Search This Blog

Friday, November 3, 2023

Israeli land and property laws

Land and property laws in Israel are the property law component of Israeli law, providing the legal framework for the ownership and other in rem rights towards all forms of property in Israel, including real estate (land) and movable property. Besides tangible property, economic rights are also usually treated as property, in addition to being covered by the law of obligations.

Principles

The Jewish state was proclaimed on 14 May 1948 with its Declaration of Independence. The Provisional State Council's first legislative act was the "Law and Administration Ordinance of 1948", a reception statute. The act adopted all existing laws "with such modifications as may result from establishment of the State or its authorities." In respect of land law matters, Ottoman laws, as had been modified by British land law during the Mandate period, continued to apply. Most of these laws have been repealed by the last quarter of the 20th century.

Over time, a modern set of codificative statutes has been enacted. These are mostly a codification of common law norms, albeit with a notable continental influence. Chief among these are the Land Law, 1969 and the Movable Property Law, 1971. They are joined by a multitude of other legislative acts pertaining to property law, in addition to a highly detailed body of case law by the Supreme Court and lower courts. Some of the main tenets of Israeli property law are:

  1. In land law, a system of title registration (Torrens title) is in place, allowing any person to quickly retrieve (usually through the internet) a summary of ownership and other rights towards any parcel of land. The legal transfer of land is only effectuated when a deed is executed and registered in the Land Registry Bureau (also known as Tabo or Tabu, טאבו). Under the Torrens title system, the Land Registry serves as an absolute guarantee of the title, allowing for a relatively easy and safe negotiation of land transactions. As of 2016, about 4% of the country's land area is still registered under a pre-Torrens, deeds registration system.
  2. Private property rights enjoy a fairly strong protection from encroachment, both by other private parties and by the government. Even when eminent domain is utilized, the government almost universally has to compensate for the fair value of the land.
  3. While private ownership of land is common (mainly in urban areas), most of the land in Israel (over 90% of the land area) is in the ownership of either the State of Israel, the Development Authority (Rashut Hapituakh, רשות הפיתוח) or the Jewish National Fund. According to Basic Law: Israel Lands, enacted in 1960, the land owned by these three bodies is administered by the Israel Land Authority (ILA). The land so owned is often leased to private persons, typically in a long-term lease for a period of 99 years. This creates a situation where, on the one hand, the land is privately held for most practical purposes; on the other hand, the ILA still wields a considerable bureaucratic power over citizens, particularly during the transfer of lease from one person to another, or various other procedures related to land use and registration, where the law requires consent or ongoing involvement by the ILA. Beginning in the first decade of the 21st century, the Knesset has enacted laws encouraging the full transfer of ownership, for no additional payment, from the ILA-represented bodies to the lessees, who thereby become owners.
  4. The most common type of housing in Israel is condominiums. The Land Law, 1969 details the legal structure of this type of property, including the rights of tenants among themselves (mainly in regard to common areas) and towards third parties. A contractual document, the bylaws (takanon, תקנון), is required to exist for every condominium; often, the common bylaws, provided as an appendix to the Land Law, 1969, are used, but many condominiums do have more detailed bylaws, agreed between apartment owners.
  5. The Land Law, 1969 enacts a "closed list" approach, listing five types of proprietary claims that may exist towards land: ownership, rental (including lease), mortgage, beneficial use and right of first refusal. However, in practice, other types of claims exist and are treated as equitable. In addition, a warning note or caveat (he'arat azhara, הערת אזהרה) is regularly placed in the Land Registry after a transaction is agreed upon and before its registration is completed. In many cases, due to various impediments to completing the registration, the warning note remains on the Land Registry for decades, commonly perceived as providing a sufficient protection to the acquirer's interests.

Overview

In 1945, of the 26.4 million dunams (26,400 km²) of land in Mandatory Palestine, 12.8 million was either owned or held in indefinite lease by Arabs, 1.5 million by Jews, 1.5 million was public land and 10.6 million constituted the desertic Beersheba district (Negev). Of the 9.2 million dunams of land that was arable, 7.8 million dunams was owned by Arabs, 1.2 million by Jews and 0.2 million was public land. By 1949, 700,000 Palestinian Arabs had fled or been expelled from their lands and villages. Israel was now in control of some 20.5 million dunams (approx. 20,500 km²) or 78% of lands in what had been Mandatory Palestine: 8% (approx. 1,650 km²) were privately controlled by Jews, 6% (approx. 1,300 km²) by Arabs, with the remaining 86% being public land. Land laws were passed to legalize changes to land ownership.

As at 2007, the Israel Land Administration (ILA), which was established in 1960, manages 93% of Israel's land comprising 19,508 km² under the following laws and land policy. The remaining 7% of land is either privately owned or under the protection of religious authorities.

  • Basic Law: Israel lands (1960) states that all the lands owned by the state of Israel will remain in state ownership, and will not be sold or given to anyone, but allows for the Kenesset to override that ban on privatization by legislation.
  • Israel Lands Law (1960) details several exceptions to the basic law.
  • Israel Land Administration Law (1960) describes the details of establishing and operating the Israel Land Administration.
  • Covenant between the State of Israel and the World Zionist Organization, establishing the Jewish National Fund (1960).

13 percent of Israel's land belongs to the Jewish National Fund, which is managed by the ILA.

Use of land in Israel usually means leasing rights from the ILA for a period of 49 or 98 years. Under Israeli law, the ILA cannot lease land to foreign nationals, which includes Palestinian residents of Jerusalem who have identity cards but are not citizens of Israel. In practice, foreigners may be allowed to lease if they show that they would qualify as Jewish under the Law of Return.

History

Ottoman era

The Ottoman Empire embarked on a systematic land reform program in the second half of the 19th century. Two of the new laws were the 1858 land registration law and the 1873 land emancipation act. Prior to 1858, land in Palestine, then a part of the Ottoman Empire since 1516, was cultivated or occupied mainly by subsistence farmers. Land ownership was regulated by people living on the land according to customs and traditions. Usually, land was communally owned by village residents, though land could be owned by individuals or families.

The Ottoman Land Code of 1858 required land owners to register ownership. The reasons behind the law were twofold: (1) to increase tax revenue, and (2) to enable the government exercise greater state control over the area. However, many farmers did not register their claims, for several reasons: for example, land owners were subject to military service in the Ottoman Army, there was general opposition to official regulations from the Ottoman Empire, and to evade payment of taxes and registration fees to the Ottoman Empire.

The registration process itself was open to falsification and manipulation. Land collectively owned by village residents ended up being registered to one villager, and merchants and local Ottoman administrators took the opportunity to register large areas of land in their own name. The result was that land became registered to people who had never lived on the land; while the subsistence farmers, having lived there for generations, retained possession, but became tenants of absentee owners.

The 1873 land emancipation act gave Jews the right to own land in Palestine under their own name. This 1873 secular land reform/civil rights law was popularly confused with a religious law and it was held as a "humiliation to Islam that Jews should own a part of the Muslim Ummah". The confusion between religious and secular law made the laws (ended in 1873) against Jewish ownership of land 'religious laws'.

Over the course of the next decades land became increasingly concentrated on fewer hands; tenant farmers continued to work on the land, giving landlords a share of the harvest. This led to both an increased level of Palestinian nationalism as well as civil unrest. At the same time, the area witnessed an increased flow of Jewish immigrants who did not restrict themselves to the cities where their concentration offered some protection from persecution. These Jews came hoping to create a new future in what they regarded as the homeland of their ancestors. Organizations created to aid Jewish settlement in Palestine bought land from Arab and absentee landowners.

British Mandate

World War I and the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire led to British control over the area in 1917, followed by the creation of the Mandate for Palestine by the League of Nations in 1922, which remained in effect until the establishment of Israel in 1948. During this period several new land laws were introduced, including The Land Transfer Ordinance of 1920, The Correction of Land Registers Ordinance of 1926 and The Land Settlement Ordinance of 1928.

It was the policy of the World Zionist Organization to encourage Jewish acquisition of land in Palestine for Jewish settlement. For that purpose, the Fifth Zionist Congress (1901) set up the JNF to buy suitable land. The rules of the JNF forbade it from selling the land it acquired, but to lease it. Land owned by the JNF was leased to kibbutzim and other Jewish settlements on long-term leases. At the end of 1935, JNF held 89,500 acres (362 km²) of land housing 108 Jewish communities. In 1939, 10% of the Jewish population of the British Mandate of Palestine lived on JNF land. JNF holdings by the end of the British Mandate period amounted to 936 km². By 1948, the JNF owned 54% of the land held by Jews in the region, or a bit less than 4% of the land in Palestine (excluding Transjordan).

From 1936, the British administration introduced a series of land regulations: The Land Transfer Regulations of 1940 divided the country into zones, with different restrictions on land sales in each. As summarized by the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry in 1946,

In Zone A, consisting of about 63 percent of the country including the stony hills, land transfers save to a Palestinian Arab were in general forbidden. In Zone B. consisting of about 32 percent of the country, transfers from a Palestinian Arab save to another Palestinian Arab were severely restricted at the discretion of the High Commissioner. In the remainder of Palestine, consisting of about five percent of the country-which, however, includes the most fertile areas- land sales remained unrestricted.

The Inquiry recommended the repeal of the Regulations, without effect.

