Summary of Knesset Committee Discussion of Bill to Expand IAA’s Jurisdiction into West Bank

Last week, November 27th, the Knesset’s Education, Culture, and Sports Committee discussed a proposed bill to expand the Israel Antiquities Authority’s jurisdiction into the West Bank in a move that threatens to transform the status of antiquity sites in the oPt.

The discussion followed a preliminary vote in July and precedes submission of the law for a first reading (vote) at the Knesset plenum.

Discussion of the bill at the Knesset’s Education, Culture and Sports Committee on November 27th

 

The bill, submitted by MK Amit Halevi (Likud), proposes amending the 1978 Antiquities Law and the 1989 Antiquities Authority Law which are currently applicable to the territory of the State of Israel only.  As mentioned in our previous alert, if passed, the bill will transfer governance over antiquities in the oPt from the Staff Officer for Archaeology (SOA) within the Israeli Civil Administration, which is a military body, to a civilian entity, replacing the Jordanian Antiquities Law of 1966 with Israeli law effectively amounting to de jure annexation of antiquity sites in Area C.

The bill follows a five-year campaign by settler regional council heads and organizations such as “Shomrim al Hanetzach” (Guardians of Eternity) (supported by Kohelet) focusing on the preservation of what is claimed as exclusively Jewish heritage and alleging widespread destruction by Palestinians. The campaign advanced a message that the West Bank sites are of seminal importance to “national heritage” (i.e., Jewish heritage), and created an impression of an “archaeological emergency” in the context of which Palestinians are characterized as looters and destroyers of antiquities who act with a clear strategy to erase Jewish sites and deny Jewish roots in the land.

In describing the rationale informing the bill, members of the coalition conflate cultural affiliation with sovereignty rights. For example, in his opening words, the Chairperson of the Committee, MK Yosef Taib (Shas) said that “even if a Palestinian State does come into being, the antiquity sites have to remain under the State of Israel.”

In defending his bill, MK Amit Halevi argued that the Israel Antiquities Authority should be responsible for the antiquities of the Jewish people:
Why should the IDF be responsible for the Tomb of the Patriarch’s? Why should the IDF be responsible for Sebastia? Abraham, our forefather, should not be under military governance. This also applies to the Cave of the Patriarchs, Mount Ebal, Shiloh, Sebastia, Herodium, and many other heritage sites significant to Israel and the Jewish people located in Judea and Samaria,” he said.

The Committee’s legal advisor, Tami Sela explained that the bill would be perceived as a shift in Israel’s legislative stance on the status of the “territories”. The legal advisor to the Ministry of Justice described the proposal as “incompatible with the region’s laws.”

In response to claims that the Staff Officer for Archaeology does not have the necessary expertise to deal with widespread theft or destruction, the Staff Officer, Beni Har-Even, said that in the last three years the Staff Officer has more than doubled the number of staff who are “combatting illegal construction on archaeological sites” and are in the process of recruiting many more people.

The Israeli archaeological community has overwhelmingly expressed objection to the law. Representing the view of the National Academy of Sciences, Prof. Amihai Mazar warned that “changing the law would harm Israeli archaeology, creating international challenges for the Antiquities Authority and academia, such as conference participation and journal publication. It would be perceived as annexation, with all its implications.”

Although the Israel Antiquities Authority was represented via zoom by authority’s legal advisor Dan Bahat, he did not present the authority’s official position on the matter. Visibly absent was the Head of the Israel Antiquities Authority, Eli Escusido. Escusido, who is not an archaeologist, has recently boasted of close relations with politicians. In the past, Escusido had said that the authority opposes initiatives to expand its remit into the West Bank. We are concerned that his absence at the committee session may attest to concessions to growing political pressures from the proponents of the bill.

Emek Shaveh’s Director Alon Arad, spoke to the committee from his hospital bed via zoom. In the short time that he was given Alon spoke about the conflation of heritage with sovereignty. “One cannot set geographic boundaries according to affiliation to historic sites. A Synagogue in Spain does not confer sovereignty rights to the State of Israel.” In a statement given to the committee prior to the session he wrote:
Advancing this legislative proposal amounts to the annexation of parts of the West Bank and is contrary to international law and agreements to which the State of Israel is a signatory. This is a bad and dangerous legislative proposal that reflects an extreme and messianic Jewish supremacist ideology. It is being promoted against the opinions of professionals and will inevitably harm the State of Israel, its foreign relations, its political horizon, and put its academic community at risk while hollowing out the field [of archaeology] and turning it into nothing more than a political tool.”

The bill is now expected to be brought for a first reading (vote) to the Knesset plenum. We will continue to update as needed.

 

Sebastia
In November, we submitted an objection to the plan to construct a military facility (probably a watchtower) at the summit of the archaeological site of Sebastia in the northern West Bank together with the municipality of Sebastia and Palestinian residents who own plots in the area seized. The seizure order designates 1.3 dunam for a military facility in the vicinity of all the central archaeological structures, particularly the Temple of Augustus and remains of the palace and burial sites surrounding it.

The mound of Sebastia is a multilayered archaeological mound in Area C which includes impressive Iron Age remains and is considered to be the site of the ancient Israelite city of Samaria. Other important remains were found from the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine periods. The Palestinian town of Sebastia adjacent to the mound is defined as Area B and contains remains from the Roman, Byzantine, Islamic, Crusader and Ottoman periods. The town dates to the Mamluk period and its ruins are an integral component of the cultural identity of its residents.

 

Map of Sebastia with designation of seized plots marked in red

 

In our objection we noted the fact that the Staff Officer for Archaeology did not submit an opinion regarding the potential impact of a military facility on the ancient site, the violation of private property ownership rights and the potential harm to the residents of Sebastia.

We noted that under International Humanitarian Law, particularly the 1954 Hague convention on the Protection of Cultural Property during Armed Conflict, there is a prohibition on establishing military facilities adjacent to historic and cultural sites. Doing so would risk losing the site its protected status.

For more information about Sebastia see our alert from July.

 

Remains of Iron Age Palace, Sebastia