Ras Jrabah: The Legal Struggle Against State-Led Displacement in the Naqab

Since May 2019, the Bedouin village of Ras Jrabah has been threatened with displacement, as the Israel Land Authority (ILA) has sought to evict the community and demolish their village in order to expand the Jewish-majority city of Dimona. Adalah has represented the residents through years of legal and planning processes.

Background

Eviction Lawsuits at the Magistrate’s Court

Appeal to the District Court

Second Appeal Request to the Supreme Court

The Planning Process

Background

Ras Jrabah is home to over 500 residents from the Al-Hawashleh, Abu Sulb, and Al-Nasasrah tribes. The village covers approximately 340 dunams (around 84 acres) of the ancestral land of the Al-Hawashleh tribe.

The State of Israel does not recognize Ras Jrabah, along with around 35 other “unrecognized” Bedouin villages in the Naqab. As a result, residents are denied essential services such as water, electricity, paved roads, and education, making daily life extremely difficult and increasing pressure to relocate.

For more information about living conditions in the Bedouin unrecognized villages, click here.

To browse Adalah and Bimkom’s interactive map, Bedouin Communities Under Threat in the Naqab.

Historically, land of the Al-Hawashleh tribe stretched from the area of Kurnub, close to the British Mandate police station in Wadi Mamshit, to Umm Dimna, the location of an old water well and the site of the first houses to be built in Dimona, in 1950.

After the establishment of and the imposition of military rule (1948-1966) on all Arab citizens of Israel, the Al-Hawashleh tribe was restricted to the Umm Dimna area. Their land was steadily expropriated in order to allow for the expansion of Dimona. Over the years, Dimona grew at the expense of Ras Jrabah, encroaching on the village land and displacing residents into a constantly shrinking area.

Despite the ongoing threat of dispossession, Ras Jrabah residents rely on Dimona for work, healthcare, banking, postal services, and daily needs. They consider themselves an integral part of Dimona’s community and wish to remain so.

Eviction Lawsuits at the Magistrate’s Court

Case citation: Civil Case 16715-05-19, Israel Land Authority - Southern District v. Al-Hawashleh, et al. (decision delivered 24 July 2023).

In May 2019, the ILA initiated 10 eviction lawsuits at Be’er Sheva Magistrate’s Court against Ras Jrabah’s residents. The ILA argued that the villagers were trespassers, as the land is officially registered as “state land” of Israel, which does not acknowledge Bedouin land ownership, and thus they must be evicted. According to the ILA, the villagers’ ongoing presence was obstructing Dimona’s expansion. The Israeli authority planned to expand the city by developing a new residential area on Ras Jrabah that willn contain thousands of housing units.

The Bedouin villagers were given just one choice: moving to the government-planned Bedouin village of Qasr al-Sir, as recommended by the Bedouin Development and Settlements Authority.[1] In a meeting with the residents, the Authority stated that its powers were limited to offering relocation within Bedouin towns, not in Jewish cities such as Dimona.

In November 2019, Adalah submitted defense arguments on behalf of the villagers at the Be’er Sheva Magistrate’s Court. Adalah Attorneys contended that the residents are not trespassers, as they have lived on their lands for generations, well before the establishment of Dimona. They highlighted numerous state actions and inactions that implicitly acknowledged Ras Jrabah’s long-standing presence. These include assurances given by military officials during the periods of military rule imposed on all Arab citizens of Israel (1948–1966) that the residents’ homes and lands would be protected from demolitions; installation of connections to the state water network from the 1980s, and official documents listing residents’ addresses as “tribe of al-Hawashleh – Dimona.” For decades, the state took no legal or administrative actions against the community. To reinforce this argument, the defense submitted an affidavit from Sheikh Haj Frej, the village’s oldest resident, who recounted its history, along with multiple documents showing that authorities have long been aware of the community’s existence.

Expert testimonies provided by organization Bimkom – Planners for Planning Rights further supported these claims with an analysis of aerial photographs demonstrating continuous habitation in the village over decades, and reviews of master plans showing that there are no planning obstacles to recognizing the village. Adalah argued that evicting Ras Jrabah’s residents solely to create a Jewish neighborhood constitutes ethnically-driven discrimination and violates the basic constitutional rights to dignity, property, housing, and equality by perpetuating segregation.

Despite acknowledging the villagers’ long-standing presence in the Dimona area, on July 24, 2024, the Be’er Sheva Magistrate’s Court ruled in favor of the ILA. The court ordered all 127 petitioners and their families to demolish their homes and vacate by March 1, 2024. It also imposed legal fees of 117,000 NIS for the villagers, significantly higher than the amount demanded in comparable cases. The court justified its decision by stating that the residents had not proven they had any rights to the land. Although the state had previously allowed the villagers to stay, it retained the authority to withdraw that permission, the court reasoned.

