The Decision on Removal of Religious Affiliation from Palestinian ID Cards: Legal and Social Consequences
Last month, the Ministry of Interior (MoI) issued forth a decision on exclusion of religious designation from Palestinian personal identification documents. The legal encounter addressed background, justification and requirements of the MoI decision, with a particular focus on legal and social impacts it exerts on the Palestinian legal framework.
In his opening statement, Mr. Mahmoud Alawneh, IoL researcher, explained that the IoL Legal Encounters Programme highlights new issues and developments introduced to the Palestinian legal system. Having received an extensive media coverage, removal of religious affiliation from Palestinian ID cards has been subject to a nationwide cultural and social debate.
Mr. Ahmed Thabaleh, Legal Advisor to the MoI, highlighted and explained the details of this significant decision. On 9 February 2014, the Minister of Interior issued Decision No. 21 of 2014 on Removal of Religious Affiliation from Palestinian ID Cards. To be effective as of the date of issuance, this enactment is a purely regulatory, administrative decision. Like other items of legislation, the decision was generated by factual incidents. Complaints have been filed by citizens and Independent Commission for Human Rights, demanding that religious affiliation be excluded from Palestinian personal ID cards. In addition, a constitutional case was initiated by a Bethlehem-based charitable association, claiming that religious designation should be removed from personal identification documents. Mr. Thabaleh stressed that this issue was not new to the MoI; human rights defenders have already submitted similar demands to the Ministry.
Mr. Thabaleh stated that the decision is administrative, not a presidential decree. In line with the Civil Status Law No. 2 of 1999, the decision was made by the Minister of Interior in his capacity as the competent authority with the relevant jurisdiction. The decision is designed to regulate internal functions within the Ministry. Accordingly, it does not affect citizens, nor their status or legal entitlements. The decision is justified by demands and complaints filed to the MoI. These highlight that keeping religious affiliation on personal ID cards breaches the principle of equal public rights and freedoms as enshrined in the Basic Law. It also entrenches racial discrimination and violates several international conventions and standards. Religion was included on personal identification documents late in the Ottoman era. It was maintained in ensuing periods, including the Israeli occupation and Palestinian Authority.
Mr. Mohammed Khadher, IoL academic researcher, reviewed background of the MoI decision, pinpointing social and legal consequences. In the first place, the mechanism used to issue the MoI decision was not made clear to Palestinian citizens. It was not clear whether it was a decision, a decree, or instructions. Introducing an approach to assess how compatible it is with relevant international standards and practices, Mr. Khadher explained that the MoI decision was generally in line with the philosophy of public rights and freedoms. The decision does not encroach on the principles of the rule of law, separation of powers, or freedom of religion. Mr. Khadher made clear the impact of the MoI decision in relation to laws and regulations, under which religious affiliation is a requirement. For example, the Personal Status Law stipulates that religion be stated with a view to determine the jurisdiction of family courts. The Civil Status Law also provides that religious affiliation be stated to report delivery of newborns, issue a death certificate, and update the Civil Register.
Mr. Khadher explained that the decision would cause a problem associated with demonstrating a citizen’s religious status. Will religious affiliation be stated on grounds of a personal declaration or birth certificate? In this case, will a citizen be required to provide evidence for his or her parents’ religion(s)? Mr. Khadher said that a birth certificate would not be adequate, particularly in light of democratic processes implemented by many organisations and ministries.
Dr. Issam Abdeen, Legal Advisor to Al-Haq - a Ramallah-based human rights organisation, highlighted the state of alienation and isolation between decision makers and citizens affected by the decision making process. A lack of public participation and transparent functions generates a state of alienation between decision makers and the public, who are required to implement decisions made. Reviewing evidence provided by proponents and opponents of the MoI decision, Dr. Abdeen elaborated that discrimination on the basis of religion is created by exclusion and marginalisation. These are devised by targeted policies and processes, not by a statement of religious affiliation on the personal ID cards. Disagreeing that maintaining religious designation on ID documents marks racial discrimination, Dr. Abdeen indicated that the latter is product of a public policy that disrupts public rights holistically. Racial discrimination is a crime against humanity, which cannot be applied to this case. Dr. Abdeen concluded that the debate should focus on the concept of and mechanisms needed to protect citizenship, particularly under the current inefficient political system.
In the ensuing discussion, participants made comments on the community and policy interest associated with the MoI decision. Discussants questioned timing of the decision and whether it was a prelude to approval of civil marriage in Palestine.
