A seven-judge panel led by retired Supreme Court president Aharon Barak yesterday rejected by a vote of six to one a petition against the route of the separation barrier in northern Jerusalem, near the village of A-Ram. The minority opinion, Justice Miriam Naor, supported the request by residents of the village's Dahiat al-Barid neighborhood to move the wall, which bisects the village.

The justices also ruled that residents of East Jerusalem with Israeli identity cards enjoy the constitutional civil rights set out in Israel's Basic Laws even if they move to the West Bank.

	Advertisement

"The unique status of Jerusalem creates difficult situations and raises sensitive problems on the legal level," Barak wrote in the ruling. "Nevertheless, this sensitivity must operate within the framework of the law and not outside of it." The judges ruled, "The military commander must protect the human rights of Israelis living in the territories; this duty derives from the Basic Laws on Human Rights. This obligation applies to both Jewish and Arab residents of Israel living in the territories."

The majority opinion also ruled, however, that the route of the separation fence in the area is "proportionate" in light of the great threat of terrorist infiltration into Israel. "Defending the city [Jerusalem] from murderous terror is a critical security requirement of the first degree," Barak wrote.

"We found no reason to assume that the fence was intended for the purpose of annexing territory. The damage to the petitioners is not so grave as to be disproportionate."

Justice Naor, in the minority opinion, judged that the portion of the fence running through the middle of Dahiat al-Barid should be moved: "The fence damages the fabric of life wherever it runs, it damages schoolchildren, family ties and culture. It wounds the landscape. It stands as a constant and painful reminder that the peoples living in this land are still unable to live in it in peace. Let us pray for better days, when there will be no need for fences to provide personal security. But these days are not, for now, at hand."

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel said after the ruling that it was "bemused and disappointed by the High Court ruling according to which imprisoning tens of thousands of people by means of a nine-meter wall on nearly every side is a proportional injury to human rights. The solutions offered by the High Court of passage via roadblocks are of little value, since cumulative experience proves that these residents are cut off from Jerusalem and from the centers of their livelihoods and their lives."

MK Orit Noked (Labor) praised the court for using its authority to find the appropriate balance between the rights of the people living near the fence and the security of the residents of Israel.

Major General (res.) Uzi Dayan, chairman of A Security Fence for Israel, welcomed the High Court decision, saying, "Now there are no more excuses and the life-saving security fence must be completed quickly."