State of Israel

After Israel's declaration of independence on 14 May 1948, state lands of the Mandate reverted to the State of Israel. In addition, property left by Arab refugees passed into the control of the new Israeli government. The newly formed Israeli ministries, committees and departments took over functions performed earlier by ‘National Institutions’. One of the first steps adopted by the new state was the reactivation of the Defence [Emergency] Regulations adopted earlier by the British in 1939 (and later repealed). Since British regulations had applied to the whole country, the Government of Israel passed the Law and Administration Ordinance [Amendment] Law [1948] to reverse the British repeal and reinstate these Emergency Regulations. Some of this land was sold by the government to the JNF, which had developed expertise in reclaiming and developing waste and barren lands and making them productive.

In 1960, under Basic Law: Israel Lands, JNF-owned land and government-owned land were together defined as "Israel lands," and the principle was laid down that such land would be leased rather than sold. The JNF retained ownership of its land, but administrative responsibility for the JNF land and government-owned land, passed to a newly created agency called the Israel Land Administration or ILA. The lease principle is hardly new to the area however as it was practiced for centuries under the Ottoman tapu system. To this day, the Land Registration Office is commonly known in Israel as the tabu, the Arabic pronunciation of the Turkish tapu.

Emergency laws and regulations

Proclamation, 5708-1948

The proclamation repealed the White Paper of 1939 and sections 13 and 15 of the Immigration Ordinance of 1941.

It also repealed the Land Transfer Regulations of 1940 retroactively to 18 May 1939, invalidating transactions conducted since then.

Law and Administration Ordinance, 5708-1948

The Law and Administration Ordinance, 5708-1948 at the Wayback Machine (archived October 28, 2009) defined the competences and composition of the Provisional Government. The law repealed sections 13 to 15 of the 1941 Immigration Ordinance and regulations 102 to 107C of the 1945 Defence (Emergency) Regulations, in order to allow Jews who entered the country illegally under Mandate to remain as legal immigrants. The 1940 Land Transfers Regulations were repealed retroactively from 18 May 1939, to allow unregistered transfers to be filed. In 1967, the law was used for de facto annexation of East Jerusalem.

Area of Jurisdiction and Powers Ordinance, 5708-1948

After the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, the Area of Jurisdiction and Powers Ordinance, 5708-1948, extended Israeli land laws to "any part of Palestine which the Minister of Defence has defined by proclamation as being held by the Defence Army of Israel" Article 3 of the law made it retroactive and effective from 15 May 1948, the day after the declaration of the establishment of the State of Israel.

Abandoned Areas Ordinance, 5708-1948

The Abandoned Areas Ordinance, 5708-1948 at the Wayback Machine (archived October 28, 2009) (published 30 June 1948, effective retroactively from 16 May 1948) defined an "abandoned area" as "any area or place conquered by or surrendered to armed forces or deserted by all or part of its inhabitants, and which has been declared by order to be an abandoned area". The Ordinance also provided for regulating "the expropriation and confiscation of movable and immovable property, within any abandoned area". The government was authorised to determine what would be done with this property.

Defence (Emergency) Regulations

Article 125

Article 125 states:

A Military Commander may by order declare any area or place to be a closed area for the purposes of these regulations. Any person who, during any period in which any such order is in force in relation to any area or place, enters or leaves that area or place without a permit in writing issued by or on behalf of the Military Commander shall be guilty of an offence against these Regulations.

According to Kirshbaum, the law was used to exclude a land owner from his own land so that it could be expropriated under the Land Acquisition (Validation of Acts and Compensation) Law (1953).

Emergency Regulations (Security Zones) Law, 5709-1949

According to the Journal of Palestine Studies, the law designated an area as "security zone" which meant that no one could permanently live in, enter, or be in said zone. According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 40), "this measure was used extensively in various parts of the country, including areas in the Galilee, near the Gaza Strip and close to the borders. Lands so acquired would often be sold to the JNF. These regulations remained in place until 1972."

Emergency Regulations (Cultivation of Waste [Uncultivated] Lands) Law, 5709-1949

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 40) this law (in Hebrew: תקנות שעת חירום (עיבוד אדמות מוברות)) was originally enacted in 1948 and amended in 1951 as the Emergency Regulations (Cultivation of Waste Lands) Law, 5711-1951. This law authorises the Ministry of Agriculture to declare lands as ‘waste’ lands (Article 2) and to take control over ‘uncultivated’ lands (Article 4). Article 2 states:

The Minister of Agriculture may warn the owner of waste land to cultivate the land or to ensure-that it is cultivated.

Article 4 reads:

If the owner of the waste land does not apply to the Minister of Agriculture as specified in regulation 3, or if the Minister of Agriculture is not satisfied that the owner of the land has begun or is about to begin or will continue to cultivate the land, the Minister of Agriculture may assume control of the land in order to ensure its cultivation.

COHRE and BADIL (p. 40) consider that "this law operated in conjunction with other laws including those declaring ‘security areas’. Once people (Arabs) were barred from their lands, these could be defined as ‘uncultivated’ and seized".

Emergency Land Requisition (Regulation) Law, 5710-1949

This law repeals the earlier Emergency Regulations (Requisition of Property) Law, 5709-1948. The law authorises the requisition of land when (Article 3):

...the making of the order is necessary for the defence of the state, public security, the maintenance of essential supplies or essential public services, the absorption of immigrants or the rehabilitation of ex-soldiers or war invalids.

The law includes clauses concerning the requisition of houses (chapter three), and states (Article 22b) that:

A competent authority may use force to the extent required for the carrying into effect of an order made by a competent authority or a decision given by an appeal committee under this Law.

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 41), "the law retroactively legalised land and housing requisitions that were carried out under existing emergency regulations. The law was amended in 1952 and 1953. A 1955 amendment, Land Requisition Regulation (Temporary Provision) Law, 5715- 1955, allows the Government to retain property seized under the law for longer than the three years originally specified. Along with a later (1957) amendment, the law also specified that any property held after 1956 would be determined to have been acquired on the basis of the British Land (Acquisition for Public Purposes) Ordinance of 1943.

Absentees' Property Laws

The absentees’ property laws were several laws which were first introduced as emergency ordinances issued by the Jewish leadership but which after the war were incorporated into the laws of Israel. As examples of the first type of laws are the Emergency Regulations (Absentees’ Property) Law, 5709-1948 (December) which according to article 37 of the Absentees Property Law, 5710-1950 was replaced by the latter; the Emergency Regulations (Requisition of Property) Law, 5709-1949, and other related laws.

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 41), unlike other laws that were designed to establish Israel’s legal control over lands, this body of law focused on formulating a legal definition for the people (mostly Arabs) who had left or been forced to flee from these lands. Specific laws in this category include:

  • The Absentees’ Property Law, 5710- 1950
  • The Land Acquisition (Validation of Acts and Compensation) Law, 5713-1953
  • Absentees’ Property (Eviction) Law, 5718-1958
  • Absentees’ Property (Amendment No.3) (Release and Use of Endowment Property) Law, 5725-1965
  • Absentees’ Property (Amendment No.4) (Release and Use of Property of Evangelical Episcopal Church) Law, 5727-1967
  • Absentees’ Property (Compensation) Law, 5733-1973

As a result, two million dunams were confiscated and given to the Israeli Custodian, who later transferred the land to the development authority. This law created the novel citizenship category of "present absentees" (nifkadim nohahim), persons present at the time but considered absent for the purpose of the law. These Israeli Arabs enjoyed all civil rights-including the right to vote in the Knesset elections-except one: the right to use and dispose of their property. About 30,000-35,000 Palestinians became "present absentees".

According to Simha Flapan, "a detailed account of exactly how abandoned Arab property assisted in the absorption of the new immigrants was prepared by Joseph Schechtman":

It is difficult to overestimate the tremendous role this lot of abandoned Arab property has played in the settlement of hundreds of thousands of Jewish immigrants who have reached Israel since the proclamation of the state in May 1948. Forty-seven new rural settlements established on the sites of abandoned Arab villages had by October 1949 already absorbed 25,255 new immigrants. By the spring of 1950 over 1 million dunams had been leased by the custodian to Jewish settlements and individual farmers for the raising of grain crops.

Large tracts of land belonging to Arab absentees have also been leased to Jewish settlers, old and new, for the raising of vegetables. In the south alone, 15,000 dunams of vineyards and fruit trees have been leased to cooperative settlements; a similar area has been rented by the Yemenites Association, the Farmers Association, and the Soldiers Settlement and Rehabilitation Board. This has saved the Jewish Agency and the government millions of dollars. While the average cost of establishing an immigrant family in a new settlement was from $7,500 to $9,000, the cost in abandoned Arab villages did not exceed $1,500 ($750 for building repairs and $750 for livestock and equipment).

Abandoned Arab dwellings in towns have also not remained empty. By the end of July 1948, 170,000 people, notably new immigrants and ex-soldiers, in addition to about 40,000 former tenants, both Jewish and Arab, had been housed in premises under the custodian's control; and 7,000 shops, workshops and stores were sublet to new arrivals. The existence of these Arab houses-vacant and ready for occupation-has, to a large extent, solved the greatest immediate problem which faced the Israeli authorities in the absorption of immigrants. It also considerably relieved the financial burden of absorption.

