Livni: Migron Compromise Agreement is Immoral (INN) ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS) By Elad Benari 03/26/12)
INN} ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS
INN} ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS Articles-Index-Top
Opposition leader MK Tzipi Livni on Sunday justified the Supreme
Court’s decision to reject the compromise agreement reached with the
residents of Migron in Binyamin. Her reasoning for justifying the
decision is that it would be immoral to move the residents, just to
have them move again in the future.
Speaking at a Kadima party event, just two days before the primaries
for the party’s leadership, Livni said the court’s decision was a
binding one and added, “But beyond the Court´s position - the idea
that there is a hill nearby on which the settlers will be able to
exercise their ideology - is immoral. It is immoral to take these
people, uproot them and plant them on a nearby hill which might also
Livni added, “There is a government here which is not ready to accept
the desired decision to settle the residents in a place which will
not be evacuated. It insists on not deciding. Leadership must make
decisions - not run away from them and not wait for the court to
decide in its place.”
The Kadima chairwoman also said that the race for her party’s
leadership on Tuesday, in which she will face off against rival MK
Shaul Mofaz, is a battle for the future of the State of Israel.
“The battle for the party leadership is not an internal Kadima
matter, but a battle over what Israel will look like – whether the
current coalition will continue,” Livni was quoted by Army Radio as
The Supreme Court earlier on Sunday rejected a compromise deal
between the government and the residents of Migron and set a new
deadline for the eviction of the residents.
The three judges, Supreme Court President Asher Grunis and judges
Miriam Naor and Salim Jubran, gave the government until August 1 to
evict the residents.
Migron was built with government help on land whose ownership is
unclear, except for the fact that it is not state land. Peace Now
launched a lawsuit before the Supreme Court aimed at destroying the
community. Since only Magistrate´s Courts adjudicate land ownership
in Israel, the question of who owned the land was not decided in the
Supreme Court, although it seems that some of it was given by King
Hussein to Jordanians who never laid claim to it. Jordan was an
occupying power in Judea and Samaria from 1949-1967.
The compromise, worked out by MK Benny Begin (Likud) with much
difficulty, would have had the residents move to a small, nearby area
that is uncontested state land and have the present Migron houses
used by the government for other purposes. A compromise moving them
to a large, new suburb to be built near the existing community of
Adam on state land was worked out by the Judea and Samaria Council
two years ago, but the residents rejected it, still hoping to save
the existing community.
In both compromises, the residents were to remain in Migron until the
alternate houses were built. The compromise was agreed to by both
government and residents in order to avoid both the violence that
accompanied the destruction of the houses at Amona in 2006 and the
bitter split in the nation that occurred due to the expulsion from
the Katif Bloc in 2005.
The courts, however, made saving Migron in its present location an
impossibility and now have made the new compromise unachievable.
(IsraelNationalNews © 2012 03/26/12)
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY