The Sasson Report about Illegal outposts
March, 2005

Summary of the Opinion Concerning Unauthorized Outposts

At the request of the Prime Minister bureau, I have prepared a summary of the opinion. The summary does not include the entire opinion, which naturally deals with many more subjects, with further details.

The second chapter of the opinion is a brief of the findings, conclusions and recommendations. This summary is based upon this brief. However, considering that this summary is presented a part from the opinion, a few remarks must be added.

Opening Remarks

A. The Commission

The commission issued by the Prime Minister is enclosed.

B. A Procedural Remark:

These are the main subjects the opinion deals with:

The opinion first explores the background for the growth of the unauthorized outposts phenomenon. Then it analyzes the legal background for establishing a legal settlement in the area of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, according to the local law (lex locus). In this context, a brief view of the laws governing Israel in its actions in the areas is presented. Following are the requirements for establishing a legal settlement. This includes the political, land, municipal (bounds of jurisdiction) and planning aspects.

In light of this legal background, a review of the unauthorized outposts is presented. This includes: the definition of an unauthorized outpost; numerical figures as far as I know them, including evacuation figures up to date; categorization of the outposts; the major ways of their establishment, as far as I know them.

A main chapter in the opinion deals with the involvement of state authorities and public authorities in the establishment of unauthorized outposts.

This framework reviews the involvement of the Settlement Division in their establishing and financing, as far as I know it;

It reviews the involvement of the Ministry of Construction & Housing – in financing infrastructure and public buildings for the outposts, financing the planning of unauthorized outposts, and the purchase of caravans affair in 2003.

It reviews the involvement of the Ministry of Defense in the matter of the unauthorized outposts, meaning the involvement of both the Civil Administration and the Assistant to Defense Minister – Settlement Affairs.

Following the factual findings is the chapter dealing with law enforcement in the territories. There I stressed the reasons for the failure of law enforcement, and recommended a legislative reform, concerning the law governing the territories, with an emphasis on actions concerning the establishment of unauthorized outposts.

As for recommendations:

Each chapter in the opinion includes recommendations concerning the findings presented in it. In addition, the opinion concludes with a general chapter of recommendations, some of which already mentioned. I enclose here the full recommendations chapter, although some of the recommendations already appear within this summary.

I further enclose to this summary the concluding chapter of the opinion, as presented at the end of the recommendations chapter.

C. The Authorities Reviewed in the Opinion, and the Authorities Not Reviewed

It should be emphasized what is not to be found in the opinion, and why I chose the authorities I dealt with:

An initial inquiry already lead me to the conclusion that the main relevant authorities involved in the matter of unauthorized outposts are the Ministry of Defense and the IDF, including the Civil Administration; the Ministry of Construction & Housing; the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization; the Ministry of Interior Affairs.

Hence this opinion focuses on the information I gathered mostly in these offices.

Nevertheless, other bodies are involved in establishing the unauthorized outposts, including the aerial councils in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and other governmental ministries. Due to the shortage of time allotted to me (which I even exceeded), my limited means, the many bodies involved, and the limited accessibility to information – I have not succeeded in the given time to examine all that requires examination. Therefore I have submitted an interim report.

D. Difficulties in Accessibility to Information Regarding the Establishment of the Unauthorized Outposts:

The relevant information regarding the unauthorized outposts is not to be found in a single office. On the contrary. Every office that supplied information to me holds partial information regarding the outposts. There is no office or body which gathers all of the relevant information concerning the matter of outposts, nor coordinates government activity regarding them.

Part of the information is accessible, but a major part of it is concealed. Even after inquiring and exploring, I cannot say that I have reached all the necessary information. This is sometimes due to bureaucratic complexity, the scope of the information, the number of authorities and offices involved in the matter, and the time passed. But in more than a number of occasions I was under the impression that the office or official in charge of the relevant information was not open to deliver it. I received parts of such information from other sources. The result is I could not reach all the required information.

Furthermore, some of the people I approached refused to converse with me. Some claimed to be too busy, some met with me but refused to give answers to the point to most of my questions.