How much of Israel's territory consists of land confiscated with the Absentee Property Law is uncertain and much disputed. Robert Fisk interviewed the Israeli Custodian of Absentee Property, who estimates this could amount to up to 70% of the territory of the state of Israel:

The Custodian of Absentee Property does not choose to discuss politics. But when asked how much of the land of the state of Israel might potentially have two claimants — an Arab and a Jew holding respectively a British Mandate and an Israeli deed to the same property — Mr. Manor [the Custodian in 1980] believes that 'about 70 percent' might fall into that category.

— Robert Fisk, 'The Land of Palestine, Part Eight: The Custodian of Absentee Property', The Times, December 24, 1980, quoted in his book Pity the Nation: Lebanon at War

The Jewish National Fund, from Jewish Villages in Israel, 1949:

Of the entire area of the State of Israel only about 300,000-400,000 dunums – apart from the desolate rocky area of the southern Negev, at present quite unfit for cultivation – are State Domain which the Israeli Government took over from the Mandatory regime. The J.N.F. and private Jewish owners possess under two million dunums. Almost all the rest belongs at law to Arab owners, many of whom have left the country. The fate of these Arabs will be settled when the terms of the peace treaties between Israel and her Arab neighbours are finally drawn up. The J.N.F., however, cannot wait until then to obtain the land it requires for its pressing needs. It is, therefore, acquiring part of the land abandoned by the Arab owners, through the Government of Israel, the sovereign authority in Israel. Whatever the ultimate fate of the Arabs concerned, it is manifest that their legal right to their land and property in Israel, or to the monetary value of them, will not be waived, nor do the Jews wish to ignore them. ... [C]onquest by force of arms cannot, in law or in ethics, abrogate the rights of the legal owner to his personal property. The J.N.F., therefore, will pay for the lands it takes over, at a fixed and fair price.

The absentee property played an enormous role in making Israel a viable state. In 1954, more than one third of Israel's Jewish population lived on absentee property and nearly a third of the new immigrants (250,000 people) settled in urban areas abandoned by Arabs. Of 370 new Jewish settlements established between 1948 and 1953, 350 were on absentee property (Peretz, Israel and the Palestinian Arabs, 1958).

The Absentees’ Property Law, 5710- 1950

This law replaced the Emergency Regulations (Absentees’ Property) Law, 5709-1948. According to Sabri Jiryis (p. 84), the definition of "absentee" in the law was framed in such a way as to ensure that it applied to every Palestinian or resident in Palestine who had left his usual place of residence in Palestine for any place inside or outside the country after the adoption of the partition of Palestine resolution by the UN. Article 1(b) states that "absentee" means:

"absentee" means -

(1) a person who, at any time during the period between the 16th Kislev, 5708 (29th November, 1947) and the day on which a declaration is published, under section 9(d) of the Law and Administration Ordinance, 5708-1948(1), that the state of emergency declared by the Provisional Council of State on the 10th Iyar, 5708 (19th May, 1948)
(2) has ceased to exist, was a legal owner of any property situated in the area of Israel or enjoyed or held it, whether by himself or through another, and who, at any time during the said period -

(i) was a national or citizen of the Lebanon, Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Trans-Jordan, Iraq or the Yemen, or
(ii) was in one of these countries or in any part of Palestine outside the area of Israel, or
(iii) was a Palestinian citizen and left his ordinary place of residence in Palestine
(a) for a place outside Palestine before the 27th Av, 5708 (1st September, 1948); or
(b) for a place in Palestine held at the time by forces which sought to prevent the establishment of the State of Israel or which fought against it after its establishment;

(2) a body of persons which, at any time during the period specified in paragraph (1), was a legal owner of any property situated in the area of Israel or enjoyed or held such property, whether by itself or through another, and all the members, partners, shareholders, directors or managers of which are absentees within the meaning of paragraph (1), or the management of the business of which is otherwise decisively controlled by such absentees, or all the capital of which is in the hands of such absentees;

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 41), the provisions in the law made sure that the term 'person' did not apply to Jews. The law also applied to Arabs who had become citizens of the State of Israel but were not in their usual place of residence as defined by the law. In this case, they were referred to as 'present absentees' and many lost their lands.

The Law then appointed a Custodianship Council for Absentees' Property, whose president was to be known as the Custodian of Absentees' Property (Article 2). The law then made these properties the legal holdings of the Custodian. According to Art. 4.(a)(2):

every right an absentee had in any property shall pass automatically to the Custodian at the time of the vesting of the property; and the status of the Custodian shall be the same as was that of the owner of the property.

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 41), those who were found to occupy property in violation of this law could be expelled, and those who built on such property could have their structures demolished. The law came to apply not only to Palestinians who fled but also to those who were away from their regular places of residence (as described in the previous paragraph).

According to the Israel Government Yearbook, 5719 (1958) (p. 235), the "village properties" of absentee Arabs "which was appropriated by the Custodian of Absentees' Property" included "[the land of] some 350 completely abandoned or semi-abandoned [Arab] villages, the aggregate area of which was about three-quarters of a million dunums .... Among the agricultural properties were 80,000 dunums of abandoned groves... [and] more than 200,000 dunums of plantations were taken over by the custodian. "It was estimated that "the urban properties ... include[d] 25,416 buildings in which there are 57,497 dwellings and 10,727 business and trade premises."

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 41), "estimates of the total amount of ‘abandoned’ lands to which Israel laid claim vary between 4.2 and 5.8 million dunum (4 200-5 800 km²). Between 1948 and 1953 alone, 350 of the 370 new Jewish settlements were created on lands confiscated under the Absentees’ Property Law."

The Absentees’ Property Law underwent several amendments, including:

Both amendments clarifying rental arrangements and tenant protection rights on such property.

Land Acquisition (Validation of Acts and Compensation) Law, 5713-1953

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 42), the Government of Israel did not automatically gain title to lands seized under the Absentees’ Property Law. This was accomplished under the Land Acquisition (Validation of Acts and Compensation) Law, 5713-1953. This law legalised expropriations (retroactively in many cases) for military purposes or for the establishment of (Israeli) settlements.

The law allows the Government to claim the property of lands which are not in the possession of its owner as of 1 April 1952. Article 2 (a) states:

Property in respect of which the Minister certifies by certificate under his hand--

(1) that on the 6th Nisan, 5712 (1st April, 1952) it was not in the possession of its owners; and
(2) that within the period between the 5th Iyar, 5708 (14th May, 1948) and the 6th Nisan, 5712 (Ist April 1952) it was used or assigned for purposes of essential development, settlement or security; and
(3) that it is still required for any of these purposes

The further states the monetary compensation for those losing their lands and that in the case were the lands corresponded to agricultural lands, where those lands formed their main source of livelihood, lands elsewhere would be offered. Article 3 reads:

(a) The owners of acquired property are entitled to compensation therefore from the Development Authority. The compensation shall be given in money, unless otherwise agreed between the owners and the Development Authority. The amount of compensation shall be fixed by agreement between the Development Authority and the owners or, in the absence of agreement, by the Court, as hereinafter provided.

(b) Where the acquired property was used for agriculture and was the main source of livelihood of its owner, and he has no other land sufficient for his livelihood, the Development Authority shall, on his demand, offer him other property, either for ownership or for lease, as full or partial compensation. A competent authority, to be appointed for this purpose by the Minister, shall, in accordance with rules to be prescribed by regulations, determine the category, location, area, and, in the case of lease, period of lease (not less than 49 years) and the value of the offered property, both for the purpose of calculating the compensation and for determination of the sufficiency of such property for a livelihood.

(c) The provisions of subsection (b) shall add to, and not derogate from, the provisions of subsection (a).

According to Alexandre Kedar (p. 153), until 1959, compensation was calculated on the basis of the 1950 land values. The author cites a 1965 ILA report which shows that over 1.2 million dunum (about 1 200 km²) of Arab land were taken in this manner.

The Absentees’ Property (Amendment No.3) (Release and Use of Endowment Property) Law, 5725-1965

Archived October 28, 2009, at the Wayback Machine

This law extends the scope of the Absentees' Property Law and earlier regulations concerning the Muslim religious endowment, the Waqf. Article 29A (c) states:

For the purposes of this section and of sections 29B to 29H, "endowment property" means Muslim waqf property being immovable property validly dedicated.

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 41), it allows the Government to confiscate vast amounts of Muslim (charity) land and other properties, including cemeteries and mosques, and place them under Government administration. According to the law, income from these properties would be used in part to build institutions and provide services for the Muslim inhabitants in areas where such property is located. The law amends the 1950 law in the following way:

In section 4 of the Absentees' Property Law, 5710-1950(1) (hereinafter referred to as "the principal Law"), the following subsection shall be inserted after subsection (a):

(1) Where any property is an endowment under any law, the ownership thereof shall vest in the Custodian free from any restriction, qualification or other similar limitation prescribed, whether before or after the vesting, by or under any law or document relating to the endowment if the owner of the property, or the person having possession or the right of management of the property, or the beneficiary of the endowment, is an absentee. The vesting shall be as from the 10th Kislev, 5709 (12th December, 1948) or from the day on which one of the aforementioned becomes an absentee, whichever is the later date.
(2) The provisions of this subsection shall not void any restriction, qualification or other similar limitation prescribed by or under this Law or imposed by the Custodian and shall not void any transactions effected by him.".

(b) This section shall have effect retroactively as from the date of the coming into force of the principal Law.

