Rejects Petition Against Jordanian Law Preventing Jewish Land Purchases
JERUSALEM (VINnews) — The Israeli Supreme Court rejected a petition by the right-wing Regavim association to cancel a racist Jordanian law which prohibits selling land to Jews in Judea and Samaria. The law, which was passed by the Jordanians in the 1950’s and has not yet been changed, states that land can only be sold to people “of Arab descent.”
Judges Anat Baron, Ofer Grosskopf and Gila Steinitz rejected the petition since there is “no need for judicial intervention.” The judges said that even if there is legitimate basis for a change in the law prohibiting sale to Jews, “we do not see justification for doing so at present.
The judges wrote that “we cannot deny that the Jordanian law has a racist approach as it distinguishes between races and discriminates against those who are not of Arab descent.”
Despite this the judges said that the matter will cause “political and security complexities” and will have little influence even if the law is cancelled.
The law has led to difficulties in acquiring land for residence since 1967 and required a legal loophole to be developed by the military commander of Judea and Samaria. Regavim claimed that this was a serious impediment and harmed the basic rights of Jews to acquire land.
Regavim head Meir Deutsch called the ruling an “unfathomable disgrace”, stating that “this is the first time that the Supreme Court allows racist discrimination under the guise of political consequences. No such discrimination against Arabs would have been permitted, even if there were political consequences.”
It should be noted that Religious Zionism leader Betzalel Smotrich is demanding among other senior ministries the Defense Ministry. If Smotrich, a former head of Regavim, would receive the ministry (as leader of the second largest coalition party) then he would be the de facto ruler of Judea and Samaria and could act to legislate a law which would cancel the anti-Jewish Jordanian law.
Deutsch added: "Getting hung up on the "cost vs. benefit" argument, as the High Court does, is like arguing that blacks in the US could travel by public transportation, just get in the back door. If these judges had been in the US in the last century, discrimination would probably have remained the same until today”
https://vinnews.com/2022/11/06/israeli-supreme-court-rejects-petition-against-jordanian-law-preventing-jewish-land-purchases/
2 comments:
While the Israeli s.c. is totally packed by Erev Rav, how would anyone expect them to honor anything from the right wing or religious Jews?
Sometimes the Emes gets in
Post a Comment