Court Fence Ruling Upholds Rule of Law

In 1832, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the United States government could not force the Native American Cherokee tribe out of its Georgia homes and into reservations in Oklahoma. President Andrew Jackson, appalled by the court’s interference in a jurisdiction he considered exclusively his own, vowed that he would ignore the court’s decision with the words: "[Chief Justice] John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it."

The court could not. Jackson pushed ahead with his implementation of the Indian Removal Act, and the Cherokees were force-marched westward. Some 4,000 died along the way.

Jackson’s decision to ignore a Supreme Court ruling is considered a low-water mark in America’s history as a nation governed by the rule of law. But, fortunately, the Jackson precedent did not stand.

By the time the Supreme Court ordered President Richard Nixon to surrender those infamous Watergate tapes, there simply was no possibility that Nixon would respond with a Jacksonesque, "Come and get ’em. I dare you." Today, rulings of the Supreme Court are supreme, although it took many years for us to get to that point.

It has not taken Israel quite as long. Last week, Israel’s High Court of Justice ruled that the route of the security barrier would have to be altered, at significant cost to the state, to eliminate the negative impact the fence had on the lives of some 35,000 Palestinians living adjacent to it. The case was brought by a group of Palestinians, led by the village council of the town of Beit Sourik, just outside Jerusalem.

The unanimous decision stated, "The fence’s current path would separate landowners from tens of thousands of dunams [quarter acres] of land … and would generally burden the entire way of life in the petitioners’ villages."

Adding significance to the ruling is the fact that the court in no way ruled against the concept of the barrier, itself. On the contrary, it endorsed the barrier as a legitimate self-defense measure.

It even conceded that the alterations it was recommending could conceivably reduce security for some Israelis. But, the judges said, "This reduction must be endured for humanitarian considerations."

The judges wrote: "Our job was a difficult one. We are members of Israeli society. Although judges sometimes dwell in an ivory tower, this tower is located inside Jerusalem, which has suffered from unbridled terror. We are aware of the killing and destruction that the terror against the state and its citizens brings. We recognize the need to defend the state and its citizens against terrorism. We are aware that, in the short term, our ruling does not ease the struggle of the state against those who would attack it. This knowledge is difficult for us. But we are judges. When we sit on the bench, we ourselves stand trial…. We are convinced that there is no security without law. Upholding the law is a component of national security."

This decision not only does credit to Israel. It provides a beacon of guidance for all nations struggling to balance security needs and individual rights in the post-Sept. 11 era.

And so does the response of the rest of Israel’s government to the court’s decision. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz both responded that the court had spoken, and that was that. The route of the fence would be altered.

Sharon even addressed the humanitarian considerations that produced the ruling, touching on the justices concern about the olive groves that were being uprooted to make way for the fence.

Speaking to Cabinet ministers, he said, "I don’t know how many of you are farmers. It is very hard when one harms these groves. People invested hard work and sweat here. People invested all of their lives in these groves."

Then, referring to the possibility of legislation overturning the court’s decision, he said, "There will be no law to bypass the High Court of Justice. Forget about it."

So the route of the barrier will be changed. And, the likelihood is that there will be more cases brought to challenge any portion that unnecessarily interferes with the lives of Palestinians. That probably means that the barrier will move closer to the ’67 border, the Green Line.

That is probably good. The barrier that will best accomplish Israel’s security goals — while simultaneously guarding the rights of the Palestinians — is not one that meanders hither and yon through the West Bank, but one with the shortest (and most defensible) lines. A barrier that adheres fairly closely to the Green Line is also the route that defends Israel’s demography to the greatest extent.

The more it strays from the Green Line, the more Palestinians who are included against their will in the Jewish state. That is why the Palestinian leadership says that a Green Line wall is fine with them.

One Palestinian expressed the common sentiment when he said, "Let them build the wall on the Green Line. That is Israel, and any country can build anything it wants on its own territory. But keep it away from my parents’ olive trees."

But all that is commentary. The most significant aspect of the court’s ruling is the ruling itself, and the fact that it will be implemented. The precedent established, for Israel and for all democracies, is a gift to us all.

M.J. Rosenberg, director of policy analysis for the Israel Policy Forum, is a long-time Capitol Hill staffer and former editor of AIPAC’s Near East Report.