According to Meron Benvenisti:

"Most Waqf property in Israel was expropriated under the Absentee proberty Law (giving rise to the sarcastic quip -"Apparently God is an absentee [in Israel]") and afterward handed over to the Development Authority, ostensibly because this was necessary to prevent its being neglected, but actually so as to make it possible to sell it. Only about one-third of Muslim Waqf property, principally mosques and graveyards that were currently in use, was not expropriated. In 1956 its administration was turned over to the Board of Trustees of the Muslim Waqf, which by then was made up of collaborators appointed by the authorities. These "trustees" would sell or "exchange" land with the ILA without any accountability to the Muslim community. Anger over these deeds led to acts of violence within the community, including assassinations.".

The Absentees’ Property (Compensation) Law, 5733-1973

This law establishes the procedure to compensate owners of lands which have been confiscated under the Absentees’ Property Law (1950). It establishes the requirements to be eligible for compensation (Article 1):

The persons entitled to compensation are all those who were Israel residents on 1 July 1973, or became residents thereafter, and prior to the property becoming vested in the Custodian of Absentees' Property were

1.the owners of property, including their heirs, or
2.the tenants only of urban property, including spouses living with them at the last mentioned date, or
3.the lessees of property, or
4.the owners of any easement in property.

Other provisions specify the time limit legally allowed for filing a claim, whether compensation would be awarded in cash or bonds (depending on circumstances), the payment schedule (generally over a fifteen-year period) and other provisions. Appended to the law is a detailed schedule of how compensation is to be calculated for each type of property, urban or agricultural. Some provisions of this law were amended in later years.

Laws enacted to legalise further acquisition of depopulated lands, and related laws

Land (Acquisition for Public Purposes) Ordinance (1943)

This ordinance was originally enacted by the British in 1943 and later used by Israel to authorise the confiscation of lands for government and ‘public’ purposes (see eminent domain). These included building government offices, creating lands and parks, and suchlike. Kedar (p. 155) describes this law as “the main general land expropriation law in force in Israel today”.

A 1964 amendment to this law, Acquisition for Public Purposes (Amendment of Provisions) Law, 5724-1964, specifies procedures to be followed in the acquisition of lands based on this and other laws, including the original Land (Acquisition for Public Purposes) Ordinance (1943), the Town Planning Ordinance (1936), and the Roads and Railways (Defence and Development) Ordinance (1943).

The 1964 amendment also defines circumstances under which no compensation would be offered to those whose lands had been expropriated; generally, where the expropriation had occurred prior to the coming into force of this law. Additional amendments corrected various laws under which such lands might be expropriated, substituting Israeli laws for earlier British versions and clarifying rights to compensation.

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 43), Israel used this law extensively to expropriate Palestinians lands. Many Palestinians challenged the expropriations and did not accept compensation. A 1978 amendment to the law, Acquisition for Public Purposes (Amendment of Provisions) (Amendment No.3) Law, 5738-1978, addresses this issue by decreeing that where the owner refuses compensation or does not give consent within the time allotted, these funds would be deposited with the Administrator-General in the name of the owner. However, this provision has no bearing on the matter of the expropriation itself. According to the COHRE and BADIL study, lands acquired under this law were used for the building of new Jewish settlements or other ventures from which Arab Palestinians with Israeli citizenship were excluded. The Jewish-dominated sector of Upper Nazareth was created in this manner and was the subject of several lawsuits filed at the Supreme Court.

Jerusalem Military Government (Validation of Acts) Ordinance, 5709-1949

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 41), this law extends Israeli jurisdiction to ‘the Occupied Area of Jerusalem’ (the western part of Jerusalem that was incorporated into Israel in 1948). It declares that all orders and regulations enacted by the Military Governor or other Government ministries shall be given the force of law.

Development Authority (Transfer of Property) Law, 5710-1950

Archived October 28, 2009, at the Wayback Machine

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 42), the ‘Authority for the Development of the Country’ (or the ‘Development Authority’) was established to work with relevant Government agencies to acquire and prepare lands for the benefit of newly arriving Jewish immigrants. Vast amounts of land allocated for this purpose were bought from the ‘Custodian of Absentee Property’. Pursuant to this law, lands passing into the hands of the State or to JNF control would be deemed inalienable. Article 3(4)(a) reads:

The Development Authority is competent:

to sell or otherwise dispose of, let, grant leases of, and mortgage property;provided that
(a) the Development Authority shall not be authorised to sell, or otherwise transfer the right of ownership of, property passing into public ownership, except to the State, to the Jewish National Fund, to an institution approved by the Government, for the purposes of this paragraph, as an institution for the settlement of landless Arabs, or to a local authority; the right of ownership of land so acquired may not be re-transferred except, with the consent of the Development Authority, to one of the bodies mentioned in this subparagraph;
(b) the Development Authority shall not be authorised to sell immovable property not being land passing into public ownership, unless such property has first been offered to the Jewish National Fund, and the Jewish National Fund has not agreed to acquire it within a period fixed by the Development Authority;
(c) the total area of immovable property, not being land passing into public ownership, which the Development Authority may sell, or the right of ownership of which it may otherwise transfer, shall not exceed 100,000 dunams, but immovable property acquired by any of the bodies mentioned in subparagraph (a) shall not be taken into account for the purposes of this subparagraph;
(d) the sale, or the transfer of the right of ownership in any other way, of immovable property, being land passing into public ownership or other immovable property, shall be effected by decision of the Government in each individual case;

Prescription Law, 5718-1958

Archived October 28, 2009, at the Wayback Machine

The Prescription Law was first enacted in 1958 and amended in 1965. It repeals critical provisions of, and reverses British practices in relation to, the Ottoman Land Code (1858).

According to COHRE and BADIL (p. 44), the Prescription Law is one of the most critical to understanding the legal underpinnings of Israel’s acquisition of Palestinian lands. Although not readily apparent in the language of the law, the purpose behind this legislation was to enable Israel to claim as ‘State lands’ areas where Palestinians still predominated and where they could still assert their own claims on the land (for example, in the north of the country). The authors claim that this law, in conjunction with the Land (Settlement of Title) Ordinance (Amendment) Law, 5720-1960, the Land (Settlement of Title) Ordinance (New Version), 5729-1969 and the Land Law, 5729-1969, was designed to revise criteria related to the use and registration of Miri lands – one of the most prevalent types in Palestine – and to facilitate Israel’s acquisition of such land.

Under this law, farmers are required to submit documentation proving uninterrupted cultivation of designated plots of land over a 15-year period (the ‘prescription’ period). Article 5 states:

The period within which a claim in respect of which an action has not been brought shall be prescribed (such period being hereinafter referred to as "the period of prescription") shall be

(1) in the case of a claim not relating to land — seven years;
(2) in the case of a claim relating to land — fifteen years or, if the land has been registered in the land register after settlement of title in accordance with the Land (Settlement of Title) Ordinance(1), twenty-five years.

The law adds the proviso that lands purchased after 1 March 1943 would be subject to a 20-year verification period. The law also specifies a five-year hiatus between 1958 and 1963 that would not be counted toward this ‘prescription’ period.

According to COHRE and BADIL, by 1963, much of the lands in question had still not been surveyed. Therefore, calculations of the requisite 20-year verification period were in effect halted, and the State was in a position to press its own claims to these lands. The authors consider that the Prescription Law had even more complex ramifications. For example, Israel decided that British aerial photographs of 1945 would be used to verify cultivation. Arab farmers who had not yet begun tilling their lands at the time the photographs were taken found they were by definition unable to meet the requisite 15-year ‘prescription’ period. Also, as Israel did not accept other evidence of cultivation, such as tax records, many Palestinians fell victim to a ‘Catch-22’: in the process of trying to establish their legal ownership they (retroactively) lost their lands.

According to COHRE and BADIL a 1965 report by the Israeli Land Administration (ILA) reflects on the rationale behind the law:

In the Northern area, there was a danger of the [acquisition of rights] by prescription according to the Statute of Limitation (1958) regarding all State land, and those [lands] of the Custodian of Absentee Property and the Development Authority. Particularly in the area of the [Arab] minorities where various elements began to take over State land and those of the Development Authority, and [sic] there was worry that these lands would be taken away from the hand of the ILA [Israeli Land Administration] and be transferred to the ownership of the trespassers.

Palestinian land laws

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Palestinian land laws dictate how Palestinians are to handle their ownership of land under the Palestinian National Authority—currently only in the West Bank (see governance of the Gaza Strip). Most notably, these laws prohibit Palestinians from selling any Palestinian-owned lands to "any man or judicial body corporation of Israeli citizenship, living in Israel or acting on its behalf". These land laws were originally enacted during the Jordanian occupation of the West Bank, which began after Jordan's partial victory during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War and ended after the sweeping defeat of the Arab coalition to the Israeli military during the 1967 Arab–Israeli War, following which the territory was occupied by Israel. Land sales by Palestinians to Israelis are considered treasonous by the former to the Palestinian national cause because they threaten the aspiration for an independent Palestinian state. The prohibition on land-selling to Israelis in these laws is also stated as enforced in order to "halt the spread of moral, political and security corruption". Consequently, Palestinians who sell land to Israelis can be sentenced to death under Palestinian governance, although death penalties are seldom carried out; capital punishment has to be approved by the President of the Palestinian National Authority.

