The Clipboard: Controversial Israeli citizenship bill criticized by legal advisor

From an article¹:

The Knesset Interior Committee held a stormy discussion Tuesday over a proposed government bill meant to halt granting citizenship or residency status to Palestinian residents of the territories who marry Israelis...

...The government wants the Knesset to hold a final vote on the bill, which passed a first reading on June 18, before the summer recess which starts next week. The government has argued that the bill is a necessary anti-terror measure, because Palestinians who received Israeli citizenship or residency within the framework of family unification, have been involved in terror attacks.

Both local and international human rights groups have decried the bill as racist, saying it creates an impossible situation in which couples will either have to separate or move abroad. Most of the cases involve Israeli Arabs who marry Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza. If the law passes, they will not be able
to live together in Israel. (link)

If somebody can explain how this is not a racist piece of legislation that ought to be torn up and thrown away, do tell.

Added: Excellent commentary by Jonathan Edelstein with links to more. Also see Frog n' Blog, and, for the inevitable comparison to Jim Crow (which I made myself in the comments on this entry), Prometheus 6.

---

Complete text of the article, Controversial Israeli citizenship bill criticized by legal advisor, by Gideon Alon

The Knesset Interior Committee held a stormy discussion Tuesday over a proposed government bill meant to halt granting citizenship or residency
status to Palestinian residents of the territories who marry Israelis.

The committee's legal advisor Miriam Frenkel-Shor was harshly critical of the proposed bill, as were the Arab Knesset members at the session. The
committee decided to postpone until Wednesday a vote on whether to allow the bill to progress to the plenum for a second and third reading.

The government wants the Knesset to hold a final vote on the bill, which passed a first reading on June 18, before the summer recess which starts next week. The government has argued that the bill is a necessary anti-terror measure, because Palestinians who received Israeli citizenship or residency within the
framework of family unification, have been involved in terror attacks.

Both local and international human rights groups have decried the bill as racist, saying it creates an impossible situation in which couples will either have to separate or move abroad. Most of the cases involve Israeli Arabs who marry Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza. If the law passes, they will not be able
to live together in Israel.

Frenkel-Shor expressed her dissatisfaction with the phrasing of the bill, remarking that in its current form it infringes basic rights. She said that the bill should include a clause affording the Interior Minister the power to grant citizenship or limited residency status to Palestinians in special cases. The current phrasing limits that possibility exclusively to Palestinians who "identify with Israel and its goals" and have contributed to the security of the state.

The advisor also suggested that any extension of the law – according to the current wording it is supposed to be in effect for only one year – will have to be voted on by the Knesset plenum and not by the Knesset Interior Committee, in order to increase parliamentary control. Frenkel-Shor's proposed
alterations will be brought to the Knesset Interior Committee for approval on Wednesday.

Coalition leader MK Gideon Sa'ar (Likud) told the legal advisor that questions of
constitutionality are the purview of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice, both of whom support the law. Frenkel-Shor replied that according to the law defining the role of the Knesset legal advisor, parliamentary procedures are interpreted by the Knesset legal advisor and not by the Attorney General.

The Arab MKs present at the discussion slammed Interior Minister Avraham Poraz and the government. MKs Talab al-Sana (United Arab List) and Issam Makhoul (Hadash) labeled the bill racist.

Minister Poraz admitted he was not exceedingly happy with the proposed bill. "I wish we didn’t need this law, I'm not thrilled with it, but there was a government decision and I must follow it."

The Arab MKs were unconvinced. "Do you want us to capitulate and let you pass an inhumane law?" shouted MK Ahmed Tibi (Hadash).

MK Eli Aflalo (Likud) replied: "This is a democratic country, you won't teach us."

As the debate became more heated, committee chairman Yuri Stern ejected al-Sana and Aflalo from the room.

The committee later held a closed-door discussion in which Shin Bet head Avi Dichter presented data on the extent of involvement in terrorist attacks of those who had received "blue" ID cards (pertaining to Israeli citizens) as a result of family unification.

The justification given for the proposed bill are the Shin Bet figures pointing to the rising involvement in terror attacks of Palestinians who are residents of the territories and who have Israeli ID cards as a result of family unification or marriage, and so are able to move easily between Israel and the territories.

Meretz MK Roman Bronfman said that the law would detrimentally affect the lives of many families, limit freedom of movement and undermine the principle of family unification.

Some blamed Stern (National Union) for caving in to pressure from the Prime Minister's office that the law be passed before the Knesset begins its summer recess. Stern denied the allegations.

reference=http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/323523.html