World Briefs

Anti-Arafat Complaint Filed in

A group of Israelis filed a complaint against Yasser Arafat in Belgium. The group, called the Terror Victims Association, said the complaint against Arafat and several Palestinian groups, including the Palestinian Authority and the PLO, cited attacks against Israelis dating back to 1974. The action came a day before a Brussels court was due to consider whether to go ahead with a lawsuit brought by Palestinian and Lebanese plaintiffs against Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Belgium has a 1993 law on “universal jurisdiction,” which enables Belgian courts to judge atrocities committed elsewhere, regardless of whether or not they involved Belgians. The court is expected to rule in January.

Man Denies Nuclear Trigger Charges

A 72-year-old man pleaded innocent Monday to charges that he exported potential nuclear triggers to Israel. Richard Henry Smyth faces a 30-count indictment involving the alleged export of about $60,000 worth of triggering devices that can be used in nuclear weapons. Smyth is being held without bail. His trial in a federal court in California is set for Jan. 15. Smyth had been awaiting trial on the charges in 1985 when he fled the United States for Spain. He was extradited from Spain earlier this month.

Lawmaker Decries U.N. Meeting

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) asked Secretary of State Colin Powell to speak out against a U.N. meeting. Waxman said Monday he believes the Dec. 5 meeting in Geneva, where the United Nations will discuss alleged Israeli violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention for its treatment of Palestinians, “will inevitably become a new platform for Arab nations to resurrect the viciously anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist declarations” made at previous U.N. forums. Waxman said he hopes Powell will express to Arab leaders that the meeting could pose a serious threat to the Middle East peace process.

Palestinian Faces Deportation

A Palestinian who faces deportation from the United States allegedly has ties to groups linked to Hamas and Islamic Jihad. The Justice Department rearrested Mazen al-Najjar over the weekend after a U.S. appeals court ruled that it could deport him for overstaying a student visa in the early 1980s. Najjar, who was previously held for three-and-a-half years on secret evidence, was involved in the World and Islam Studies Enterprise and the Islamic Concern Project. The U.S. government says these groups raise money for Islamic Jihad and Hamas, but Najjar’s lawyers say the groups send money to orphans in Palestinian-ruled areas. Born in the Gaza Strip, Najjar previously taught at a Florida university.

ZOA Names New Director

Milton Sussman was named executive director of the Zionist Organization of America. Formerly the executive director of the Israel Cancer Research Fund, Sussman has also worked for the Anti-Defamation League and B’nai B’rith. He replaces Janice Sokolovsky, who is returning to Israel after a two-year stint in the position.

Controversial Germ an Exhibit

Right-wing protests are expected to greet the reopening of an exhibit in Germany. The exhibit, which details how ordinary German soldiers committed Nazi war crimes, caused an uproar when it was first launched in 1994 because it countered a widely held belief that the army, unlike Hitler’s SS, was not involved in Nazi atrocities. The display closed in 1999 after historians said some photographs showed Soviet security police, not the German army, involved in mass killings. The new exhibit, slated to open Wednesday in Berlin, has less of an emphasis on photography and more on textual sources to make the same point about the Wehrmacht, the wartime German army.

Israel nabs 9 suspected terrorists

Israeli forces arrested nine members of Islamic Jihad in
Hebron. The arrests were made when the forces entered Palestinian-controlled
areas of the West Bank city, according to the Jerusalem Post, which cited
Palestinian sources. The arrested men were suspected of planning and carrying out terror attacks in Jerusalem.

Jewish home in Jerusalem razed

Jerusalem officials razed a Jewish-built house they said was constructed illegally. It was the sixth such structure in a Jewish neighborhood of the city to be bulldozed during the past year. In the same period, the municipality razed 30 mostly empty Arab-built structures in eastern Jerusalem, according to the Jerusalem Post. Thedemolition of Arab structures generally is condemned around the world.

Save That Toilet Water

An Israeli legislator proposed a bill to flush less water. Nahum Lagenthal proposed the bill, which requires toilet manufacturers to reduce the amount of water used to flush toilets. Cutting the necessary flush water by some 20 percent would help Israel’s worsening drought, suggested Lagenthal, a member of the National Religious Party.

All briefs by Jewish Telegraphic Agency.