Background

Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan and Gaza from Egypt during the Six-Day War of 1967. Under international law as interpreted by the Palestine Liberation Organization, Jordanian laws as they existed on 4 June 1967 (the eve of the occupation) are applicable to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and Israel as an Occupying Power is obliged to respect these laws.

Shortly after the war, Israel began establishing settlements in these territories based on the legal opinion of Plia Albeck, in contradiction with legal advice of others, including from Theodor Meron, the Israeli Foreign Ministry's advisor. In 2005, Israel dismantled its settlements in Gaza, but Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem, along with their security zones, still account for about 60% of the area. In the West Bank, settlements have continued to slowly grow and as of April 2009, included about 400,000 settlers. All Israeli settlements in the occupied territories (including those in East Jerusalem) are considered illegal by the international community, but Israel disputes this.

Palestinians argue that the growth of Israeli settlements compromises their ability to establish a viable state of their own in the territories, in accordance with the proposed two-state solution. In April 2009, a Chief Islamic Judge of the Palestinian Authority reminded of an existing fatwa that bans Palestinians from selling property to Jews, which is considered high treason and punishable by death.

Land sale to non-Palestinians

The Negotiations Affairs Department of the State of Palestine (PLO-NAD) declared in 2008, that all transactions with Israelis and other foreigners transferring confiscated land in the Occupied Territories violate international law and are null and void. It stated that under the Hague Regulations an occupant may only administer public property as a usufructuary and does not gain sovereignty or title over any part of occupied territory. Israel thus has no right to sell Palestinian state land, nor does it have a right to lease state land for long periods or for the purpose of settlements. According to the PLO-NAD, the Palestinian government of the future Palestinian state will not be under any obligation to honour Israeli transactions in occupied Palestinian property that took place during Israel’s occupation.

Property transactions under Palestinian law

In a 2009 case, in which a Palestinian was convicted of selling land to foreigners, it appears that some additional laws were used to obtain the conviction. The Jerusalem Post states that the defendant was convicted under a law prohibiting sale of Palestinian land to "the enemy" (possibly a reference to the old Jordanian law), as well as a Palestinian "military law" which, according to the Jerusalem Post, "states that it is forbidden to sell land to Jews", and two earlier laws dating from the 1950s which forbade trade with the state of Israel.

While Palestinian Authority courts can impose death sentences, they cannot be carried out without the approval of the PA President. The current President, Mahmoud Abbas, has consistently refused to approve executions. In September 2010, a Palestinian court reaffirmed that the sale of Palestinian land to Israelis is punishable by death. The Palestine General Prosecution said that the ruling represented "a consolidation of the previous legal principle," and that the "ruling aimed to protect the Palestinian national project to establish an independent Palestinian state."

Effects

Sources differ on the number of Palestinians officially executed for the offence, with the Jerusalem Post stating that none have been executed while a BBC report indicates that there have been two executions. However, a number of extrajudicial killings have also taken place since the death penalty was first announced. In May 1997 for example, three Palestinians convicted under the statute were later found murdered. Human Rights Watch argued that the circumstances of the murders "strongly suggested official tolerance if not involvement" by the PA, citing as evidence "inflammatory statements" by PA Justice Minister Frei Abu Medein "which seemed to give a green light to violence against suspected land dealers." Medein is quoted as saying: "... expect the unexpected for these matters because nobody from this moment will accept any traitor who sells his land to Israel."

In 1998, Amnesty International reported that torture of those accused of selling land to Israelis appeared to be systematic, and unlawful killings were also reported against those accused.

An additional consequence has reportedly been increased intimidation of Palestinian Christians, as many ordinary Palestinians have misinterpreted the law to mean prohibition on sale of property not only to Jews but also to any other non-Muslim. This misperception has been fuelled by a number of fatwas issued by Palestinian Muslim clerics in support of the PA's death penalty which fail to distinguish between Jews and Christians, but which simply condemn sale of property to "infidels" (i.e. non-Muslims).

In March 2007, the Palestinian Authority and Jordan arrested two Palestinians accused of selling a house in Hebron to Israelis. According to Hebron's Jewish Committee, "The arrest exposes once again the anti-Semitic nature of the PA. We call upon the government to accept the racial hatred prevalent in the PA." Knesset member Uri Ariel demanded that the government act to secure the release of the arrested Palestinians, while Orit Struk of the committee said the arrest proves that the house legally belongs to the Jewish community.

In 2012, Mohammad Abu Shahala, a former PA intelligence officer, was reportedly sentenced to death for selling land to Jews. The Jewish community of Hebron petitioned the UN, the US, and the Israeli government to step in on Abu Shahala's behalf.

Events in 2009

In early April 2009, it was reported that several Jewish businessmen from the United States purchased 20 dunams (2 hectares) of land from Palestinians in the Mount of Olives area of Jerusalem. The report prompted the PA to reissue its warning that sale of property to Jews constitutes "high treason" punishable by death. Sheikh Tamimi, Chief (Islamic) Judge of the PA, reminded Palestinians of an earlier fatwa against the practice. "The city of Jerusalem is the religious, political and spiritual capital of the Palestinians," he said. "The Jews have no rights in Jerusalem. This is an occupied city like the rest of the territories that were occupied in 1967." Fatah legislator Hatem Abdel Kader, an advisor to the PA Prime Minister, asserted that the ban on sale of property to Jews was still necessary as the Israeli government and settlers were mounting a "fierce onslaught" on the Arab sector in East Jerusalem, attempting to alter the demographic balance there by demolishing Palestinian homes. East Jerusalem was annexed by Israel in the wake of the 1967 war, but the annexation has not been recognized by the international community.

In late April 2009, a Palestinian military court condemned a man to death by hanging for treason after he sold some land to Israelis. The death sentence requires the approval of the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, who is not expected to approve it.

Events in 2012

Osama Hussein Mansour, a retired Palestinian security officer, was arrested by the Palestinian Authority in June 2012 on charges of collaborating with Israel and being involved in land transactions with Israelis. He died in July after falling from a window while being held in Palestinian custody, but it was unclear whether he fell or was pushed. His wife does not believe it was suicide, but rather that he was killed, and stated that she visited him a few days before and he was in good spirits and happy.

Events in 2014

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas issued an executive order that amended the land law penal code, and increased punishments for selling land to "hostile countries and its citizens". These punishments include hard labor to life imprisonment for Palestinians who sell, rent or mediate real estate transactions.

Jewish National Fund

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Jewish National Fund
Native name
קרן קיימת לישראל
Acronym: קק״ל
Formerlyהפונד הלאומי
TypePublic-benefit corporation
IndustryReal estate
Founded1901; 122 years ago
Headquarters
Key people
Avraham Duvdevani, chairperson, Russel Robinson, JNF-USA CEO
Revenue 2.583 billion (2015)
511 million (2015)
398 million (2015)
Total assets 12.720 billion (2015)
Number of employees
950 (2015)
Websitewww.kkl.org.il Edit this at Wikidata jnf.org
Golden Book signed by Theodor Herzl and Johann Kremenetzky. In the Jewish Museum of Switzerland's collection.

Jewish National Fund (JNF; Hebrew: קֶרֶן קַיֶּימֶת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, Keren Kayemet LeYisrael; previously הפאנד הלאומי‎, Ha Fund HaLeumi) is a non-profit organization founded in 1901 to buy and develop land in Ottoman Syria (later Mandatory Palestine, subsequently Israel and the Palestinian territories) for Jewish settlement. By 2007, it owned 13% of the total land in Israel. Since its inception, the JNF says it has planted over 240 million trees in Israel. It has also built 180 dams and reservoirs, developed 250,000 acres (1,000 km2) of land and established more than 1,000 parks.

In 2002, the JNF was awarded the Israel Prize for lifetime achievement and special contribution to society and the State of Israel.

Name

The name Keren Kayemet comes from the Mishnah. Tractate Peah (1:1) lists the types of good deeds whose rewards are enjoyed in this world, while the principal merit will be in the world to come: hakeren kayemet lo l’olam haba.

History

JNF postage stamp, c. 1915

The idea of a national land purchasing fund was first presented at the First Zionist Congress in 1897 by Hermann Schapira, a Lithuanian-Jewish professor of mathematics. The fund, named Keren Hakayemet (later known in English as the "Jewish National Fund") was formally established at the Fifth Zionist Congress in Basel in 1901. In its early years, the organization was headed by the Jewish industrialist Johann Kremenezky. Early land purchases were completed in Judea and the Lower Galilee. In 1909, the JNF played a central role in the founding of Tel Aviv. The establishment of the "Olive Tree Fund" marked the beginning of Diaspora support of afforestation efforts. The JNF collection boxes or Blue Box (known in Yiddish as a pushke) has been part of the JNF since its inception, symbolizing the partnership between Israel and the Diaspora. In the period between the two world wars, about one million of these blue and white tin collection boxes could be found in Jewish homes throughout the world. From 1902 until the late 1940s, the JNF sold JNF stamps to raise money. For a brief period in May 1948, JNF stamps were used as postage stamps during the transition from Palestine to Israel.

Ottoman era

The first parcel of land, 200 dunams (0.20 km2) east of Hadera, was received as a gift from the Russian Zionist leader Isaac Leib Goldberg of Vilnius, in 1903. It became an olive grove. In 1904 and 1905, the JNF purchased land plots near the Sea of Galilee and at Ben Shemen. In 1921, JNF land holdings reached 25,000 acres (100 km²), rising to 50,000 acres (200 km²) by 1927. At the end of 1935, JNF held 89,500 acres (362 km²) of land housing 108 Jewish communities.

