A victory against the wall: Mel Frykberg reports from the Occupied Territories on the September announcement by the Israeli court that after a long, tough battle, it agreed that a small section of the apartheid Wall must be rerouted away from Palestinian-owned land.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

AN ATMOSPHERE OF triumph and celebration permeated the air in the West Bank village of Bil'in north of Ramallah. Singing and dancing, honking car horns and waving Palestinian flags, the celebrating crowd of several hundred Israeli anarchists, international activists and Palestinian villagers from Bil'in, moved towards the separation barrier which divides the West Bank from Israel proper.

There they were confronted by jeep loads of stony-faced Israeli soldiers, armed with machine guns, teargas grenades and clubs. But unlike previous confrontations where stones were exchanged with bullets and beatings, this time the joyful crowd threw sweets and chocolates at the soldiers as the international media looked on.

Israel's Supreme Court had just released an order ordering the Israeli Defence Ministry to reroute a mile-long segment of the West Bank separation barrier, a combination of electronic fences, concrete walls, patrol roads and trenches that is about two-thirds complete.

This followed a tough and protracted legal battle, which began in 2002, between Bil'in's village council and the Defence Ministry. The council took their case to court after the fence's construction cut straight through the village, separating its 1,700 residents from many of their olive and almond trees, vineyards and grazing land.

The ruling, which was closely followed internationally, means hundreds of acres of agricultural land, confiscated for the benefit of Jewish settlers, will now be restored to the Palestinian village.

But a jubilant Mohammed Khatib, a leading member of Bil'in's Popular Committee Against the Wall and the secretary of Bil'in's Village Council, expressed caution as he told TME, "This is not the end of the struggle, we will continue to fight against the Wall and the settlements. There is a tough battle ahead."

In the court's unanimous ruling, Chief Justice Dorit Beinish a decided that the fence's location was "highly prejudicial" to the villagers and had no justification on military or security grounds. This was in stark contrast to the Israeli argument that the Wall was essential on the grounds of security to protect Israeli civilians, in a future settlement still to be built, from "terrorist attacks".

The Palestinians contended that it was Israeli commercial interests, not security concerns that determined the barrier's routing.

Saeb Erekat, a veteran Palestinian Authority negotiator, issued a statement praising the "heroic struggle and steadfastness" of the villagers and demanding that Israel dismantle the entire barrier and end its occupation of the West Bank, captured in 1967.

For some years now following the construction of the Wall which began in 2002, regular and mostly peaceful protests have taken place on a Friday in Bil'in. The organisers of the protests, the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a grassroots organisation of Israelis and Palestinian supporters from the Occupied Territories and abroad have fought to have the barrier taken down.

At times the protests were marred by stone-throwing Palestinian youths or overly zealous Israeli soldiers wading into the crowd with clubs, shooting rubber bullets and lobbying teargas canisters. The Israeli government was left red-faced several years ago after revelations in a number of newspapers alleged a number of the stone throwing incidents had actually been incited by undercover members of the Israeli security forces, mingling with the crowd and disguised as agitators, in an effort to discredit and embarrass the ISM.

Following the violent clashes a number of protestors were arrested and beaten with some incurring serious injuries. One Israeli activist, a lawyer and member of Anarchists Against the Wall, sustained a fractured skull and had to undergo emergency surgery after he was hit with a rubber bullet, in reality a metal ball the size of a marble surrounded by 0.5mm of rubber.

The building of the Wall followed waves of suicide bombings carried out by Palestinian militants that left hundreds of Israeli civilians dead and thousands injured.

In early 1995, the Shahal commission was established by Yitzhak Rabin to discuss how to implement a barrier that would effectively separate Israelis and Palestinians. Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak vowed to build a separation barrier in order to "help the Palestinian nation foster its national identity and independence without being dependent on the State of Israel".

Opponents argue that the barrier is an illegal attempt to annex Palestinian land under the guise of security. It violates international law, has the intent or effect of pre-empting final status negotiations, and severely restricts Palestinians who live nearby, particularly their ability to travel freely within the West Bank and to access work in Israel, thereby undermining their economy.

A UN report states that it is "difficult to overstate the humanitarian impact of the Wall. The route inside the West Bank severs communities, people's access to services, livelihoods and religious, educational, healthcare and cultural amenities. In addition, plans for the Wall's exact route and crossing points through it are often not fully revealed until days before construction commences.

"This has led to considerable anxiety amongst Palestinians about how their future lives will be impacted. The land between the Warrier and the Green Line constitutes some of the most fertile in the West Bank. It is currently the home to 49,400 West Bank Palestinians living in 38 villages and towns," stated the report.

Following harsh international criticism and legal action, in 2004 the International Court of Justice passed a number of resolutions calling for the Wall to be removed and the Arab residents to be compensated for any damage. However, most of those affected have yet to see any compensation.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Legal experts say that the latest ruling by the Israeli Supreme Court sets a precedent and could affect at least one similar challenge now under litigation, perhaps serving as a lesson to commercial developers about the risks of seeking profit from seizures of West Bank land for settlements.

"Beyond its legal and economic impact, the ruling is a political victory for Palestinians in the tug of war over territory they want for a future state," said Michael Sfard an Israeli lawyer who represented the Bil'in villagers. Although the ruling has not resolved the land acquisition question, it has restored half of the disputed real estate to the residents, he added.

Yair Oppenheimer, a spokesman for the Israeli movement, Peace Now, called the ruling "courageous". "No one can be allowed to use the security argument to gain some land, build on it and sell it for profit," he said. "This is the main message of today's decision."

The Israeli Defence Ministry promised "to respect the court's decision and abide by it". But as Khatib explained to TME: "Israel's Supreme Court demonstrated both the power of non-violent resistance to Israeli occupation, and its limits.

"On the same day as the victorious ruling the Israeli court rejected our petition to stop construction of another Israeli settlement, Mattiyahu East, on our land even further to the west. Israel, with US support, appears determined to retain major West Bank settlement blocs, including one west of Bil'in, that carve the West Bank into Bantustans."