As for Material Received from the Relevant Ministries:

Compared to the material I have asked for, the material handed to me by some of these ministries was partial. It was only by the end of January 2005 that the Ministry of Construction & Housing responded to my request for data concerning investments by the Ministry in unauthorized outposts over the last four years. This was only after correspondence starting September 2004, oral and written requests, reminders, an appeal to Minister Ms. Livni, her personal interference and demand to release the material – all of which was in vain (soon afterwards Ms. Livni left office to serve in the Ministry of Justice). Only after Mr. Herzog became Minister of Construction & Housing I received a response to my request, which I am not yet satisfied with, and which needs to be thoroughly examined (see detailed reference in section 8.3.1.1-d).

I might add, that in response to my last letter to the Ministry of Housing, in which I stressed that at least some of the data given to me was incorrect, the Ministry of Construction & Housing informed me, just less than a week ago, that it admits now the falseness of some of the data, and asked for further time to check it out. Needless to say, the false data is amounts, which are lower than the amounts actually allotted to unauthorized outposts.

Although requested, the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization has not yet delivered data concerning the amounts it invested in unauthorized outposts, which it took part in establishing. The Infrastructure Dept. of the Civil Administration has not yet delivered full data concerning unauthorized outposts, claiming this takes more time and requires much work.

E. Accuracy of Information Regarding Unauthorized Outposts

The data I hold was received from the Infrastructure Dept. of the Civil Administration. Possible errors may exist in this data, but I have no other source for certified information regarding the unauthorized outposts, including aerial photographs, valid and invalid programs, land privileges, etc.

F. Examination of the Outposts According Local Law

The opinion examines the legality of the unauthorized outposts only in the aspect of local law (lex locus), and not other possible aspects of international law.

G. Examination of Unauthorized Outposts and Not of Other Settlements

The opinion examines the unauthorized outposts, and not other settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, nor unauthorized neighborhoods in existing settlements.

H. Collecting the Information

The opinion followed research. Interviews were made with some 100 officials in different offices. The interviews were documented. In addition, numerous meetings were held in different ministries, in which I took part, and many documents were gathered.

I received great assistance from Brigadier General (Res.) Baruch Shpigel, Assistant to the Defense Minister, who supplied me with material regarding the unauthorized outposts, always with good spirit and full cooperation. Further assistance was given by the staff of the Legal Advisor to Judea and Samaria, the International Law Branch of the IDF, the State Attorney, the General Attorney and the Ministry of Justice.

A summary of the opinion, the findings, the conclusions and the recommendations follows.

The Background for the Establishment of the Unauthorized Outposts

The expansion of the unauthorized outposts phenomenon began in the mid nineties, after the building in Judea, Samaria and Gaza was frozen by the Rabin Administration in 1993. Building in settlements was still approved, but the approval rate went decreasing as the negotiations with the Palestinian representatives accelerated.

The unauthorized outposts phenomenon began expanding, in light of the government’s position opposing the authorizing of the building of settlements in the territories.

In fact, the unauthorized outposts phenomenon is a continuation of the settlement enterprise in the territories. But while in the distant past the Israeli governments officially acknowledged and encouraged the settlement enterprise, in some of the years, a major change took place in the beginning of the nineties. The Israeli governments were no longer officially involved in the establishment of settlements, apparently due to Israel’s international situation, and the negative position of most nations towards the settlement enterprise. That was not the case for public authorities and other Israeli government bodies, who took, along with others, a major role in establishing the unauthorized outposts. Some of which were inspired by the political echelon, sometimes by overlooking, sometimes by actual encouragement and support, but never as a result of an authorized resolution by the qualified political echelon of the State.

The Necessary Conditions for Establishing a Settlement in the Judea, Samaria and Gaza Territories

The local law requires the fulfillment of a number of basic conditions before establishing a settlement in the Judea, Samaria and Gaza territories.

First, the decision to establish a settlement must be made by the authoritative political echelon. Government resolutions have always declared that the establishment of a new settlement, either inside Israel or in the territories, requires a government resolution. Such an establishment requires various considerations – economic, social, geographical, political, public and others.