British Mandate

JNF head office in Jerusalem under construction 1938
JNF staff Jerusalem 1940
JNF publicity in 1945

In 1939, 10% of the Jewish population of the British Mandate of Palestine lived on JNF land. JNF holdings by the end of the British Mandate period amounted to 936 km². By 1948, the JNF owned 54% of the land held by Jews in the region, or a bit less than 4% of the land in what was then known as the British Mandate of Palestine. By the eve of statehood, the JNF had acquired a total of 936,000 dunams (936 km2; 361 sq mi) of land; another 800,000 dunams (800 km2; 310 sq mi) had been acquired by other Jewish organizations or individuals. Most of the JNF's activities during the Mandatory period were closely associated with Yossef Weitz, the head of its settlement department.

From the beginning, JNF's policy was to lease land long-term rather than sell it. In its charter, the JNF states: "Since the first land purchase in Eretz Israel in the early 1900s for and on behalf of the Jewish People, JNF has served as the Jewish People's trustee of the land, initiating and charting development work to enable Jewish settlement from the border in the north to the edge of the desert and Arava in the south."

State of Israel

Planting trees in the Gilboa mountains, c.1960

After Israel's establishment in 1948, the government began to sell absentee lands to the JNF. On January 27, 1949, 1,000 km² of land (from a total of about 3,500 km²) was sold to the JNF for the price of IL11 million. Another 1,000 km² of land was sold to the JNF in October 1950. Over the years questions about the legitimacy of these transactions have been raised but Israeli legislation has generally supported the JNF's land claims.

In 1953, the JNF was dissolved and re-organized as an Israeli company under the name Keren Kayemet LeYisrael (JNF-KKL). In 1960, administration of the land held by the JNF-KKL, apart from forested areas, was transferred to a newly formed government agency, the Israel Land Administration (ILA). The ILA was then responsible for managing some 93% of the land of Israel. All the land managed by the ILA was defined as Israel lands; it included both land owned by the government (about 80%) and land owned by the JNF-KKL (about 13%). The JNF-KKL received the right to nominate 10 of the 22 directors of the ILA, lending it significant leverage within that state body.

After concentrating on the centre and northern part of the young state, the JNF-KKL started supporting Jewish settlements around the Negev border from around 1965. After the Six-Day War in 1967, the JNF-KKL started work in the newly occupied Palestinian territories as well.

Reclamation projects

The JNF charter specifies the reclamation of land for the Jewish people as its primary purpose. During the 1980s, almost 60,000 acres (240 km2) were planted. Over 50,000 acres (200 km2) of crop-land were reclaimed, and hundreds of miles of roads built. Research into the soil and water conservation and the construction of dams and reservoirs took on added importance in the face of water shortages and drought.

The JNF's collaborative work involves participation in the International Arid Land Consortium, which explores the problems and solutions unique to arid and semiarid regions, working to develop sustainable ecological practices to improve the quality of life among people in the dry areas.

Afforestation

Eshtaol Forest planted by JNF
Dedication of Pope John Paul Forest in Nazareth
Jerusalem forest

The early JNF was active in afforestation and reclamation of land. By 1935, JNF had planted 1.7 million trees over a total area of 1,750 acres (7.08 km²) and drained swamps, like those in the Hula Valley. Over fifty years, the JNF planted over 260 million trees largely in semi-arid, rocky, hilly terrain in which cultivation is not cost-effective and the risk of land degradation is high. While the Ministry of Agriculture is the official regulator of Israel's forests, the JNF is responsible for the implementation of forest management and afforestation. In 2006, the JNF signed a 49-year lease agreement with the State of Israel which gives it control over 30,000 hectares (300 km2) of Negev land for the development of forests. The JNF has been criticized for planting non-native pine trees which are unsuited to the climate, rather than local species such as olive trees. Others say that JNF deserves credit for this decision, and the forests would not have survived otherwise. According to JNF statistics, six out of every 10 saplings planted at a JNF site in Jerusalem do not survive, although the survival rate for planting sites outside Jerusalem is much higher – close to 95 percent. The Israeli newspaper Maariv wrote that workers remove saplings daily to allow more tourists to plant the following day, but the JNF denied this and said it would sue the paper for libel. The Union for Environmental Defense has criticized the fund's forestry practices for "overreliance on highly flammable pine trees" and overuse of toxic herbicides, in the context of minimal government and public scrutiny. Some forests have been planted for security reasons and as a means of demarcating Israeli space. Critics argue that many JNF lands outside the West Bank were illegally confiscated from Palestinian refugees, and that the JNF furthermore should not be involved with lands in the West Bank. Shaul Ephraim Cohen has said trees have been planted to restrict Bedouin herding. Susan Nathan wrote that forests were planted on the site of abandoned Arab villages after the 1948 war. Nathan also writes that olive trees were replaced by pine and cypress trees and that JNF afforestation policy erases traces of the Arab presence prior to 1948. In 2008, the JNF announced that historical information plaques erected in JNF parks and forests would cite the names of the Arab villages formerly located there.

Since 2009, the JNF has been helping the Palestinian Authority plan public parks and other civic amenities for the Palestinian city of Rawabi, north of Ramallah. The JNF provided the Palestinian Authority with 3,000 tree seedlings for a forested area being developed on the edge of the new city.

Water conservation

Israel's fresh water supply is dependent on 50 days a year of seasonal rainfall, while water consumption has doubled since 1960. Towards the end of the 1980s, the JNF undertook several large-scale water conservation projects. Dams and reservoirs were built to capture rainwater run-off which would have otherwise been lost in the Arava Valley, Reshafim in the Beit She'arim Valley and Kedma near Kiryat Gat. An artificial lake was built in Timna Park.

The JNF has built 200 reservoirs around the country, and plans to build 30 more reservoirs and water treatment plants over the next five years. Over the past decade, JNF has invested over $114.99 million in reservoir construction, increasing the country's total storage capacity by 7%, to over 130 million cubic metres (34×109 US gal) of water. JNF is also involved in river rehabilitation projects all over Israel, such as the Nahal Alexander Restoration Project begun in 2003.

Land development

JNF trees in the Negev Desert. Man-made dunes (here a liman) help keep in rainwater, creating an oasis.

The JNF's engagement in developing Israel for Jewish purposes has involved a range of massive land infrastructure development projects. In the 1980s, the JNF launched a project known collectively as "Operation Promised Land", to meet the challenge of the massive upsurge of Jewish immigration from the Soviet Union and Ethiopia. In recent years, the JNF has again moved towards the development of towns to accommodate new Jewish immigrants, focusing on the Galilee and Negev regions, the two areas of Israel with a tenuous Jewish demographic majority. In particular, the JNF's 600 million dollar Blueprint Negev aims to attract and build infrastructure for 250,000 new settlers in the Negev desert, which accounts for 60% of the country's land mass but remains sparsely populated. The plan has come under scrutiny as groups such as Bustan, Save the Negev, and Ohalah have expressed concern over the project's lack of transparency in light of the potential strain on ecological resources and the possible impacts on Bedouin communities nearby.

International fundraising arms

United States

Benefit concert at David's Citadel, 1926

The United States arm of the JNF, incorporated on January 26, 1926, is the largest contributor to JNF-KKL. In 1996, JNF-USA was accused of mismanaging funds. According to the charges, only 21% of US donations reached Israel, and money was being diverted to Latin American JNF offices. In the wake of this scandal, the North American management was forced to resign. The tax-exempt status of the JNF-USA was challenged in 2011 as violating the public policy of the United States with respect to ethnic and religious discrimination. In July 2017, in response to an investigation by the Jewish Daily Forward, the New York State attorney general's office ordered JNF-USA to rescind two illegal loans totaling more than $500,000 the organization had made to its chief executive officer, Russell Robinson, and its chief financial officer, Mitchel Rosenzweig. (New York State forbids charities from lending their officers any money.) JNF-USA argued that Robinson and Rosenzweig were not officers under the meaning of the law, but the attorney general's officer rejected that argument and the two executives agreed to repay the balance of their loans.

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, the JNF-UK (full name JNF Charitable Trust) was formed in 1939 and registered as a charitable organization. In October 2005, the JNF-KKL in Israel split from its British partner, accusing JNF-UK of having "misled" the public. The JNF-KKL claimed that the British group was using the KKL name to raise funds "for their own causes which are not associated with KKL." The Israeli JNF-KKL said it would launch a separate fundraising operation in the UK. JNF-UK launched a legal action to stop KKL using the names "JNF" or "Jewish National Fund" in the UK. The two organisations made peace after the Israeli-born businessman Samuel Hayek took over as JNF-UK chairman in 2008. Israeli JNF-KKL ended its dispute with the JNF-UK within weeks of ending a similar dispute with the American JNF-USA On 1 May 2020 a ruling was issued to JNF on a will writing service encouraging elderly to leave money to KKL. District Judge Geddes noted on KKL's "lack of independence from JNF UK"

The charitable status of the JNF-UK has come under increasing attack. British prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown had been Honorary Patrons of the JNF-UK, like all British prime ministers before them since its inception. David Cameron resigned as Honorary Patron to JNF-UK in 2011. According to a spokesman, Cameron said it was an organisation that was specifically focused around work in one specific country—i.e., Israel. Cameron's decision was interpreted as a snub, in spite of the spokesman's assurances that his decision had "absolutely nothing to do with any anti-Israel campaign". However, campaigners claimed that Cameron's resignation was due to political pressure. Since then, the JNF-UK's Honorary Patrons include no leader of the main British political parties. An Early Day Motion in the British parliament called for the revocation of the JNF's charitable status in the UK and was signed by 66 Members of Parliament. In 2012 the Green Party called for the JNF to be stripped of its charity status.

