What Israel’s Own Reviews Found About Unauthorized Outposts
Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office found 105 unauthorized outposts in March 2005, expressly a floor, and NIS 71,870,000 of ministry funding.
Israel’s Prime Minister’s Office published an opinion in March 2005 finding 105 unauthorized outposts in the West Bank and Gaza, and stating that the figure “probably does not reflect the true number of outposts in the area”. The opinion, commissioned by the Prime Minister’s bureau and published in English by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, recorded that state and public authorities took part in breaking the law by financing construction the political level had never approved. It remains the fullest account Israel has published of its own conduct on this subject.
| Figure | What it counts | Who published it | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| 105 | Unauthorized outposts known to the author, expressly a floor | Prime Minister’s Office | March 2005 |
| 26 | Of those outposts, the number on State land | Prime Minister’s Office | March 2005 |
| 15 | Of those outposts, the number on Palestinian private property | Prime Minister’s Office | March 2005 |
| 39 | Of those outposts, the number on mixed lands, part State, part survey, part Palestinian-owned | Prime Minister’s Office | March 2005 |
| NIS 71,870,000 | Ministry of Construction and Housing outlay on unauthorized outposts, the Ministry’s own stated figure | Prime Minister’s Office, citing the Ministry | 2000 to 2004 |
| NIS 270 million | Traffic fines issued to Palestinian drivers and left uncollected, the audit’s own estimate | State Comptroller of Israel | 2014 to 2021 |
What land were the outposts standing on?
The Prime Minister’s Office published the land status of the 105 in four buckets and never totalled them. It recorded 26 on State land, 7 on survey lands, 15 on Palestinian private property and 39 on mixed lands, and it stated that a further group sat on lands whose nature the author had not resolved.
Those four buckets sum to 87, not 105, which is why both the outpost count and any non-State-land count derived from it are floors rather than totals.
What did the opinion say about who paid?
That Israeli state bodies did. The Prime Minister’s Office recorded, in the author’s own words: “The problem is State and public authorities took part in breaking the law. They are the ones who financed construction without a resolution by the political echelon, in contrary to government resolutions, with no legal planning status, sometimes not on State owned land, sometimes on private Palestinian property or on survey land.”
- Ministry of Construction and Housing outlay on unauthorized outposts, 2000 to 2004: NIS 71,870,000, the Ministry’s own stated figure.
- Of 140 caravans placed in the territories in the 2003 acquisition, 90 went to unauthorized outposts.
- A further 64 caravans were conveyed to unauthorized outposts between 18 August and 5 December 2004.
What made an outpost unauthorized?
A government resolution of 1979, taken after the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Elon Moreh case, that Israeli settlements in Judea, Samaria and Gaza “shall be established only on State land”. The Prime Minister’s Office set out the first characteristic of an unauthorized outpost as: “There was no government decision to establish it, and in any case no authorized political echelon approved its establishment.”
The definition is narrower than the phrase suggests. The opinion counted only sites at least a few hundred metres from an existing settlement, so the 105 excludes unauthorized construction inside or adjoining recognised settlements.
What did a later commission recommend?
The opposite conclusion, and the government never adopted it. A commission appointed by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice on 13 February 2012 signed its report on 21 June 2012 and it was released on 9 July 2012. The commission concluded that the classical law of occupation cannot be considered applicable to Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria, and that “the establishment of settlements cannot in and of itself be considered to be illegal”.
On outposts built without a government decision, the commission found their establishment “was carried out with the knowledge, encouragement and tacit agreement of the most senior political level”, which it read as implied agreement. It also criticised the state in its own conclusions: the picture of settlement activity before it “does not befit the behavior of a state that prides itself on, and is committed to the rule of law”.
What have Israel’s courts ordered?
Evacuation, in the two cases brought by registered Palestinian landowners.
| Case | What the Court ordered | Deadline set | Judgment date |
|---|---|---|---|
| HCJ 8887/06 (Migron) | Final order to evacuate the outpost from the petitioners’ lands, and to remove the settlers and structures | 31 March 2012 | 2 August 2011 |
| HCJ 9949/08 (Amona) | Removal of the entire outpost | 25 December 2016 | 25 December 2014 |
Source: Israeli Supreme Court sitting as High Court of Justice. In Migron the State did not dispute that the lands were registered under private Palestinian ownership in the villages of Burqa and Dir Dabwan, or that the outpost was illegal, and the Court described its establishment and continued expansion as “blatant and defiant violations of the law and of the Palestinian landowners’ property rights”.
What has the State Comptroller audited?
Policing capability, not this. The State Comptroller of Israel published a follow-up audit of the Israel Police district covering Area C in May 2022, examining February to August 2021. The audit recorded 12,865 cases opened in the district in 2020 for disturbing public order, security violations and damage to property, and 48,371 traffic tickets issued that year, 36,074 of them to Palestinians, which it writes as about 75%.
