Jerusalem Center for Social and Economic Rights

LEGAL ADVOCACY

Petition against Services of the Interior Ministry in East Jerusalem

The petition was submitted to the Israeli Supreme Court by JCSER (Jerusalem Center for Social & Economic Rights and CRC (Citizens’ Rights Center).

Background:
The petition is an attempt to force the Interior Ministry Office to improve its services provided to the Palestinian people living in East Jerusalem towards the same level as the people living in West Jerusalem. The petition demands equal rights for all applicants and equal treatment of all applications whether submitted by Jewish or Palestinian Jerusalemites. Therefore, important service improvements should be made at the office in East Jerusalem.

The Petition Contained the Following:

A demand to improve waiting conditions;
A demand to improve procedures for applications;
To make procedures for applications more transparent;
To translate application forms into Arabic;
To stop asking applicants for illegal documents;
To shorten the period of time that people have to wait for a decision on their applications;
To increase the number of employees for a more effective and efficient service.

First Hearing Held in September 2000
In September 2000, during the first hearing, a number of agreements were made between JCSER/CRC and the Interior Ministry. The agreements included:

With Regard to Waiting Conditions:

The Interior Ministry committed to transferring its office from Nablus road to another place in East Jerusalem, which is more suitable. This means that it has to be a bigger office where people can wait inside under proper conditions. Both parties agreed that the Ministry was going to make a strong effort to move before May 2000, but at least within less than one year from then.

Until the time of the transfer, the Ministry will provide proper waiting facilities to applicants in its office in East Jerusalem- Nablus road, including a shadow and places to sit. Furthermore, the Ministry will provide application forms to people outside the building through its security guard.

With Regard to Procedures for Applications:
Both parties agreed that the Ministry is going to develop a new form of application and that this form will be translated into Arabic. They also agreed that the Ministry is going to check whether somebody previously submitted an application and provided documents. Furthermore, they agreed that the Ministry would add three more employees to its staff.

It would announce in the local daily newspapers the following:

Opening hours of the Ministry’s Office;
Procedures and what kind of applications can be send by mail.

The Ministry should inform the petitioners’ lawyers about the following within a 60-day period:

The appointment of three new employees;
The preparation for the new building.

The petitioners’ lawyers requested a timetable for the Ministry concerning the following:

Establishing a computer system to monitor applications;,/li>
Increasing the days in which services are provided by telephone;
Opening the office in the afternoon.

No agreement was made with regard to these items; neither the Ministry agreed upon the statement of JCSER and CRC that the Ministry asks for illegal documents. However, both parties showed willingness to discuss these issues further.

Second Hearing Session Held in January 2001
Progress Made with Regard to Waiting Conditions:

The representatives of the Ministry showed documents to prove that they applied for a permit at the Jerusalem Municipality to build shadow facilities. They were still waiting for its approval and indicated that they needed more time;
They located a building in the neighborhood of Wadi Al-Joz and presented a plan for reconstruction of that building.

Progress Made With Regard to Procedures for Applications:

The representatives of the Ministry brought prove of applications of advertisements in the Arabic daily newspapers;
They showed new application forms and the translation into Arabic.

Still no agreement has been made concerning other requests, for example the needed documents.

JCSER wrote the following protocol about the commitments made in September 2000:

Waiting Conditions:

There are still no proper waiting facilities in the Ministry’s Office in Nablus road;
The transfer of the office did not take place yet although the commitment was made to move before May 2000.

Procedures for Applications:

The Interior Ministry’s employees are still asking for illegal documents. JCSER included three pages of illegal documents;
The translation of the application into Arabic is handwritten and not correct. It should be typed and properly translated;
It is still not clear if extra employees were added to the staff;
No other efforts took place upon the requested items, such as opening hours, computer system, and telephone services.

Third Hearing Session Held on 6 June 2001
The petitioners were surprised by the attitude of the Judges of the Supreme Court towards the case. The judges stated that they could see improvement in many ways and that they were convinced of the good intentions of the Ministry, although until now nothing actually has been changed yet. Furthermore, all three shared the opinion that the case was too general and asked for specific cases about concrete damages caused by the Ministry.

That the petition was not taken very seriously can be illustrated by the following quote made by one of the judges: ‘Tell the people to take an umbrella and a chair themselves’. He also said that everybody in Israel experiences the problem of waiting and that this is not unique for Arab citizens. He mentioned examples of waiting in hospitals, solders on duty and even his own experience at the American Embassy. The petitioners responded that hospitals normally have proper waiting facilities, that that the example of the solders is a totally different case, not in any way related to the petition, and finally that the American Embassy is not an Israeli Institution. However, this did not convince the judges to decide to keep observing the implementation further and the case was dismissed.

Conclusion:
Although the case was dismissed without concrete improvement in the services provided by the Ministry to Palestinian applicants in East Jerusalem, this case must not be seen as a failure. The agreements and protocol give JCSER and CRC the possibility to observe the efforts of the Ministry to fulfill its obligations. Furthermore, both Centers will start to collect specific cases to submit to the Supreme Court as suggested by its judges.