2021 controversy

On 2 December 2021, JNF-UK Chairman Samuel Hayek gave an interview to The Jerusalem Post where he expressed concern over rising levels of antisemitism in the UK, claiming that "in 10 years, maybe less, who knows, Jews will not be able to live in the UK". When asked by Jewish News 18 days later to clarify his reasoning, Hayek claimed the evidence lay in "the number of immigrants to England. The demographic of British society is changing". When asked to clarify if the immigrants he was referring to were Muslims, Hayek confirmed this, and went on to claim that Muslim immigrants "don't speak English [and] create their own ghettos, their own education, their own process of thinking". Hayek appeared to echo sentiments closely associated with far-right great replacement theory when he continued, "the process is the white Christian majority is shrinking. It shrinks to a degree where there is a point it cannot protect itself anymore." Leaders of the Board of Deputies (BoD), the Jewish Leadership Council and the Community Security Trust all condemned Hayek's comments, as did the Chief Rabbi, while Jewish MP Alex Sobel called for Hayek's resignation as chair of JNF UK, or the isolation of the JNF UK from communal organisations while Hayek remained in his position. On 4 January 2022 a letter signed by 46 BoD Deputies called for Hayek to resign, stating they would continue to advise synagogues not to participate, support or cooperate with JNF-UK as long as he remained chair. On the 10 January 2022 another letter signed by 105 Jewish student leaders to suspend all programmes run by the JNF UK and to suspend JNF membership from the BoD. On the 13 January 2022 the Charity Commission for England and Wales opened a regulatory case on JNF UK to assess concerns.

On 23 December 2021, then BoD senior VP and JNF-UK deputy Gary Mond condemned Hayek's remarks, stated they did not represent JNF-UK and affirmed his belief that the UK "is one of the best places in the world to be Jewish", and that British Jews "have a great future in the UK". On 12 January Jewish News published an article stating they had alerted the BoD to historic social media posts where Mond appeared to express support for Islamophobic sentiments, including "liking" two posts by Pamela Geller, an American far-right activist, currently banned from entering the UK, a post expressing his "concern" over a possible increase in the number of Muslim MPs and another suggesting that civilization was "at war" with Islam. In response, the BoD asked Mond to step down while an investigation took place. Mond resigned from the BoD the following day, claiming he had been "cancelled" and accusing the Board leadership of leaning to the political left and being unwilling to take account of different views.

Hayek refused to resign, and on 21 January wrote an op-ed in The Jewish Chronicle stating that he stood by his remark to The Jerusalem Post but he was "not against any minority or against the Muslims in the UK or Europe, but against anyone who spreads hatred that harms Jews" and that his previous remarks were "misconstrued".

On 23 January 2022, the BoD voted to censure JNF-UK over the failure of its board of trustees to condemn Hayek's remarks.

Canada

Following the Six-Day War, the Canadian arm of the JNF raised about $15 million US to fund a 1,700-acre park called "Canada Park". The park was built in 1970 on land that had been occupied until the war by three Palestinian villages, which were destroyed on the orders of Yitzhak Rabin. Starting around 2013, Independent Jewish Voices has campaigned against JNF Canada's charitable status, and in 2017 it filed a formal complaint with the Canadian government seeking the revocation of JNF's charitable status on the basis of discrimination.

JNF collection boxes

JNF collection box

JNF's blue charity boxes were distributed by the JNF almost from its inception at the initiative of Johann Kremenezky. Once found in many Jewish homes, the boxes became one of the most familiar symbols of Zionism. A children's song about the boxes, written by Dr. Yehoshua Frizman, Headmaster of the Real Gymnasium for Girls in Kovno, ran

The box is hanging on the wall
The blue box
Each penny put inside
Redeems the land.

A bank clerk named Haim Kleinman in Nadvorna, Galicia placed a blue box labeled "Keren Le'umit" in his office and urged others to do the same. The first mass-produced boxes were distributed in 1904. Kleinman visited Mandate Palestine in the 1930s and planned to make aliyah, but perished in the Holocaust. Menahem Ussishkin wrote that "The coin the child contributes or collects for the redemption of the land is not important in itself; it is not the child that gives to the Keren Kayemeth, but rather the Fund that gives to the child, a foothold and lofty ideal for all the days of his life."

The boxes could take a variety of shapes and sizes. Some were paper made to fold flat like envelopes and able to contain only a small number of coins, some early American boxes were cylindrical, some German boxes were made of tin stamped into the shape of bound books.

Israel issued postage stamps bearing the image of the blue box in 1983, 1991, and 1993 for the JNF's 90th anniversary.

Controversies

Transparency

T'ruah has expressed concerns that the JNF is not transparent about where their funds go and that the organization may be subsidizing projects in West Bank settlements. The organization's chief executive later acknowledged that JNF does fund projects within settlements. A review of their tax filing from 2014 led Rabbi Jill Jacobs of T'ruah to estimate that about $600,000 of the $27.2 million in grants by JNF-USA went to support settlements. In 2021, JNF announced that it would change its policy and subsidize Israeli settlements in the West Bank. However, the necessary vote of the board was delayed indefinitely in April after opposition from members and supporters abroad.

Israeli lawmakers have sought, unsuccessfully, to allow the State Comptroller to examine the books of the organization to determine whether the group's funds were being spent appropriately.

Leasing policy controversy

A community in the Negev established by the JNF under its Blueprint Negev program
Aminadav Forest

The JNF stipulates that only Jews can buy, mortgage or lease JNF land. Article 23 of the JNF lease states that the lessee must pay compensation to the JNF if this stipulation is violated. On 13 October 2004, Adalah, an organization and legal center for Arab minority rights in Israel, submitted a petition to the Supreme Court entitled Challenging the Prohibition on Arab Citizens of Israel from Living on Jewish National Fund Land. Shortly afterwards, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and the Arab Center for Alternative Planning also filed a petition to the Supreme Court challenging the ILA policy as discriminatory. The JNF responded to the two petitions on 9 December. In its response, the JNF stated:

The JNF is not the trustee of the general public in Israel. Its loyalty is given to the Jewish people in the Diaspora and in the state of Israel... The JNF, in relation to being an owner of land, is not a public body that works for the benefit of all citizens of the state. The loyalty of the JNF is given to the Jewish people and only to them is the JNF obligated. The JNF, as the owner of the JNF land, does not have a duty to practice equality towards all citizens of the state.

On 26 January 2005, Israel's Attorney General Menachem Mazuz ruled that lease restrictions violated Israeli anti-discrimination laws, and that the ILA could not discriminate against Arab citizens of Israel in the marketing and allocation of the lands it managed; this applied both to government lands and to lands belonging to the JNF. However, the Attorney General also decided that, whenever a non-Jewish citizen wins an ILA tender for a plot of JNF-owned land, the ILA would compensate the JNF with an equal amount of land. This would allow the JNF to maintain its current hold over 2,500,000 dunams (2,500 km2) of land, or 13% of the total land in Israel.

As a result of the Mazuz ruling, authorities found themselves facing a conundrum: on the one hand the JNF, as a "private" organization, had received donations from outside Israel which were specifically earmarked for the benefit of Jews; on the other hand, the state and the ILA (an agency of the state), which administered the land owned by the JNF, were banned from discriminating against non-Jews. In early 2005, the JNF and the Finance Ministry were reported as trying to draft a new agreement that would separate the JNF from the state, thereby allowing it to continue selling land to Jews only.

In July 2007, the Israeli Knesset approved the Jewish National Fund Bill, submitted by MK Uri Ariel (National Union/National Religious Party), in its preliminary reading; but the bill was later dropped. The bill sought to authorize the JNF practice of refusing to lease land to Arab citizens. The bill called for a new provision to the 1960 Israel Land Administration Law, entitled "Management of the Jewish National Fund's Lands"; the provision stated that regardless of other conflicting rulings, leasing JNF lands for Jewish settlement did not constitute discrimination, and: "For the purpose of every law, the association documents of the Jewish National Fund will be interpreted according to the judgment of the Jewish National Fund's founders and from a nationalist-Zionist standpoint."

In September 2007, the High Court heard a further Adalah petition seeking cancellation of an ILA policy as well as Article 27 of the Regulations of the Obligations of Tenders, which in concert prevent Arab citizens from participating in bids for JNF-controlled land. The High Court of Justice agreed to delay a ruling by at least four months, and a temporary settlement was reached (following the compromise proposed in 2005 by Menachem Mazuz) wherein, although the JNF would be prevented from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity, nevertheless every time land is sold to a non-Jew, the ILA would compensate it with an equivalent amount of land, thus ensuring the total amount of land owned by Jewish Israelis remains the same.