The Comptroller published no complaint, investigation, indictment or conviction count for offences by Israeli civilians against Palestinians, and no figure in that audit is one. It found several deficiencies unrectified since the previous audit, including the district’s bulletproof vehicles and expired ceramic vest plates, and it noted that sections of the report were published under confidentiality.
Where these figures come from
Every figure on this page comes from an Israeli body reporting on Israeli conduct: an opinion commissioned by the Prime Minister’s bureau, a commission appointed by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice, two Supreme Court judgments, and a State Comptroller audit.
The 105 and the land-status buckets are floors, and the opinion says so in terms; the four buckets sum to 87 and 18 outposts were unresolved. The four buckets are never totalled by the source, so any combined non-State-land figure is a derivation and is stated as one. The dating buckets, 71 established before March 2001 and 24 after, may not be summed to 105 either, because 10 outposts had no established date. The NIS 71,870,000 is the spending Ministry’s own figure over a partial list, which the opinion says does not settle with the Ministry’s own working schemes. The State Comptroller audit published sections under confidentiality, so its counts are floors, and its case count and its ticket count are different universes that may not be summed or divided into one another. The judgment dates on this page are the dates the Court ruled, not the dates on which anything was evacuated.
Questions
How many unauthorized outposts were there?
105 known to the author in March 2005, on the Prime Minister’s Office’s published opinion, which states that the figure probably does not reflect the true number.
Who commissioned that opinion?
The Prime Minister’s bureau. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs published the English summary in March 2005.
How many were on private Palestinian land?
15 outright, with a further 39 on mixed lands part of which was Palestinian-owned, and 18 whose land status the author could not resolve.
Did the Israeli government pay for them?
The opinion records that the Ministry of Construction and Housing reported an outlay of NIS 71,870,000 on unauthorized outposts between 2000 and 2004, and that state and public authorities took part in breaking the law by financing construction the political level had not approved.
What is the legal test?
A government resolution of 1979, following the Supreme Court’s Elon Moreh judgment, that settlements be established only on State land, together with the requirement of a government decision to establish.
How many outposts were evacuated?
The Ministry of Defence supplied a figure of 81 evacuated, covering only outposts established after March 2001, and the opinion records that only a few of them were manned. That figure is not net, because the opinion records that some outposts were occupied again.
What did the 2012 commission conclude?
That the classical law of occupation cannot be considered applicable to Israel’s presence in Judea and Samaria, and that establishing settlements cannot in itself be considered illegal.
Was that report adopted?
The commission itself wrote that implementation would follow only “should the government decide to adopt our recommendations”. This page states what the commission concluded, and does not report what any cabinet then did.
Did the commission criticise the state?
Yes. It wrote that the picture of settlement activity displayed before it “does not befit the behavior of a state that prides itself on, and is committed to the rule of law”.
What did the Supreme Court order about Migron?
A final order on 2 August 2011 to evacuate the outpost from the petitioners’ lands and remove the settlers and structures, with a deadline of 31 March 2012.
Did Israel dispute who owned the Migron land?
No. The State did not dispute that the lands were registered under private Palestinian ownership, or that the outpost was illegal.
How large was Migron?
The State reported some 60 prefabs, one permanent building and 43 families in June 2006, and about 45 families and about 250 residents in February 2009, which it described as the largest outpost in Judea and Samaria.
Does the State Comptroller audit publish settler violence figures?
No. Its May 2022 follow-up audit of the district covers policing capability, and it publishes no complaint, investigation or indictment count for offences by Israeli civilians against Palestinians.
Where can these be read?
The Sason opinion summary is on gov.il, the State Comptroller audit at mevaker.gov.il, and the judgments through the Israeli judiciary’s own publication of Supreme Court decisions.
Sources
- Israeli Supreme Court sitting as High Court of Justice, 2011. HCJ 8887/06 al-Nabut v. Minister of Defense (Migron). Judgment of 2 August 2011. Official record (court judgment).
- Israeli Supreme Court sitting as High Court of Justice, 2014. HCJ 9949/08 Hamad v. Minister of Defense (Amona). Judgment of 25 December 2014. Official record (court judgment).
- Levy, E. E., Shapira, T., and Baker, A., Commission to Examine the Status of Building in Judea and Samaria, 2012. Report on the legal status of building in Judea and Samaria. Signed 21 June 2012, released 9 July 2012. Official record (government-commissioned review).
- Prime Minister’s Office of Israel, 2005. Summary of the opinion concerning unauthorized outposts. Published 10 March 2005, gov.il. Official record (government-commissioned review).
- State Comptroller of Israel, 2022. Interdisciplinary audit: Samaria and Judea District of the Israel Police, follow-up audit. State Comptroller Report, May 2022. mevaker.gov.il. Official record.