GHLands: The Wall and Settlement Resistance Commission revealed that the Israeli authorities have issued three military orders authorizing the implementation of "security measures" aimed at removing vegetation cover and uprooting olive trees from lands belonging to the villages of Salem, Burin, and Madama in the Nablus Governorate. The orders affect an actual area estimated at approximately 68.7 dunums, including a strip of land extending 5,567 meters across the lands of Burin and Madama.
In a statement issued on Saturday, the Commission explained that an examination of the orders shows that two of them—Orders No. 79/26 and 80/26—target nearly the same location in the lands of Salem, while differing significantly in the timeframes allowed for implementation and for filing objections. The third order, No. 83/26, targets a long corridor of land between Burin and Madama.
The Commission emphasized that the primary concern surrounding these orders lies not only in the areas and trees they target, but also in the fact that they were issued after Israeli forces had already carried out the removal operations on the ground. This effectively transforms the orders from prior authorizations into procedural cover granted after the actions had already been completed.
It further noted that, although the orders formally grant landowners periods during which they may file objections, their issuance after the uprooting of the trees—and the provisions in some of them permitting implementation immediately upon signature or within only three hours—render the right to object largely meaningless. As a result, the objection process becomes merely a procedural formality incapable of preventing the damage or protecting property rights. In this way, the military orders are used to retroactively legitimize a reality imposed on the ground, rather than to ensure landowners have a genuine opportunity to object before their land and property are affected.
The Commission added that Military Orders No. 79/26, 80/26, and 83/26 reveal what it described as a highly concerning pattern in the use of military legislation. According to field information, the orders were issued only after Israeli forces had already begun removing the trees or had completed the operation, thereby transforming the orders from prior authorization for implementation into instruments that provide procedural cover for a reality imposed by force.
Although the orders include provisions allowing objections, the Commission stated that the immediate implementation authorized under Order No. 79, the objection period of no more than three hours under Order No. 83, and the explicit provision allowing objections even after the completion of the works effectively deprive this right of its preventive purpose. A right to object cannot be considered effective if it is granted only after the damage has already occurred, particularly when the matter involves the uprooting of trees and permanent alterations to the land that cannot be remedied simply by accepting a subsequent objection.
No comments:
Post a Comment