The court rejected claims of segregation, stating that there is no law preventing residents from buying homes in the planned neighborhood in Dimona. However, this is irrelevant to a community that cannot afford such purchases and intends to continue living together. Regarding the violation of the residents’ constitutional rights, the court concluded that any rights infringed upon were justifiable to protect “the fundamental property rights of the [state], i.e., those of the general public.”

To read the eviction lawsuits [Hebrew], click here.

To read the defense arguments [Hebrew], click here.

To read the affidavits of Ras Jrabah’s residents [Hebrew], click here.

To read the expert option by Bimkom [Hebrew], click here.

To read the state’s response to the defense [Hebrew], click here.

To read more about the Magistrate’s Court decision [Hebrew], click here.

Appeal to the District Court

Case citation: Civil Appeal 21579-01-24, Al-Hawashleh et al. v. The Israel Land Authority (decision delivered on 3 June 2024).

In January 2024, Adalah filed an appeal to the Be’er Sheva District Court challenging the decision of the Magistrate’s Court ordering the eviction of Ras Jrabah’s villagers. In the appeal, Adalah’s Attorney contended that the lower court had made a grave error in ruling that the residents had no valid claim to their land. The Magistrate’s Court recognized that Ras Jrabah had been located there for at least 45 years. Yet, it found the residents to be illegal occupants, portraying them as trespassers rather than long-time residents.

Adalah also argued that the Magistrate’s Court had not adequately considered the violation of constitutional rights involved, claiming that eviction would not only deprive residents of their homes, but also breach their rights to dignity, equality, and housing. Additionally, it would break family and community ties and promote a segregationist view that “Bedouins should live with Bedouins in Bedouin villages.”

On 3 June 2024, the District Court partially reversed the Magistrate’s Court’s decision. It acknowledged that, since Ras Jrabah’s residents had been living in the village since at least 1978, they are not trespassers. Instead, the court concluded that the residents held an “implied right” to stay on the land, based on the ILA’s long-standing knowledge of their presence and its failure to act in this regard for many years. However, the court also found that this permission could be revoked at any time by the landowner, i.e. the state. As a result, the right was nullified once the ILA issued eviction notices and filed lawsuits against the residents.

The court further determined that, in line with government policy, the ILA only permits Bedouins to receive land directly within designated Bedouin villages and towns, reflecting the state’s overarching aim to control and organize Bedouin communities in the Naqab. Therefore, the court found that the ILA did not have the authority to allocate lands to Ras Jrabah’s residents in the new Dimona neighborhood, and nor was it required to consider this option. Nevertheless, the Court found that residents were free to buy land in the new neighborhood once it is developed, so no racial segregation had occurred. The legal fees were reduced from 117,000 to 40,000 NIS.

In Adalah’s view, the ruling exposes Israel’s system of systematic racial segregation, which allows state authorities to exclude Palestinian Bedouin citizens from Jewish towns and cities and force them into segregated Bedouin towns. This reinforces a land regime that is designed to dispossess Bedouins, confine them to restricted, segregated areas, and deny them equal housing and integration, which amounts to apartheid under international law. The case of Ras Jrabah – like earlier cases such as that of the village of Umm al-Hiran – shows that constitutional protections do not safeguard Palestinians’ rights, as Israel’s constitutional values, including those enshrined in the Jewish Nation-State Law and the Basic Law: Israel Lands, legitimize the forced eviction of Bedouin communities for purposes of facilitating Jewish settlement.

To read the appeal [Hebrew], click here.

To read the state’s response [Hebrew], click here.

To read the decision from 3 June 2024 [Hebrew], click here.

Second Appeal Request to the Supreme Court

Case citation: Civil Appeal Leave Request 51561-09-24, Elhawashla et al. v. Israel Land Authority – Southern District.

In September 2024, Adalah submitted a motion to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal against the District Court’s decision to uphold the eviction of Ras Jrabah’s residents. Adalah contended that the ruling supports a segregationist scheme by relocating an indigenous Bedouin community from its land to accommodate another population, purportedly for urban growth.

Three months later, a Supreme Court judge issued an interim order to freeze the evictions. At a hearing on the appeal in May 2025, the state’s representatives, responding to the justices’ questions, admitted for the first time that there were no immediately available housing arrangements for the villagers, including in Qasr al-Sir, the Bedouin town to which the state planned to forcibly relocate them.

The hearing revealed that the idea of integrating Ras Jrabah’s residents into the new Dimona neighborhood was never properly considered. Instead, the state representatives relied on claims that the ILA lacked authority over land allocation in Dimona, indicative of a discriminatory and segregationist approach. The appeal argued it was unjust to pursue evictions based on an unapproved development plan, especially since they had no chance to participate in the planning process. Nevertheless, the court dismissed their arguments and justified eviction on the basis of a future plan.

