Israel: Citizenship and immigration law in the vise of security, nationality, and human rights

International Journal of Constitutional Law

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 184-192

  Barak Erez, Daphne ^a  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 39049097324     PISSN: 14742640     EISSN: 14742659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/icon/mom036     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Citizenship and Entry into Israel (Temporary Order) Law, 2003, S.H. 544.
2. HCJ 7052/03 Adalah et al. v. Minister of Interior [2006] (publication forthcoming) (hereinafter Adalah).
3. Citizenship Law, 1952, 6LSI 50 (1951-52) (Isr.).
4. Law of Return, 1950, 4LSI 114 (1950) (Isr.).
5. See, e.g., Chaim Gans, Nationalism and Immigration, 1 ETHICALT THEORY & MORAL PRAC. 159 (1998).
6. For the legislative history of the amendment, see Adalah, (Barak, C.J., paras. 1-6).
7. Many of the politicians who defended the amendment in the public arena also raised demographic concerns regarding the prospect of Israel remaining a Jewish state if the Arab minority were allowed to grow significantly by virtue of marriages with Palestinians from the occupied territories. The petitioners argued that the underlying purpose of the amendment, indeed, was demographic engineering. As noted, the justices rejected this argument and considered the amendment to be concerned only with promoting security. See, e.g., Adalah, (Barak, C.J., paras. 79-81).
8. See also YaacovBen-Shemesh, Constitutional Rights, Immigration and Demography: Following the High Court of Justice Judgment Concerning the Constitutionality of the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law, 10 LAW & GOV'T 47 (2006) [Hebrew].
9. For an academic criticism of the law along similar lines, see Guy Davidov, Amnon Reichman, Ilan Saban, & Jonathan Yovel, State or Family? The Citizenship and Entry to Israel Act (Temporary Order) 2003, 8 LAW & GOVT 643 (2005) [Hebrew].
10. Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, 1992, S.H. 1391, 8§ (According to this section, usually called the "limitation clause," "There shall be no violation of rights under this Basic Law except by a law befitting the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose, and to an extent no greater than is required").
11. In practice, Israeli citizens who have Palestinian spouses are Arabs (who are members of the same national community).
12. The Supreme Court interpreted the two basic laws as empowering the courts to carry out judicial review of primary legislation. For precedent to that effect, see CA 6821/93 United Hamizrahi Bank Ltd. v. Migdal Kfar Shitufi [1995] IsrSC 49(4) 221 [hereinafter United Hamizrahi]. This fundamental change in the constitutional regime has grounds in the text of the basic laws but relies also on interpretive choices made by the Court. For history of the basic laws see Daphne Barak-Erez, From an Unwritten to a Written Constitution: The Israeli Challenge in American Perspective, 26 COLUM. HUM. RTS. L. REV. 309 (1995).
13. See, e.g., Aharon Barak, Protected Human Rights: Scope and Limitations, 1 LAW & GOVT 253, 261 (1993) [Hebrew].
14. Adalah, (Joubran, J., para. 24 and Procaccia, J., para. 14).
15. See United Hamizrahi, supra note 11.
16. For the controversy surrounding the constitutional adjudication of the Israeli Supreme Court, see Shimon Shetreet, Resolving the Controversy Over the Form and Legitimacy of Constitutional Adjudication in Israel: A Blueprint for Redefining the Role of the Supreme Court and the Knesset 77 TULANE L. REV. 659 (2003).
17. See HCJ 1715/97 Bureau of Inv. Managers v. Minister of Fin. [1997] IsrSC 51(4) 367
18. HCJ 6055/95 Tzemachv. Minister of Def. [1999] IsrSC 53(5) 241
19. HCJ 1030/99 Cron v. Speaker of the Knesset [2001] IsrSC 53(5) 640
20. HCJ 1661/05 Reg' Comm. of the Gaza Coast v. Knesset [2006] IsrSC 59(2) 481
21. HCJ 8276/05 Adalah v. Minister of Def. [2006] (publication forthcoming). This latter decision, rendered after the Adalah decision, is exceptional in that it deals with a hotly debated issue - an enactment giving the government a broad immunity from tort liability for damages caused in areas of conflict in the occupied territories.
22. An argument based on reference to comparative law and international law was made by Amnon Rubinstein & Liav Orgad, Human Rights and National Security - The Case of Israeli Restrictions of Family Reunification during Armed Conflict, 48 HAPRAKLIT 315 (2006) [Hebrew], cited throughout the Adalah decision.
23. See, e.g., Daphne Barak-Erez, The International Law of Human Rights and Constitutional Law: A Case Study of an Expanding Dialogue, 2 INT'L J. CONST. L. (I•CON) 611 (2004).
24. Adalah, (Naor, J., para. 22).
25. See PHILIP B. HEYMAN & JULIETTE N. KAYYEM, PROTECTING LIBERTY IN AN AGE OF TERROR 101-108 (MIT Press 2005).
26. For a more elaborate argument on this matter, see Daphne Barak-Erez, Terrorism and Profiling: Shifting the Focus from Criteria to Effects, 29 CARDOZO L. REV. 1 (forthcoming 2007).
27. See, e.g., HCJ 727/00 Natl Comm. of Arab Mayors v. Minister of Hous. & Bldg. [2002] IsrSC 56(2) 79
28. HCJ 11163/03 High Follow-up Comm. for Arab Citizens in Israel v. Prime Minister of Israel [2006] (publication forthcoming) (concerning government allocations to areas of "national priority".
29. See Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation, 1994, S.H. 1454, §2
30. Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, 1992, S.H. 1391, §1(a).