In East Jerusalem, the closure of Palestinian institutions is not limited to closed doors. It interrupts educational, sports and social programmes and places their officials in front of very short deadlines for contestation. For the Burj al-Luq Luq association, in the old city, the deadline is Monday, 16 November: according to the organisations that support it, it is the last day to object to the new closure order signed on 9 November.
Six months of closure, one exception for kindergarten
The new order against Burj al-Luq Luq was implemented on 10 November. Police officers posted the decision at the entrance to the institution. This is not its first closure of the year: a previous order had been applied on 17 February, before a reopening reported on 13 August. The new measure therefore comes after the resumption of activities, not as part of a continuous closure since February.
According to the communiqué of the Network of Palestinian NGOs and the consolidation of Jerusalem’s human rights institutions, dated 10 November and published the following day by St. Yves, the measure runs for six months. It also covers activities carried out under another name or by intermediaries. Kindergarten activities are explicitly excluded. To present the decision as a prohibition without any exception would therefore be inaccurate.
The same statement describes a seven-day period from the coming into force to allow the owner or owner of the premises to challenge the decision. He called on diplomatic representations and international organizations to act before 16 November. The evidence provided does not indicate that an appeal has already been filed or that it would have suspended the closure.
A political ground contested by the association
The decision of the Israeli Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben Gvir, is based on the 1994 legislation limiting activities related to the Palestinian Authority. She blames the institution for acting under her patronage or on her behalf. The association rejects this presentation and asserts that its activities are part of its community mission, regardless of political rivalries.
After reopening, she reported that she had resumed her educational, sports and social programmes for children, women and young people. His statement of 10 November calls for the lifting of the closure and the return of the teams to headquarters. The charges raised in the decision are not in themselves a public demonstration of the alleged links; Conversely, the challenge to the association does not amount to the cancellation of the order.
Several institutions, separate procedures
Timeline is important. The Abnaa al-Quds club in the Saadiya neighbourhood was ordered closed on 5 November. On the same evening, a cultural demonstration in the Al-Hakawati Theatre was prevented, according to the grouping of rights organizations. These facts precede the order concerning Burj al-Luq Luq and are not further closures on 14 November.
Another case concerns the Arab al-Sawahra clan association in Jabal Mukabber. As early as 4 November, she had announced that she had received notification of a judicial decision providing for her removal from the register of associations and the cessation of her activities. She had asked donors to suspend transfers, also announcing the closure of her bank account and official page. This case must remain distinguished from an administrative order of six months: the authorities seized, the announced effects and the means of challenge are not identical.
For the inhabitants, these legal differences have an immediate translation: what services remain available, whether an activity can resume and when a decision can be challenged. In the case of Burj al-Luq Luq, the exception concerning kindergarten and the date of 16 November are the two practical benchmarks established. No subsequent decisions were identified in the documents consulted.
Illustration photograph: view of Jerusalem by Yasir Gürbüz, from Libnanews Bank and prior to the events described; date of shooting not specified. It does not show closed establishments.
Comments