High Court: Controversial settlement neighborhood to remain in place

M: "Arabs build houses on land they own and Israel bulldozes them if they don`t have all the right permits. Jews build houses on land they do not own and get to stay. Please explain the discrepancy." It can be explained away in two very simple words: "colonial expansionism". All very 19th century - yeah, I know - but By Golly that's zionism for ya'......

First of all, I am not an Israeli-educated lawyer, and what I have to go by is the contents of the article writen by Yuval Yoaz. It appears that Israel has a Statute of Limitations (a time period in which to bring a lawsuit.) Israel (or the Shomron and Judea Districts of Israel) may also have adverse possession laws (also called "squatters rights.") I have never studied law or property rights in Israel, and therefore, I am not qualified to render an authoritative opinion on this subject.

To think of the hundreds and thousands of Palestinian homes they demolished over the last 7 years that left over 170,000 Palestinians displaced or homeless. How shameful! More one sided justice from the High Court. Dutch

Nice to see good Jewish thinking from Honest Israelis, people like you do show that there are many JEWS who do not agree with such COURT rules and blatant injustice. Keep up your good values as usual.Shalom

When a group of people attempt to claim land through military means and population transfer, whether justified by historical affirmative action (as Israel claims) or by blatent conquest (as was true throughout all of history and clearly in the case of much of Muslim and Christian civilization), they will not use the same ethics that they would use when policing their own society. This is true of every group throughout history bar none. The issue of settlements and by extension, any justified Jewish presence in any land whether it be in Israel proper, the West Bank, any muslim country or for that matter any country in the world, is really the issue. If you feel that Israel has a right to exist, you inherently agree to the taking of land. If you feel the USA has a right to exist, or if you feel that any Arab Muslim land outside of Arabia has a right to exist, then you inherently agree in the taking of land. The courts simply agreed with their own right to exist.

J.& S is OUR lands, nobody can tell us what to do on our properties.

it would be better if it can be change into The High Court of Injustice, How can a court agree to allow buildings to stand, after knowing that they were built illegally on somebody else lands.? What Municipality will give permission for constrution of buildings without proper documents.? in fact they should be made to pay ALL THE COSTS. The Refugees should be allowed to live in them not the settlers.

It is a pity to dismentle it when this complex can be given to the rightful owners. This would be JUSTICE not INJUSTICE.

Arabs build houses on land they own and Israel bulldozes them if they don't have all the right permits. Jews build houses on land they do not own and get to stay. Please explain the discrepancy.

Victor wrote: "worldwide there are time limits on bringing complaints!" Like 60-year-old Holocaust lawsuits?

It is common that all law filings carry time limitations. Pollard is serving a life sentence because his earlier lawyers missed a deadline for filing an appeal on his life, so he spends the rest of his life with no right of appeal and he never had a trial to start but plea bargained. That's simply the law. Those who gave the builders the permits to build should pay the arabs who own the land. In Us state governments can confiscate homes and land under emmininet domain for better housing and pay the condition value of the land to it's owners. Arabs or Jews cannot simply build without permits, and those homes should be dismantled. Illit Modin building"s had govt permits and govt should pay legal Arab owners.

The petitioner was Peace Now. They lost. Proof that even the stinking Israeli court system can get it right on rare occasions.

the court had appeared to be so heroic when it ruled that the construction was illegal. this flagrant disregard for the law and for the basic right of Bil'in's residents to their rightful land is a terrible defeat for human rights.

This is at least the second story on this court decision and still the complete story is not reported. Does anybody have a link to an English translation of the entire court decision? What were the findings of fact? What was the legal rationale? So far the court looks to have the same scizophrenic findings as the Israeli government policy on outposts. With what has been reported so far, no rational legal approach has been taken.

Palestinian homes are routinely bulldozed for being built without planning permission. These homes, also built illegally, without planning permission, are allowed to stand. Why? Does Israeli law favour Jews and is biased against Palestinians? Pleas explain why this is not discreet racism.

do you know what the complaint was to the court ? it was not about compensation for land !!

your ignorance must be as high the empty guinness bottles outside of your back door! worldwide there are time limits on bringing complaints! a court can order costs as it sees fit and often does !!

The Arab settlers of Bilin haven't gone back to Arabia yet?

If the court had ordered the owners to be paid fair value, ah, then we would not have to conclude that theft is legitimate, when the owners are Palestinians. Shame on the court! Shame on the thieves.

1. "Dozens of existing buildings built in a controversial neighborhood of the West Bank settlement of Modi'in Ilit will not be demolished, despite the fact that they were built illegally and partially on private Palestinian land." 2. "Residents of the West Bank village of Bili'in own some of the property on which the neighborhood was built." Who said that there is no racial and ethnic discrimination in Israel? On the contrary, the country is full of it. I would like to see what would happen if one Jew in Israel would try to build illegally on another Jew's land. The people and the courts would scream hell and murder right away. This case of Modi'in Ilit is a sad example of PURE STATE AND COURT SUPPORTED DAYLIGHT ROBBERY. There most probably won't be too many responses to this article from inside Israel proper, but just don't think that this incident will go down well abroad. It'll be like another ton of seeds for more anti-Israel feelings, respectively anti-semitism.

They would destroy it themselves anyway. They get satisfaction out of that- hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of goods destroyed in Gaza instead of using greenhouses for their own benefit. As the saying goes, some hate others more than they love themselves.

Typical of israeli's to steal land and have THEIR OWN COURTS say its perfectly legal. If they really believe that they are legally right, then I suggest they take their case to the world court...but alas, they are cowards. The lot of them!

After causing them to go broke, after wasting time and money, the "court" oorders them to pay costs.What a kangaroo court.

The High Court rules that notwithstanding the illegality of the construction the buildings, entire village remains. No destructions, no bulldozers, no police dogs, no eviction in the middle of the night. Why, simply because the occupants and the building are " JEWISH". Arab homes are destroyed before the army gets a court order. Somehow, Zionisim destroyed all the Jewish value. The Solgan on the top of the High Court should read " JUSTICE ONLY FOR JEWS"

this appears to be a "judgement of solomon?" how can you build on private land if the owner is active ? who gave the building permits for this estate without proof the land was owned by the developer? its all mysterious and inexplicable ?

The article states----"In part, the court based its decision on the fact that the petitions should have been filed several years earlier." Gosh I wonder how many lawsuits filed by Israelis more then"several"years later should be overturned.Are they not still at it. What a crock of BS. Nonetheless, the High Court ordered settlers, the state, and construction companies to pay the petitioners' court fees, totaling NIS 160,000. I thought the loser usually paid.More BS.

The court ruled the buildings can remain, and the people can live in them. The solution, writes (#1) is to give the buildings to the Pals. Really? Did they build them? Did they pay for them? No. Strange suggestion.

Why demolish the buildings. Just give it to the rightful landowners so they can use them.