The establishment of an Israeli settlement in the Judea, Samaria and Gaza territories requires additional considerations, including international and national policy and security considerations. The authoritative political echelon is the only one qualified to consider such considerations, and the only one who bares responsibility for such a decision.

The Second Condition concerns the interests (title) in the land to be settled.. After the High Court of Justice ruling in the case of Elon More, a 1979 Israeli government resolution states that Israeli settlements shall be established only on State land.

The Third Condition is that a settlement shall be established only according to a lawful designed building scheme. This means that a settlement in the Judea, Samaria and Gaza territories may be established only according to a detailed scheme, which has the power to produce a building permit. It must be clarified that according to the law in force in the territories, the approval of the political echelon is needed not only for establishing a settlement, but also in some of the steps in the plan approval. Meaning – as long as there is no approval for the plan for the settlement, or a part thereof – there is no political echelon approval for its establishment.

The Fourth Condition is that the bounds of jurisdiction of such a settlement was determined in an order by the Commander of the area. The Commander of the area may determine the bounds of jurisdiction only after receiving the approval of the political echelon.

These four conditions are accumulative. The lack of fulfillment of one of them makes the settlement illegitimate.

Unauthorized Outposts

An unauthorized outpost is a settlement which does not fulfill at least one of the abovementioned conditions. And I must emphasize: an unauthorized outpost is not a “semi legal” outpost. Unauthorized is illegal. I mean that if the outpost were authorized, according to the conditions mentioned above, it was legal. Missing an authorization of the kinds mentioned above makes it illegal.

After studying all Government resolutions, Minister Security Committee meetings, Settlement Minister Committee meetings, whether named as so, or operating as sub-committees for settlements of Minister Security Committee – I have not found a single government or committee resolution, since the beginning of the nineties, to establish a new settlement in the territories, or to expand a neighborhood of an existing settlement.

Since many outposts were established in the Judea, Samaria and Gaza territories, it seems that it was not the result of government decision.

The Characteristics of an Unauthorized Outpost:

A. There was no government decision to establish it, and in any case no authorized political echelon approved its establishment.

B. The outpost was established with no legal planning status. Meaning, with no valid detailed plan governing the area it was established upon, which can support a building permit.

C. An unauthorized outpost is not attached to an existing settlement, but rather at least a few hundred meters distant from it as the crow flies.

D. The outpost was established in the nineties, mostly from the mid nineties and on.

The Number of the Unauthorized Outposts and Other Data Regarding them

I failed in finding out how many unauthorized outposts exist in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, since the source for the data is the Infrastructure Dept. of the Civil Administration, which has not delivered all the necessary information. I was informed that gathering the information requires much work and takes time.

The information I have so far shows that there are 105 unauthorized outposts (that I know of today). But this probably does not reflect the true number of outposts in the area. (As for the gap between this figure and data presented by the Ministry of Defense in the past – see sec. 5.4 of the opinion.)

Out of the number I know of: 26 outposts are located on State land; 7 are located on survey lands; 15 are located on Palestinian private property; 39 are located on “mixed” lands – part State, part survey, part owned by Palestinians.

In addition, a few outposts are located on lands which I failed yet to resolve its nature.

The Implication of Establishing an Unauthorized Outpost Not on State Land

After the High Court of Justice ruling in the case of Elon More, a 1979 Israeli government resolution states that Israeli settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza shall be established only on State land. Hence, no settlement is to be established on other than State land (the definition for State land appears in the first chapter of the opinion). No Israeli settlement is to be established on survey land (to which the title is unclear). Surely no Israeli settlement is to be established on private Palestinian property.

It is absolutely prohibited to establish outposts on private Palestinian property. Such an action may in certain circumstances become a felony.

But first and foremost this is a serious prejudice of the right of possession. This right is a basic right in Israel – included in Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom, and was defined by the Israeli Supreme Court as a constitutional right. Israel High Court of Justice ruled that the Commander of the area must protect the fundamental rights of the Palestinians in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. This means he must also protect their right of possession. It is the Commander’s duty to prevent the intolerable prejudice of Palestinians’ right of possession, which an establishment of outposts on their property causes.

