Denying Palestinian laborers access to justice

[Little Tich]

Source: +972Mag

A new Israeli labor regulation continues a trend of increasingly suspending rule of law for Palestinians in the West Bank, in this case leading to further segregation in access the courts.

In the Israeli economy, dirty, difficult, and dangerous jobs often are left to some 170,000 foreign workers, among them 55,000 Palestinian workers from the West Bank. Numerous NGO reports and media exposes have documented the abuses faced by these workers. Yet the most vulnerable and exploited segment of Israel’s labor force now faces yet another barrier to justice: in August, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked issued a new regulation requiring most foreign workers to deposit a financial guarantee as a condition to proceed with lawsuits against their employers in the country’s labor courts. As a result, whatever rights these workers should enjoy by law will likely be too expensive to actually enforce.

Shaked and her Jewish Home party have made plain the political agenda behind the rule: to thwart an imagined “lawsuit intifada” of legal claims by Palestinians working in the Jordan Valley settlements against their Israeli employers. Adalah, the Workers’ Hotline, and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel jointly filed a petition to Israel’s Supreme Court challenging this regulation, which blatantly discriminates on the basis of national origin. Under this regulation, Israeli and foreign workers would be subjected to different standards for pursuing their rights, even when performing the same tasks for the same employers side-by-side.

Moreover, Shaked adopted the regulation in a breathtakingly arbitrary fashion, without any public consultation or debate. It comes as little surprise then that the regulation also violates the separation of powers. Israeli law permits the government to set some procedural rules for the country’s labor courts but the Jordan Valley regulation so dramatically tilts the scales of justice in favor of employers that it changes the substantive rights involved. Moreover, the regulation disregards numerous court precedents stressing that the requirement of a financial guarantee should only be used in exceptional circumstances when judges determine that plaintiffs would refuse to pay legal fees if they lose or are engaging in frivolous lawsuits. This regulation usurps the legislature’s role and unreasonably eliminates judicial discretion only in order to obstruct access to court for foreign workers, especially Palestinians.

The new labor regulation is part of a disturbing trend in recent years to increasingly suspend the rule of law with regard to Palestinians in the West Bank, leading to increased segregation in access the courts for the enforcement of their rights.

Read more: http://972mag.com/denying-palestinian-laborers-access-to-justice/122319/

[deathrind]

1. Wow.

[TubbersUK]

2. K & R n/t

[shira]

3. More crap from Adalah, creators of a bogus list of 50 discriminatory laws.

The discriminatory laws that do not discriminate
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/The-discriminatory-laws-that-do-not-discriminate-463677

Adalah works tirelessly to end the state of Israel, taking away the right of self-determination of the Jewish people & their country's sovereignty in favor of 2 states; One that is Jew free in Gaza and the W.Bank, and the other within the green line a binational state (at best) with an Arab majority after the return of millions of Palestinians.

Adalah are the real racists who don't believe Jews have rights.

Meanwhile this new regulation seeks to avoid frivolous lawsuits, requiring a deposit in advance for court fees should the plaintiff lose & be responsible for steep court costs. Hardly discriminatory. In fact, this is an old story Adalah hashed up from 5 years ago, passing it off as something new:

(2011) Palestinians Say Israel Imposing Steep Court Fees to Prevent Lawsuits
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/palestinians-say-israel-imposing-steep-court-fees-to-prevent-lawsuits-1.394246

[Little Tich]

4. Underpaid Palestinian guest workers don't strike me as being extra prone to lodge frivolous

lawsuits.

This is just another attempt by a democracy-hating Justice Minister to make Israel less democratic. No real democracy would ever pass a law like this.

One unintended consequence is that further impeding the access for guest workers to arbitration of labor based disputes in Israeli courts may lead to a reassignment of Israel as a Tier 2 trafficking country by the US State Department.

You don't like Adalah, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Amnesty International, B'Tselem, Human Rights Watch, the UN, The World Bank, World Vision etc. Is there any NGO that helps Palestinians that you don't like?

[shira]

6. Your BDS friends could front their court costs then. Problem solved.

As to other democracies, we know Israel treats enemy civilians better than any other liberal western democracy, so you're just spewing nonsense. Any other democracy in the same situation would've done far worse to an enemy population.

You don't like Adalah, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, Amnesty International, B'Tselem, Human Rights Watch, the UN, The World Bank, World Vision etc. Is there any NGO that helps Palestinians that you don't like?