An alternative proposal submitted by Amnon Rubinstein, a former minister, recommended that a distinction be made between JNF lands and state lands, such that all JNF lands directly acquired via donations from abroad specifically for the benefit of Jews (some 900,000 dunams (900 km2)) will pass to the direct control of the JNF; while properties purchased by the JNF from the state in the 1950s and formerly belonging to Palestinian refugees (the so-called "lands of missing persons" or "absentee" lands, amounting to 2,000,000 dunams (2,000 km2)) would revert to state control. Rubinstein's intention was "to avoid passing racist legislation [such as the Ariel Bill] that would limit the use of these lands to the Jews". Others denied however that the Ariel Bill was racist. The Rubinstein proposal was not taken up.

In late 2007 a land swap deal was proposed that would allowing the JNF to continue leasing its lands only to Jews. Urban JNF land sold in future to non-Jews would include an automatic swap mechanism: the fund would transfer the land to the ILA, and in exchange would receive the purchase price plus a similar-sized plot in the Negev.

Legal conflicts

In December 2011, Seth Morrison resigned from the board of JNF-USA in protest at the decision by Himnuta, a subsidiary of JNF-KKL, to launch eviction proceedings against the Sumarin family, who lived in the Silwan neighborhood of East Jerusalem. In the case of the Sumarin family, the children of the original owner, Musa Sumarin, were declared absentees after his death even though there were other family members living in the home at the time. In 1991, the Israeli government took the step of transferring the property to the JNF subsidiary. A campaign against the JNF's eviction was launched by Rabbis for Human Rights, the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement, and the Jewish organization Yachad. The pressures led the JNF to delay the eviction. The JNF played a similar role in evicting the Gozlan family in the 1990s.

Jewish land purchase in Palestine

Map showing Jewish-owned land as of 31 December 1944, including land owned in full, shared in undivided land and State Lands under concession. This constituted 6% of the total land area, of which more than half was held by the JNF and PICA

Jewish land purchase in Palestine was the acquisition of land in Ottoman and Mandatory Palestine by Jews from the 1880s until the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. By far the largest such arrangement was known as the Sursock Purchase. As of April 1, 1945, Jews had acquired 5.67% of the land in Palestine.

Background

Palestine agricultural land ownership by sub-district (1945)

Towards the end of the 19th century, the creation of the Zionist movement resulted in many European Jews immigrating to Palestine. Most land purchases between the late 1880s and the 1930s were located in the coastal plain area, including "Acre to the North and Rehovoth to the South, the Esdraelon (Jezreel) and Jordan Valleys and to the lesser extent in Galilee". The migration affected Palestine in many ways, including economically, socially, and politically.

The Talmud mentions the religious duty of settling the Land of Israel. It also allows for the lifting of certain religious restrictions of Sabbath observance to further its acquisition and settlement.

Land purchases

KKL collection boxes to fund land purchases in Palestine were distributed among Jews from 1904

In the first half of the 19th century, no foreigners were allowed to purchase land in Palestine. This was official Ottoman policy until 1856 and in practice until 1867. When it came to the national aspirations of the Zionist movement, the Ottoman Empire opposed the idea of Jewish self-rule in Palestine, fearing it might lose control of Palestine after recently having lost other territories to various European powers. It also took issue with the Jews, as many came from Russia, which sought the empire's demise. In 1881 the Ottoman governmental administration (the Sublime Porte) decreed that foreign Jews could immigrate to and settle anywhere within the Ottoman Empire, except in Palestine and from 1882 until their defeat in 1918, the Ottomans continuously restricted Jewish immigration and land purchases in Palestine. In 1892, the Ottoman government decided to prohibit the sale of land in Palestine to Jews, even if they were Ottoman citizens. Nevertheless, during the late 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, many successful land purchases were made through organizations such as the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association (PJCA), Palestine Land Development Company and the Jewish National Fund.

Jewish rabbis purchasing land from an Arab landowner, 1920s.

The Ottoman Land Code of 1858 "brought about the appropriation by the influential and rich families of Beirut, Damascus, and to a lesser extent Jerusalem and Jaffa and other sub-district capitals, of vast tracts of land in Syria and Palestine and their registration in the name of these families in the land registers".

According to Palestinian-American anthropologist Nasser Abufarha, "In 1858 the Ottoman Authority introduced the law of tabu to fix rights of ownership of the land. Land owners were instructed to have their property inscribed in the land register. The tabu was resisted by the fellahin. They saw a threat to their community in registering their land for two main reasons: 1) the cultivated fields were classified as ardh ameriyeh (the land of the Emarit) and were taxed. Owners of registered fertile land were forced to pay tax on it; 2) data from the land register were used by the Turkish Army for the purpose of the draft. Owners of registered lands were often drafted to fight with the Turkish Army in Russia."

In 1918, after the British conquest of Palestine, the military administration closed the Land Register and prohibited all sale of land. The Register was reopened in 1920, but to prevent speculation and ensure a livelihood for the fellahin, an edict was issued forbidding the sale of more than 300 dunams of land or the sale of land valued at more than 3000 Palestine pounds without the approval of the High Commissioner.

From the 1880s to the 1930s, most Jewish land purchases were made in the coastal plain, the Jezreel Valley, the Jordan Valley and to a lesser extent the Galilee. This was due to a preference for land that was cheap and without tenants. There were two main reasons why these areas were sparsely populated. The first reason being when the Ottoman power in the rural areas began to diminish in the seventeenth century, many people moved to more centralized areas to secure protection against the Bedouin tribes. The second reason for the sparsely populated areas of the coastal plains was the soil type. The soil, covered in a layer of sand, made it impossible to grow the staple crop of Palestine, corn. As a result, this area remained uncultivated and underpopulated. "The sparse Arab population in the areas where the Jews usually bought their land enabled the Jews to carry out their purchase without engendering a massive displacement and eviction of Arab tenants".

In the 1930s, most of the land was bought from landowners. Of the land that the Jews bought, 52.6% were bought from non-Palestinian landowners, 24.6% from Palestinian landowners, 13.4% from government, churches, and foreign companies, and only 9.4% from fellaheen (farmers).

On 31 December 1944, out of 1,732.63 dunums of land owned in Palestine by large Jewish Corporations and private owners, about 44% was in possession of Jewish National Fund. The table below shows the land ownership of Palestine by large Jewish Corporations (in square kilometres) on 31 December 1945.

Land ownership of Palestine by large Jewish Corporations (in square kilometres) on 31 December 1945
Corporations Area
JNF 660.10
PICA 193.70
Palestine Land Development Co. Ltd. 9.70
Hemnuta Ltd 16.50
Africa Palestine Investment Co. Ltd. 9.90
Bayside Land Corporation Ltd. 8.50
Palestine Kupat Am. Bank Ltd. 8.40
Total 906.80
Data is from Survey of Palestine (Vol I, p245).

By the end of the mandate, more than half the Jewish-owned land was held by the two largest Jewish funds, the Jewish National Fund and the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association.

By the end of the British Mandate period in 1948, Jewish farmers had cultivated 425,450 dunams of land, while arab palestinian farmers had 5,484,700 dunams of land under cultivation.

Anti-Zionist demonstration at Damascus Gate, 8 March 1920

Peel Commission

In 1936 the British government appointed the Peel Commission to investigate the reasons for the civil unrest in Palestine. Lord Peel's findings on land purchase were as follows:

A summary of land legislation enacted during the Civil Administration shows the efforts made to fulfill the Mandatory obligation in this matter. The Commission point to serious difficulties in connection with the legislation proposed by the Palestine Government for the protection of small owners. The Palestine Order in Council and, if necessary, the Mandate should be amended to permit of legislation empowering the High Commissioner to prohibit the transfer of land in any stated area to Jews, so that the obligation to safeguard the right and position of the Arabs may be carried out. Until survey and settlement are complete, the Commission would welcome the prohibition of the sale of isolated and comparatively small plots of land to Jews.

Up till now the Arab cultivator has benefited on the whole both from the work of the British Administration and the presence of Jews in the country, but the greatest care must now be exercised to see that in the event of further sales of land by Arabs to Jews the rights of any Arab tenants or cultivators are preserved. Thus, alienation of land should only be allowed where it is possible to replace extensive by intensive cultivation. In the hill districts there can be no expectation of finding accommodation for any large increase in the rural population. At present, and for many years to come, the Mandatory Power should not attempt to facilitate the close settlement of the Jews in the hill districts generally.

The shortage of land is due less to purchase by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population. The Arab claims that the Jews have obtained too large a proportion of good land cannot be maintained. Much of the land now carrying orange groves was sand dunes or swamps and uncultivated when it was bought.

Legislation vesting surface water in the High Commissioner is essential. An increase in staff and equipment for exploratory investigations with a view to increasing irrigation is recommended.

— Report of the Palestine Royal Commission, July 1937

Economic impact

The fellahin who sold land in an attempt to turn "vegetable tracts into citrus groves became dependent on world markets and on the availability of maritime transportation. A decrease in the world market demand for citrus or a lack of means of transportation severely jeopardized the economic situation of these people".

Influence on population

Director of Development Lewis French established a register of landless Arabs in 1931. Out of 3,271 applicants, only 664 were admitted and the remainder rejected. Porath suggests that the number of displaced Arabs may have been considerably larger, since French's definition of "landless Arab" excluded those who had sold their own land, those who owned land elsewhere, those who had since obtained tenancy of other land even if they were unable to cultivate it due to poverty or debt, and displaced persons who were not cultivators but had occupations such as ploughman or laborer.

Structured programming

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...