There is no way to validate the establishment of an outpost on private Palestinian property, not even post factum. Such outposts must be evacuated, the sooner the better.

List of the Outposts by Date of Establishment

The list of the outposts may be divided into two lists: those established before March 2001, and those established afterwards, and were not evacuated, or were evacuated but returned. This division is based on political reasons, but has no legal implication. Accordingly, 71 outposts were established prior to March 2001, and 24 outposts were established afterwards. As for 10 more outposts – I have yet to find out when they were established. As mentioned above, this is probably not the full list of outposts in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (in lack of data).

Information Concerning Evacuation of Outposts

This information, concerning the evacuation of outposts established only after March 2001 was, delivered to me by the Ministry of Defense:

81 outposts were evacuated so far, only a few of them were manned. Some of them were re-occupied by the settlers, sometimes returning nearby the outpost. Some were evacuated again. Some were occupied again and not yet evacuated.

13 delimitation orders were issued so far, deriving from the Order Concerning Unauthorized Outposts (the main legal tool for evacuating outposts). Appeals were submitted against the delimitation orders. 12 appeals were granted. One is yet to be answered by the Ministry of Defense. Some of these outposts were evacuated (either willingly of by the IDF). A total of 7 outposts, 2 of which returned.

The legal proceedings before the High Court of Justice concerning 4 outposts have ended, and the petitions were denied. These outposts, plus two more that have returned, can be evacuated immediately. A total of 6 outposts can be evacuated effective today.

Requests for license according to a mandatory plan were submitted for a number of outposts. Most of them were denied. Delimitation orders may be issued against them, unless appeals are submitted. As for other outposts, delimitation orders may be issued (see details in sec. 5.5.1).

Neighborhoods Which are Not Outposts

It needs to be clarified that I have defined an outpost as a settlement not attached to an existing settlement. Civil Administration information shows that new neighborhoods attached to existing settlements were established and expanded. From the legal aspect this situation is sometimes similar to the establishment of unauthorized outposts.

I have not examined such unauthorized neighborhoods, in accordance with my jurisdiction.

The Momentum of Thickening Outposts Still Goes On

I am not aware of new outposts established over the last months. But I know of unauthorized building taking place in existing outposts. The building momentum includes conveying caravans to the outposts (64 caravans were conveyed to unauthorized outposts between August and December 2004). But it also features other ways, such as making new infrastructure for future connection of caravans; land preparation, stiff construction in some outposts including permanent buildings (for example, 23 structures, 160 square meters each, were placed in the Bruchin outpost on 28 September, 2004); 9 habitats were built in the Ahuzat Shalhevet outpost near Yitzhar on October 2004; primary structures of 60 square meters were placed in Migron and in other outposts. Sheds and agriculture structures were built, lands were over taken, roads were paved. This is day to day activity. Illegal sites and new invasions report between 8 August 2004 and 5 December 2004 enclosed (annexes 1 & 2 of booklet C). I must add that the expansion continues to take place in outposts which delimitation orders were issued against them, even after approved by the High Court of Justice. For instance, 3 caravans were placed in Giv’at Haro’eh on January 2005, and preparations are made for two more caravans; iron elements are starting to be placed in Giv’at Hadegel, a playground was built on December 2005 and two caravans were coated with stone; 5 caravans were placed outside the delimited area in Mitspe Asaf; two caravans and two containers were placed in Mitspe Yitzhar.. All delimited outposts, which the High Court of Justice allowed their evacuation, and were still thickened are listed in the report enclosed (see the abovementioned annexes 1 & 2).

The Ways the Outposts were Established

The outposts are mostly established by bypassing procedure and violating the law, displaying false pretense towards some of the State authorities, and enjoying the cooperation of other authorities in harsh violation of the law.

One way to establish an outpost is first to falsely ask for an antenna to be placed up on a hill. Afterwards comes a request to supply electricity – only for the antenna. Then a cabin is placed, for the guard, and the cabin is also connected to the electricity. Then a road is paved to the place, and infrastructure for caravans is prepared. Then, one day a number of caravans arrive at the place – and an outpost is established.

