Eitan case – Israel’s immigration policy against Israel

An appeal by the Israeli Immigration Policy Center against the return of illegal aliens released from the Saharonim detention facility back to south Tel Aviv – October 2013

Following the cancelation of the Anti-Infiltration Law (Amendment 3) in September 2013 and the decision by the High Court of Justice that all detainees held in the Saharonim facility be released within 90 days, the IIPC filed an urgent appeal with the High Court of Justice in October 2013, demanding to prohibit the released migrants from reaching south Tel Aviv. In addition, the Center demanded that the state establish open-air detention facilities near south Tel Aviv that would cater to every need of the migrants, and that the migrants be forbidden from working. This was the first and only time when an appeal in the name of the residents of South Tel Aviv was filed with the High Court of Justice demanding to place limitations on the phenomenon of illegal migration into Israel.

In the appeal, the suffering of the residents of South Tel Aviv was described and quotes were brought from Supreme Court justices who recognized their plight. For example, in File 7146/12, Najat Serge Adam against the Knesset, Justice Fogelman wrote:

“The cry of the residents of South Tel regarding what is happening in their neighborhoods was heard loudly and clearly. It is a cry coming from the heart and entering the heart. We should not take it lightly.”

In the appeal, data regarding criminality and depositions by residents who were hurt were also heard. The center mentioned the violations of the right to life, the right to own property, freedom of employment and freedom of occupation. In addition, the court was asked to force the state to implement government decisions regarding the establishment of open-air detention facilities.

Amendment to the Anti-Infiltration Law:

In order to meet the deadline decided upon by the High Court of Justice, the state began an expedited legislative process to add an amendment to the Anti-Infiltration Law. The new law that was drafted (Anti-Infiltration Law, amendment 4) determined that migrants who would enter Israel after the date on which the law is passed would be placed in custody in a closed detention facility for a period of one year, instead of three years as the previous law demanded. Migrants who are already in Israel, as well as newly-arrived migrants held in a closed facility beyond the maximal amount of time allowed by the court, would be sent to the open facility Holot and must register with wardens there three times per day.

When the fourth amendment to the Anti-Infiltration Law became law following a third reading in the Knesset on December 10 2013, the state began sending subpoenas to migrants who were already living in Israel for some time, calling them to report at the Holot facility. Following this, a massive exodus of illegal migrants began almost at once. In January 2014, 765 illegal migrants left Israel, and in the two months that followed, until the next ruling by the High Court of Justice was made public, more than 3,000 additional migrants left, most of them after receiving a subpoena to the open-air detention center without having spent even a single day there.

Appeal by the NGOS helping migrants against the law:

Five days after the law passed its third reading, NGOS helping the migrants filed an additional appeal, in order to cancel amendment 4 of the Anti-Infiltration Law. In a discussion held on December 25 2013 on our appeal (the Eitan case) after the law entered into force, the justices unanimously decided to merge discussion of our appeal with discussion of the appeal filed against the law. Following the decision, residents of South Tel Aviv who we represented, began protesting inside the courthouse.

The stream of migrants leaving the country continued at an unprecedented pace until the day on which the joint appeal was discussed, when a drastic decline was noted: Up to the day of the discussion on April 1, more than 1,500 illegal aliens were leaving the country every month, while after the discussion this number dropped to about 300.

The IIPC stood by the residents of South Tel Aviv in the additional discussion as well. In addition, the IIPC submitted an official response to the appeal by NGOs helping the migrants.

Canceling the law:

In spite of these efforts, on September 22 2014, High Court justices decided to cancel the clauses in the law forcing migrants to stay at Holot, as well as the clause obligating migrants who enter Israel after the date on which the law was passed to stay at a closed detention facility for a year. Chief Justice Asher Grunis, who held the minority opinion, rejected the appeal filed by the IIPC (the Eitan appeal) and ruled that the law as passed by the Knesset withstands the test of legality, making the appeal redundant. Despite this, the justices in the majority rejected our appeal and ruled that the law should be canceled and migrants should be released from the facility, without giving a reason for their decision or giving the residents of South Tel Aviv an alternative solution.

The Eitan appeal – prohibiting illegal aliens from returning to the neighborhoods: