJ handed down its judgment reaffirming the authority of the military commander of the region to order the construction of a security fence in Judea and Samaria on the basis of security considerations.

In the case of the fence in the of Azun Atma village, the HCJ was convinced that the fence was constructed to meet essential security requirement, the protection of Israelis from suicide bombers, and that the planned route demonstrates a proportional balance between the need to protect human life from terror attacks and the requirement to consider the civil rights and interests of Palestinians.

Petition against the route of the security fence in “Beit Sahur” area

On 4th January 2010, a petition filed by Beit Sahur village against the planned route of the security fence in the area, was denied.

The HCJ accepted the position of the state of Israel, stating that the petition should be denied due to the significant delay in its filing.

In addition, the HCJ stated that the planned route was articulated on the basis of security and topographic considerations and, as such, demonstrates the proper balance between the security requirements of the state and civil rights of affected Palestinians.