Another way is falsely requesting to built an agricultural farm (either an acclimatization or a biosphere farm). The farm is supposedly built for agricultural needs. After a while, caravans arrive to the place and an outpost is established.

Another way is founding an educational institution. “Staff” families settle in the place and an outpost is established.

Another way is establishing outposts by “expansions” and “neighborhoods” in disguise, within an existing outpost. The new outpost is named as the old one, as though it were just a neighborhood, even when it is sometimes kilometers away as the crow flies; on the ground the distance is much greater). (In some cases this explains the variety of names given to a single outpost, for example Esh Kodesh N.G. 827 – Migdalim Southl; Nof Harim – Aley T., etc.) This enables financing the new outpost by the different authorities: the money supposedly goes to the old settlement, as known to the authorities. In fact, it goes to the new outpost.

After a while, when the outpost stands still, it is no longer convenient for its inhabitants to be considered just as a neighborhood of an existing settlement. They wish for direct connection to different sources; they are interested in an independent emblem given by the Ministry of Interior Affairs (which allows budget from the Ministry of Interior Affairs as a local authority). Therefore the Assistant to Defense Minister – Settlement Affairs requested the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization to acknowledge some of the outposts as independent settlements, eligible for an emblem and a budget. The former Director General of the Prime Minister Office (Mr. Lieberman) has also requested such acknowledgement regarding some of these outposts (these letters are included in annexes booklet C, enclosed to the opinion).

Involvement of Government Authorities in Establishing Outposts

A substantial number of outposts were built with the involvement of public authorities and State bodies, but with no authoritative decision by the Government of Israel.

These are the State authorities I succeeded to examine:

The Ministry of Construction & Housing;

The Ministry of Defense and the IDF: the Civil Administration, and several aspects of the Assistant to Defense Minister – Settlement Affairs;

In addition: the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization, which is a public authority.

These authorities have legitimate powers regarding the Israeli settlement in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, but they apparently use their powers unlawfully in connection with unauthorized outposts, as to be described.

As I have already mentioned, other authorities and government ministries are involved in establishing unauthorized outposts. I also know that the regional councils in Judea, Samaria and Gaza take a major part in this activity. But due to the short time I was given and the scope of the research needed, I could not examine them as well.

Authorities and Their Relevant Roles

The World Zionist Organization – The Settlement Division

The role of the World Zionist Organization is to settle. It receives lands from the official in the Civil Administration (the Commissioner of Government and Deserted Property), for the purpose of planning or planning and development. It is supposed to allot the lands for building settlements, after receiving the approval of the qualified political echelon – to establish a new settlement or to expand an existing one. It is supposed to take care of planning for the land, establishing the primary camp and creating means for production.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing

Involved in establishing settlements or expanding existing ones in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, through the Rural Building Administration of the Ministry of Construction & Housing. Finances the establishment of infrastructure and public buildings in Judea, Samaria and Gaza settlements. Plans new settlements and employs independent architects for planning and expanding settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Owns caravans for residence, which it transfers to others, especially to Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

The Civil Administration

Responsible for locating lands for new Israeli settlements, and examining rights and privileges concerning them; registering titles to land. Responsible for allotting land to settling bodies, including the Settlement Division. Responsible for the planning and building registration process. Responsible for receiving the political echelon’s approval for planning. Responsible for supervising illegal construction in the territories. Responsible for permitting connections of buildings to water or electricity. Responsible for permitting caravan conveyance in the territories, subject to the approval of the Ministry of Defence.

The Ministry of Defense

Responsible for granting various permits, including: permit for initiating land survey; license for land planning prior to its allotment by the Commissioner to a settling body; permit to convey a caravan to the territories; approval of the political echelon (the Minister of Defense) for different stages of a plan.

Regarding law enforcement in the territories – the Ministry of Defense grants the political approval for security legislation in the area, including legislation concerning the establishment of unauthorized outposts and unlawful confiscation of lands. Approves the carrying out of destruction orders issued as a result of illegal construction. Issues delimiting orders in order to evacuate outposts. Instructs the IDF directly to evacuate unauthorized outposts.

