JUSTICE MINISTRY STATEMENT
(Communicated by Justice Ministry spokeswoman)
The Supreme Court sitting as the High Court of Justice, and in a special expanded composition of seven judges (headed by Supreme Court president Meir Shamgar) presented a unanimous ruling, today
(Thursday), 28.1.93, on the petitions submitted against the expulsion orders.
In its ruling, the High Court of Justice rejected the petitions and invalidated the conditional orders.
At the beginning of its ruling, the court reviewed the activities of the HAMAS and Islamic Jihad movements, and determined that these movements are organizations which combine "the most radical Islamic fundamentalism with absolute opposition to any settlement with the State of Israel, or recognition thereof, and preach the extinction of the State of Israel."
The court added that the acts of murder and terror by these organizations are in a constant process of escalation with opportune abductions for the sake of murder being their most prominent characteristic.
In the foreign policy sphere, the court noted that the HAMAS organization emphasizes its demand that Arab states participating in the peace process should withdraw and not respond to the demands of the "Zionist enemy" to cease the economic boycott and to normalize relations with Israel.
In the second part of its decision, the court determined that from a legal standpoint there are instances in which the security prerogatives of the state justify immediate expulsion without the right to a prior hearing. Such instances are unusual and, therefore, it is not possible to routinely expel [persons] without granting the right to a hearing prior thereto.
The court also determined that, even in a case where there is no irregularity which justifies immediate expulsion without the right to a prior hearing, the expulsion orders still remain valid but the defect therein should be corrected by granting the right of a belated appeal.
As to the expulsion of the 415 [persons in question], the court did not determine whether their expulsion was justified from the outset or not. The court only determined that, in any event, granting the right to a belated hearing would correct the defect if one had occurred and, thus, there is no room for the invalidation of the expulsion orders.
Accordingly, the court determined that from a practical standpoint the Government of Israel must give each deportee who so desires the right to lodge an appeal with the advisory commissions and, if the petitioner also requests to personally appear before the commission, it is proper to permit him to appear in person. Prior to the appearance, he should be allowed to meet personally with his attorney.
The court determined that "the commission can hold its hearings anywhere the IDF can ensure that the hearings are held properly," and that the practical arrangements which should allow for this are to be decided upon by the state authorities.
The court also noted that the Legal Advisor to the Government announced that, through the initiative of the State, and within a reasonable [amount of] time, a further analysis of the security information relating to each deportee will be held even if no appeal is submitted by him.
As to the other charges raised by the petitioners, claiming the expulsion orders are invalid because of further defects in the manner of their receipt beyond the defect which was charged concerning the right to petition the court determined that the place to raise [these charges] was before the advisory commission to which each deportee is allowed to submit his appeal.
The court rejected the claim of the petitioners that the expulsion of the 415 [persons] contrary to international law on the grounds that the orders given were based upon detailed information personally regarding each deportee and not upon a general and collective expulsion order which is prohibited by international law.