First, you need to acknowledge there's a problem with Adalah. Then we can move on to other organizations.

[Little Tich]

7. I hope you understand that making it harder for low wage workers to access legal means to arbitrate

disputes with their employers is not consistent with the democratic values of some (non-Israeli) democratic countries.

But is there any NGO that deals with Palestinians that you do like? Perhaps Lehava, Regavim, or Im Tirtzu are more to your liking?

[shira]

8. If BDS groups out there care, they can front those court costs....

Last edited Mon Oct 3, 2016, 09:38 AM - Edit history (3)

Frankly, we both know racist BDS bigots don't care. They'd rather demonize Jews.

Besides, shouldn't you be busy boycotting whatever Israeli business there is in the W.Bank? You'd prefer the Palestinians not work for any Israelis in the W.Bank. Problem solved if no Palestinians are working for Israelis in the W.Bank. End of story.

So....?

But is there any NGO that deals with Palestinians that you do like?

It's really difficult for you to acknowledge any problems with Adalah, isn't it?

[Israeli]

5. K&R nt.

[FBaggins]

9. This is about Palestinian workers at Israeli companies in the West Bank?

The ones that you would prefer have no jobs at all?

What an odd OP.

[Little Tich]

10. Are you in favor of this kind of legislation?

Personally, I think that legislation that facilitates for employers to exploit low wage laborers is wrong. Israel shouldn't emulate Bangladeshi or Saudi Arabian labor laws.

[FBaggins]

11. It isn't "legislation"... and I'm not sure why it matters to you.

You want those employers to not be employing Palestinians at all. Obviously the Palestinians whose families are fed by those jobs disagree with you... but why should that matter?

I think that legislation that facilitates for employers to exploit low wage laborers is wrong

You've provided no evidence beyond your own belief that this is what would happen.

Am I in favor of it? That's hard to say when all I have to go on is a 972 claim re: what the rule does... and they barely have a passing relationship with the truth.

If, as is claimed, there are Palestinians (many of whom aren't even employees) suing employers frivolously just to cost them legal expenses... only to disappear without paying court costs when they lose... then it isn't unreasonable at all.

Despite 972's fevered rantings that it "suspend(s) the rule of law" or your own wild spin that it's anti-democratic... it isn't even that unusual. In fact it's quite common for plaintiffs to be required to post a surety bond in such cases.

[Little Tich]

12. I interpret that as you're in favor of the legislation.

Personally, I'm strongly opposed to both Shaked and this kind of legislation.

[FBaggins]

13. Once again... it isn't legislation

You're falling for the bloviating of the spin doctors at 972 who are trying to spin fairly plain-vanilla procedures as violating separation of powers, "tilting the scales of justice", etc.

MY favorite is that it somehow trumps judicial discretion... even though plaintiffs wouldn't lose a penny, even if they lost the case, unless the judge decides that it was a frivolous lawsuit. Running a close second is that this somehow puts a damper on legitimate suits. Surety bonds are actually very cheap unless the case appears to be frivolous. The attorneys or Palestinian rights groups could easily cover that if they had any confidence in the charges at all. The only cases likely to be shut down are the ones where the plaintiffs know that their charges are bogus and don't care... because their goal is to cost the business money at no risk to themselves.

[Little Tich]

14. I suppose you think it's pretty vanilla to deter poor people from going to court by making it too ex

I personally think that a democratic society should encourage people with no means to defend their rights in court, not to deter them from doing so. This kind of legislation is really counterproductive, and shows how far Israel has sunk.

[shira]

15. I suppose you'll deny there are plenty of Israel haters who would like...

....nothing more than to tie up Israel's courts with frivolous lawsuits, leaving the Jews to foot the bill.

[FBaggins]

16. There isn't any reason for it to "deter poor people"

Lawyers aren't free either, yet representation is always possible when you have a legitimate claim against someone who can pay. It's also possible when you don't have a legitimate claim if the attorney (or groups who support the attorney) is willing to cover costs in order to harass a target of their own bigotry.

All this change accomplishes is to make it harder for the second group to succeed in their attacks.

I personally think that a democratic society should encourage people with no means to defend their rights in court

And this change doesn't impact that in the slightest regard. Bogus lawsuits are not "rights" (in or out of court). Actual non-frivolous lawsuits wouldn't be impacted at all.

shows how far Israel has sunk

"Sunk" as far as the rest of the western world where frivolous lawsuits are frequently responded to in just this same fashion?

I'm sure that they'll be all broken up at your reasoned approbation.