I shall specify my findings regarding each of these authorities. Following the findings, I shall describe my main recommendations for each authority. It should be noted that the recommendations chapter includes additional and more general recommendations.

Types of Recommendations According to My Commission

A. Organizational recommendations

B. Amendments to government resolutions and new resolutions to be taken

C. Instructions to authorities in connection with all matters of establishing unauthorized outposts

D. New legislation

E. Reform in security legislation in the territories

F. Recommendations for the Attorney General

The Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization

The Settlement Division is a part of the World Zionist Organization, which is a settling body, according to a government resolution. The Division’s role is to assist the government in establishing Israeli settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Its full budget comes from State treasury.

The Settlement Division took major part in establishing Israeli settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. According the findings in the repost, it built mostly many unauthorized outposts, without the approval of the qualified political echelon.

This reality shows that there is no more a political mechanism for establishing new settlements in the territories. The decision to establish settlements has “dropped one scale”, and became a decision made by officials who were not authorized to do so. It is no longer the decision of the elected echelon, who is accountable towards their voters.

The “engine” behind a decision to establish outposts are probably regional councils in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, settlers and activists, imbued with ideology and motivation to increase Israeli settlement in the Judea, Samaria and Gaza territories. Some of the officials working in the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organization, and in the Ministry of Construction & Housing, cooperated with them to promote the unauthorized outposts phenomenon. After the mid nineties, these actions were apparently inspired by different Ministers of Housing, either by overlooking or by actual encouragement and support, with additional support from other Ministries, initiated either by officials or by the political echelon of each Ministry.

The Settlement Division is supposed to be an executive echelon, implementing decisions made by the political echelon. In this case it was the other way around, and the executive echelon became partners with the political one, contrary to its role.

The lands were allotted to the Division by the Commissioner of Government and Deserted Property of the Civil Administration, on the assumption that the Division act with good faith and according to allotment regulations. Apparently, the Division violated the agreement with the Commissioner in more than one aspects: it allotted lands a secondary allotment without the Commissioner’s approval; it sometimes allotted lands which it received for planning purposes only. The Commissioner wasn’t even informed of the allotment. It failed to regulate the settlers’ status in the land against the Commissioner.

The Settlement Division established unauthorized outposts, disregarding the need for a valid detailed plan, and this not by accident, but rather as a system. This is a violation of the Jordanian Planning and Construction Law in force in the territories. The Division never even attempted to authorize a plan before starting building.

Some of the settlements established by the Division exceed the area allotted, and are partly located not on State land (part of the settlement is located within the area, and another part is outside of it, sometimes on survey land, sometimes on private property).

Response of the Settlement Division

A. No political approval is required for the establishment of outposts.

B. If it is indeed required, thus it was granted.

C. The outposts were established without a valid detailed plan, since this is the way settlements are established regularly by the Division inside Israel.

This response does not settle with my findings. An establishment of an outpost requires the approval of the political echelon, according both government resolutions and the law in force in the territories. The claim that the political approval for establishing outposts was granted is false.

The attempt to justify the Division’s actions, in contrary to the Planning and Construction Law, by claiming it to be its standard procedure inside Israel – is unacceptable. Actions violating the law cannot be justified. Surely continuous violation in one place cannot justify continuous violation in another.

It is my conclusion that a fundamental change in the operation of the Settlement Division must take place.

My Main Recommendations for the Settlement Division

A government resolution must be made as follows:

To cancel all land allotments made to the Settlement Division, if and to the extent they were not yet allotted to others, and to return them to the Commissioner; to cancel all land allotments made to the Settlement Division, which it further allotted to others in contrary to its license; to cancel all allotments made by the Division to others, and were not yet used, and to return them to the Commissioner; to cancel all allotments upon which unauthorized outposts were established, and to return them to the Commissioner; to cease all activity of the Settlement Division in establishing settlements, unless the Government authorizes ad-hoc the Division as a settling body for the purpose of establishing or expanding a specific settlement in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, that the Government has decided to establish or expand; the Ministry of Finance shall modify the Settlement Division budget in light of the necessary changes resulting this resolution.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing

The Ministry of Construction & Housing is involved with establishing unauthorized outposts.

