Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05TELAVIV648
2005-02-02 14:17:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Tel Aviv
Cable title:  

ATTORNEY GENERAL MAZUZ CANCELS CHANGES IN

pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 000648 

SIPDIS

NSC FOR ABRAMS/DANIN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/01/2015
TAGS: PREL PHUM KWBG IS JE GOI INTERNAL ISRAELI PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS
SUBJECT: ATTORNEY GENERAL MAZUZ CANCELS CHANGES IN
IMPLEMENTATION OF ABSENTEE PROPERTY LAW IN JERUSALEM

REF: TEL AVIV 594

Classified By: Ambassador Daniel C. Kurtzer for Reasons 1.4 (b,d)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TEL AVIV 000648

SIPDIS

NSC FOR ABRAMS/DANIN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/01/2015
TAGS: PREL PHUM KWBG IS JE GOI INTERNAL ISRAELI PALESTINIAN AFFAIRS
SUBJECT: ATTORNEY GENERAL MAZUZ CANCELS CHANGES IN
IMPLEMENTATION OF ABSENTEE PROPERTY LAW IN JERUSALEM

REF: TEL AVIV 594

Classified By: Ambassador Daniel C. Kurtzer for Reasons 1.4 (b,d)


1. (C) Summary. Deputy Prime Minister and MOIT Minister
Olmert confirmed to the Ambassador February 1 that AG Mazuz
has reversed the GOI decision of July 2004 concerning
application of the Absentee Property Law to East Jerusalem.
He also passed us a copy of Mazuz's decision. Separately,
Deputy Attorney General Mike Glass informed Deputy Economic
Counselor that Mazuz's decision was the result of intense
international pressure. Mazuz's decision was conveyed in a
January 31 letter to members of the Cabinet; it raises
fundamental questions about the legal basis for applying the
APL to East Jerusalem properties. End Summary.

--------------
Olmert Confirms Mazuz Reversal to Ambassador
--------------


2. (C) Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert informed the
Ambassador that Mazuz had acted decisively to reverse the
Cabinet's decision of last summer that would permit changes
in the implementation of the Absentee Property Law (APL) in
Jerusalem. Olmert said the issue was quite complicated, a
point underscored in the written opinion of Mazuz that Olmert
shared with the Ambassador. Olmert said the issue came down
to whether a special Ministerial committee on Jerusalem had
the authority to change a ruling of the Attorney General in
1968 that prevented the custodian of absentee property from
disposing of property in Jerusalem. In 1968, the Attorney
General had ruled that, since Palestinians had not of their
own accord made themselves absent from property in Jerusalem
-- in fact, it was Israel's occupation of Jerusalem and its
decision to change Jerusalem's status that created the change
-- the custodian could not dispose of such property. Over
the years this decision was reaffirmed from time to time and
was challenged only last summer, when two members of a
Ministerial advisory committee on Jerusalem -- Natan
Sharansky and Zvulun Orlev, voted to give the custodian
authority to dispose of absentee property in Jerusalem. Part
of their reason for making this change was to facilitate the
state's ability to seize property for the construction of the
security barrier in Jerusalem. In July, the Cabinet approved
this measure, but Olmert said the issue passed through the
Cabinet with no one paying any attention to it or its
ramifications.


3. (C) In a conversation with Deputy Economic Counselor,
Deputy AG Glass, who called the issue "a tempest in a
teapot," noted that intense pressure from the U.S. and other
parties had led to Mazuz's decision. Glass noted the
decision requires the AG's personal approval of any GOI
attempt to apply the APL to East Jerusalem properties.
According to Glass, this was the procedure used by the GOI
prior to last July's government decision. Glass also noted
that the Ministry of Justice is continuing to work on
procedures that would allow West Bank Palestinians to access
their property on the other side of the security barrier in
East Jerusalem. He would not speculate when these procedures
would be finalized, however.

--------------
The Mazuz Decision
--------------


4. (C) While mainly concerned with enumerating the detailed
history of the APL and its application, the letter also notes
that:

-- The Israeli Supreme Court had ruled in the past that the
APL's definition of "absentee" was unusually broad;

-- Although the GOI's decision to apply all GOI laws to East
Jerusalem following the Six Day war included the APL, "the
absenteeism of property belonging to West Bank residents is
technical in nature, as they were turned into absentee
landholders as a result of a unilateral operation by the
State of Israel." This application is thus not in accordance
with the original purpose of the law;

-- The APL does not provide for compensation;

-- The state has an "obligation to honor the property rights
of residents in areas which are being held as a result of a
military seizure;"

-- The Ministry of Justice opposed the change in application
of the APL last summer;

-- International concern over the separation barrier makes it
inopportune to "open new fronts in the international arena"
at this time; all of which leads to Mazuz's bottom line
decision that
-- "This (July 2004) decision can not stand."


********************************************* ********************
Visit Embassy Tel Aviv's Classified Website:
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/nea/telaviv

You can also access this site through the State Department's
Classified SIPRNET website.
********************************************* ********************
KURTZER