Parts of two business premises near the site of Friday’s deadly shooting terrorist attack in Hebron were demolished without a prior hearing, the state acknowledged in a response to the High Court of Justice on Sunday, saying the military commander considered the work urgently necessary.
The state also said it had not posted a demolition notice at the site because of an error. In connection with the affected site, business owners, who deny any involvement in the attack, petitioned the court to stop the demolitions, arguing they amounted to collective punishment.
The petition concerns two commercial compounds near Hebron’s northern entrance. It is separate from the broader evacuation of Palestinian residents and restrictions imposed across the city following the October 23 attack in which two IDF soldiers were killed.
In her initial decision on Friday, Justice Gila Canfy Steinitz directed the state to respond and said she expected it to refrain from changing the existing situation pending a further decision.
The state subsequently said the demolition work described in its response had taken place before the petition and the court’s decision reached the authorities, and that work stopped immediately upon their receipt.
Mustafa and Sufian Qawasmeh and the Al-Quds ceramics and sanitary ware company filed the petition through attorney Muhammad Dahleh. It concerns approximately 17 dunams of commercial property containing offices, display areas, and merchandise.
IDF soldiers operated without written order, explanation, petition claims
According to the petition, soldiers instructed the owners to remove goods ahead of demolition without providing a written order or explaining how they could challenge the decision.
The petitioners said the business was closed on Friday apart from a guard, and that the gunmen had climbed over a locked gate. They denied assisting the attackers, knowing about the attack in advance, or being connected to the ploy in any way.
The state’s response presented a different account of the grounds for demolition. It said the terrorists had used a factory at one of the premises as cover and fired from behind a corrugated fence and equipment.
According to the response, the military assessed that construction near the checkpoint posed an immediate security risk. The work included removing fencing at the premises used by the attackers and demolishing a fence and an office container at the compound opposite it.
The state also cited a demolition order issued in August 2012 for the fence and office at the second compound, but did not explain the intervening enforcement history.
Those grounds differ from the punitive-demolition allegations presented in the petition. The owners’ charge of collective punishment remains disputed.
Regarding the matter of the absence of a hearing, the state reiterated that military officials considered the demolition urgently and immediately necessary. It said officials had orally explained the intended work to the owners and allowed them an opportunity to remove merchandise.
The response added that no further demolition was immediately planned at either compound and that any subsequent enforcement against unlawful construction would follow the applicable procedures.
These proceedings come amid a wider dispute over the military’s actions in Hebron following the attack.
In a separate legal letter to the military, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) demanded that displaced residents be allowed to return, movement restrictions be lifted, and demolitions carried out as punishment be halted. It also requested the orders authorizing the measures already taken.
ACRI: Approximately 1,500 Palestinians forced from their homes
ACRI said approximately 1,500 Palestinians had been forced from their homes, citing Palestinian authorities. It argued that public statements by ministers indicated a punitive purpose, including Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s description of demolitions as serving as deterrence and as exacting a price for the attack.
“No attack, however grave, gives the military license to punish an entire city,” ACRI executive director Noa Sattath said.
The IDF, in information provided to reporters, described civilians’ departure differently, saying residents who wished to leave temporarily were permitted to do so through designated checkpoints.
It estimated that approximately 2,000 people lived in the area and were part of the Jaba’a clan, which the military described as associated with Hamas and as the clan from which the attackers came.
The military said forces had searched approximately 200 sites and arrested 10 suspects. It described demolition near the attack site as enforcement against unlawful construction and the removal of potential security risks.
Beyond that briefing, The Jerusalem Post repeatedly requested clarification from relevant IDF officials about how a mass evacuation could be legal absent evidence that the vast majority of the evacuees had taken illegal action and were not ideologically pro-Hamas.
Additionally, several media reports confirmed that IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir insisted on withdrawing troops from the area, but Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted on them staying and maintaining the evacuation of the Palestinians – without specifically articulating a security necessity.