The main (but not the only) branch of this Ministry involved with unauthorized outposts is the Rural Building Administration. This administration is engaged for years in establishing new settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza and in expanding old ones. The Rural Building Administration executed the policy of Housing Ministers and Director Generals of this Ministry in the relevant years in which the outposts phenomenon flourished, meaning the mid nineties and on.

It seems that at least between 2000 and 2004, a substantial part of the Rural Building Administration budget was dedicated to building in the territories, including unauthorized outposts.

These are the activities of the Ministry of Construction & Housing in establishing unauthorized outposts known to me:

Financial Aid for Infrastructure and Public Buildings in Unauthorized Outposts

The Ministry of Construction & Housing assisted regional councils in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, by financing foundations and infrastructure (such as land preparation, development, road break through and paving, connecting water, electricity and other facilities, preparing infrastructure for caravans, etc.), and establishing public buildings in unauthorized outposts. The aid was disguised as building new neighborhoods within existing settlements, in order to bypass the absence of a Government resolution to establish outposts. The Ministry of Construction & Housing was aware of the absence of a qualified political echelon approval for establishing the outposts.

The aid by the Ministry of Construction & Housing was indirect – through the regional councils. The Ministry of Construction & Housing did not engage directly with contractors. The regional councils did so, and the Ministry of Construction & Housing financed it. It seems that this way was chosen in order to conceal the fact that the Ministry of Construction & Housing is financing building in unauthorized outposts.

In 2001 the Ministry of Construction & Housing created a special budgetary clause, named “general development misc.”, and used it for financing unauthorized outposts. In 2001 the amount in this section was 17 million shekels. In 2002 it was 34 million shekels. No criteria were set for the usage of this money. There is no public transparency concerning the goals and the exploitation of this budget.

According to the information the Ministry of Construction & Housing supplied (referring to a partial list it was given), between 2000 and 2004 the Ministry has spent an amount of NIS 71,870,000 on unauthorized outposts.

This is figure stated by the Ministry of Construction & Housing – the Rural Building Administration. It does not settle with information appearing in the Ministry’s working schemes for these years. In light of these working schemes it allegedly seems that the Ministry financed unauthorized outposts in much greater sums. Questions directed towards the Ministry of Housing were not yet answered to the point (see details in sections 8.3.1.1). The Ministry of Construction & Housing has informed me, only a few days before submitting the opinion to the Prime Minister, that after examining my last address it found the information earlier given to me to be partially wrong. They claim to be further examining the matter these days.

Be that as it may, it seems that the actual sum considerably exceeds the one mentioned above. I might add that the abovementioned sums are nominal.

The sum also does not include money the Ministry of Construction & Housing paid for infrastructure, public buildings and planning in unauthorized neighborhoods in Judea, Samaria and Gaza.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing was well aware of the fact that the construction work it financed was done without legal planning status. In other words, it was done in violation of the Planning and Construction Law.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing financed the establishment of unauthorized outposts, but never examined the interests (title) in the lands upon which the outposts were built. Some of the outposts built with the Ministry’s aid were located on private Palestinian property and on survey land. The Housing Ministry claims it was not aware of this fact. There is no dispute it never bothered to check it out.

Planning Unauthorized Outposts, Some of which on Private Palestinian Property

Architects of the Housing Ministry, as well as free lance architects, were employed in planning unauthorized outposts, after their establishment. The Ministry was aware of the absence of a government resolution or a qualified political echelon decision to establish them. Part of the unauthorized outposts planned were built on private Palestinian property.

Acquisition of Caravans and Placing Them in Unauthorized Outposts in 2003

The acquisition of caravans by the Ministry of Construction & Housing in 2003 is a bold example of bad government, and it is also connected with unauthorized outposts.

