An Unlimited Ugly Law

By Dani Rubinstein

Dr. Sa'ab Erakat, of Al-Najah University in Nablus, was brought to court and found guilty of writing a hostile publication. He was sentenced to a fine and conditional imprisonment. In the course of his trial, Erakat argued that the publication he wrote is an expression of a political opinion, and, relying on the principle of freedom of expression, he claimed that what he did is permitted.

There is no right to freedom of expression in the areas of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, answered the military prosecutor. As a matter of fact, there was nothing new in this answer. Everybody knows about the restrictions imposed on the Arab press distributed in the territories. The censorship procedures in the territories are also known to refer to books, publications, and study programs. In the territories and in East Jerusalem, orders prohibiting meetings and lectures are a matter of routine.

Still, the announcement of the military prosecution in the Nablus court that there is no freedom of expression cause some surprise. The usual justifications for an Israeli ban on a publication, book, meeting, or exhibit are security reasons. The administration claims that it is forced to ban a publication because its nature might incite breaches of order, riots, terror, etc. This time it seemed that the military prosecutor is tired of the official game. So the administration informed Dr. Erakat that he was forbidden to write what he wrote because he and the residents of the territories have no right to freedom of expression.

Jewish Settlers Exempt from Military Orders

However, everybody knows that the military restrictions do not apply to all residents of the territories. The Jewish settlers are exempted from them! A system of military regulations created gradually a differing legal approach to Jewish residents and to Arab residents. For example: The Arab civil courts in the territories operating according to the Jordanian law are not entitled to deal with complaints against Jews.

Without doubt, the regime and the military law in the territories resemble more and more an apartheid regime. The separation in the territories is national. The Arabs have a law and regime and administration of their own. The Jews have another, separate system. The separation is usually on grounds of citizenship—the citizens of the West Bank (Arabs) on one side, and the Israeli citizens on the other.

Thus was the matter settled officially, but then into the territories came new settlers—recent Jewish immigrants to Israel who are not yet Israeli citizens. Therefore, in several sectors, the law was forced to state, that the term "Israelis" also includes persons who are not Israeli citizens, but who are entitled to Israeli citizenship according to the Law of Return—meaning Jews. In other words, the law was forced to divide the inhabitants of the territories not according to their citizenship, but according to their national origin...

The apartheid of the type existing in Nablus, Hebron, and Gaza crosses the border into the state of Israel. So far, in spite of the regime in the territories, Israel succeeded in keeping some of the values of democracy and equality before the law. But now it turns out that the whole green line has been erased and forgotten. The rules of the administration in the territories also threatens life inside Israel. True, the prosecutor of the Tel Aviv court cannot announce officially that we have no freedom of expression, as Dr. Erakat was publicly told in Nablus. But other declarations, trends, and examples are added daily to the picture of the "territorial regime" expanding inside Israel.

This article originally appeared in Davar on July 27, 1987, and was translated by Israel Shahak, an Israeli survivor of Nazi concentration camps. The Washington Report periodically reprints Dr. Shahak's translations of Israel's Hebrew press.