In 2003 the Ministry of Construction & Housing has decided to finance the acquisition of caravans by the regional councils in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. The budget needed for this purchase: NIS 33,749,180.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing tried to exempt this sum from tender, so that the money could go to the regional councils for purchasing the caravans. The Ministry of Finance objected granting an exemption. The subject was brought to the Attorney General. His deputy determined that the Ministry of Construction & Housing must set criteria, as a pre-condition for supporting the regional council. But the Ministry of Construction & Housing did not wish to set such criteria, so it chose a bypass, to avoid confronting the legal barrier.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing has decided to purchase the caravans itself, to divide them only between the regional councils in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, with no explanation, with no criteria, and with nothing in return.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing published a frame tender for purchasing caravans. Two companies won the tender. The Ministry ordered 400 caravans from one company, and 120 from the other. I found that some of the caravans were ordered and produced much earlier – for the regional councils in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. These caravans were already placed in the area at the time the tender for their production was published. At the time a total of 140 caravans were placed in the territories, 90 of which in unauthorized outposts.

Apparently, the same company that won the Ministry of Construction & Housing’s tender, and was requested to produce 400 caravans, was the one who produced the caravans for the regional councils, for which the Ministry of Construction & Housing paid.

The Ministry of Construction & Housing delivered all of the 400 caravans to Judea, Samaria and Gaza without any agreement to receive any consideration in exchange – either from the regional councils or from whoever received the caravans. A year and a half has passed by, and the Ministry of Construction & Housing has received nothing in return for the caravans.

Main Recommendations Regarding The Ministry of Construction & Housing

1. A government resolution shall be made, as follows:

a. Regarding planning, budgeting and establishing unauthorized outposts and/or unauthorized constructions

The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall not plan a settlement, a neighborhood or any building in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, before running a thorough examination concerning the interests in the lands designated for planning. The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall not plan the establishment of a settlement or a neighborhood without a decision of the political echelon. The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall not plan post factum an unauthorized outpost. The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall not plan, budget or build in lands that are not State lands. For the avoidance of doubt, the Ministry of Construction & Housing shall never take any action mentioned above in survey lands or in private Palestinian property. The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall establish a data base with all the information concerning titles to land in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. This data base shall be accessible to all of the Ministry’s departments, including the Rural Building Administration. The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall not finance nor built in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, either directly or through others, without first getting a building permit.

b. Regarding the purchase of caravans

Any purchase of caravans designated for the territories is equal to an approval for building houses in the territories. Therefore, any future purchase, by the Ministry of Construction & Housing or by any other Ministry, of caravans designated to the Judea, Samaria and Gaza territories, is subject to the approval of both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense, prior to the publication of a tender for their production or acquisition.

2. Administrative recommendations regarding the issue of caravans

A number of recommendations were given concerning the acquisition of caravans, including criteria for future purchase. The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall demand the caravans back from the regional councils. The Ministry of Construction & Housing shall demand restoration for their usage until their actual return to the Housing Ministry.

3. A recommendation to forward material in the report to the Attorney General

I have recommended to forward the report’s findings in this chapter to the Attorney General, in order to consider whether to take legal action against State officials and others, who with regards to establishing unauthorized outposts knowingly acted while violating the law.

I further recommended to forward to the Attorney General all material in this report concerning publishing the tender for the manufacture of caravans, the winning thereof, their conveyance to unauthorized outposts, and all other matters concerning the caravan affair – in order to consider whether to take legal action against Ministry officials and others involved.

The Civil Administration in Judea, Samaria and Gaza

I have examined various aspects of its authorities and activities concerning the establishment of unauthorized outposts.

Main Findings

Locating Lands and Inquiring into Interests in Lands Designated for Israeli Settlements

I found that some of the lands allotted by the Civil Administration to the Settlement Division were survey lands, and some were private Palestinian property. Apparently this was a result of errors in marking State lands on maps. This is one of the reasons that some of the unauthorized outposts were established not on State lands.

I recommend that no lands shall further be allotted until a serious reexamination is made concerning interests in the land allotted, so that only State lands are allotted, according to the 1979 Government resolution. A systematic examination of titles to lands shall be made concerning old allotments. Planning committees shall be instructed not to approve any plan until the interests in the lands are reexamined, and the plan undoubtedly applies only State