Meanwhile, and before the Supreme Court made its decision, the planning process for the new neighborhood in Dimona began, and Adalah filed a separate petition against the approval of the plan (see below). On this basis, Adalah requested that the court postpone its decision until after the completion of the planning process.

In early July 2025, an update was submitted to the Supreme Court regarding the cancellation of approval for the new plan for Dimona and the authorities’ obligation to reconsider the integration of Ras Jrabah’s residents into it. The court was once again asked to delay the eviction lawsuits until a revised plan is introduced, which could potentially include Ras Jrabah’s residents.

Despite this, on 12 November 2025, the Israeli Supreme Court rejected the appeal against the eviction of Ras Jrabah’s residents, confirming their displacement despite the absence of an approved development plan. In its ruling, the Court concurred with the District Court and ordered the residents to evacuate Ras Jrabah within 90 days, finding that, although they had lived on their land for decades with the state’s knowledge and tacit permission, the state could revoke this permission at any time. It emphasized that state ownership of the land included the authority to evict residents without requiring further justification.

On the question of alternative housing arrangements, the court stated that the ILA had proposed suitable options, which residents reportedly rejected, because they wished to remain together as a community and preserve their way of life. Although Adalah challenged this during the hearing, the State’s Attorney did not, in fact, provide any concrete alternatives, merely referring to the remote, general possibility of temporary accommodation or rental assistance in Dimona. Finally, the Supreme Court rejected Adalah’s argument that the displacement of the population of Ras Jrabah was part of a systematic policy of racial segregation intended to move Bedouin citizens into segregated townships and prevent their integration into Jewish towns, noting that residents were allowed to bid for public land tenders in Dimona, without considering their limitations.

In Adalah’s view, the court’s ruling endorses effectively apartheid by allowing for the forced displacement of Palestinian Bedouins from their ancestral land. It approves policies involving demolition, dispossession, and Judaization, indicating the Supreme Court’s adoption of a settler-colonial mindset that excludes Bedouins from urban development and views Bedouin communities not as indigenous groups, but as obstacles to Jewish expansion.

To read the motion requesting permission to appeal to the Supreme Court [Hebrew], click here.

To read the response of the ILA [Hebrew], click here.

To read the decision of the court from December 29, 2024 [Hebrew], click here.

To read the Court’s ruling [Hebrew], click here.

The Planning Process

Case citation: Administrative Petition 53780‑12‑24, Al-Hawashleh et. al v. Chair of Southern District Planning and Building Committee.

A few days after the Magistrate’s Court approved Ras Jarah’s eviction, on 24 July 2023 the Southern District Planning and Building Committee held its first public meeting on the East Dimona Master Plan for the development of a new neighborhood in Dimona, and facilitate the eviction of Ras Jrabah.

Residents of Ras Jrabah, along with representatives from Adalah and Bimkom, attended the meeting and voiced their wish to be included in the plan and to be integrated into Dimona. Following the hearing, in August 2024 the committee determined that, before submitting the plan, the authorities must take into account the villagers’ wish for integration.

Subsequently, Bimkom requested a meeting with the ILA to discuss the residents’ needs and preferences. However, these requests were overlooked, and only after the District Court’s decision did an ILA representative respond, stating that, since the court had already ordered eviction, no further meetings were necessary. Later that month, the East Dimona Master Plan was officially made available for public objections. It included proposals for 8,000 housing units, a 780-dunam area designated for commercial and public uses, and 4,870 dunams of open space.

On 14 September 2024, shortly after submitting their second appeal petition to the Supreme Court, Adalah and Bimkom submitted an objection on behalf of 105 villagers to the District Planning and Building Committee. The objection argued that, although the master plan included Ras Jrabah’s land, it ignored the community’s presence and failed to take their interests into account, in contradiction of the planning committee’s earlier decision.

The objection emphasized the residents’ willingness to integrate and presented four potential sites identified in collaboration with the villagers. Adalah and Bimkom argued that integration would not undermine the plan to expand Dimona, which remains open for negotiation. The Objections Subcommittee conducted a hearing within 15 days, and issued a press statement praising the approval of the plan. It dismissed the objected on behalf of Ras Jrabah in its entirety, and the Chair also rejected a request to appeal to the National Planning Council.

In December 2024, Adalah, representing Bimkom and the villagers, filed a petition to the Administrative Court in Be’er Sheva against the rejection of both the objection and the motion to appeal. The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel also submitted a petition contesting the plan’s approval on the grounds that no environmental impact assessment was conducted. The two petitions were combined and heard together.

On 25 June 2025, the Be’er Sheva District Court cancelled the approval of the East Dimona Master Plan, ruling that the District Committee was required to mandate an environmental impact assessment and to consider integrating Ras Jrabah residents into the new neighborhood. The decision highlighted the ILA’s duty to revise and resubmit the plan following a sincere, good-faith evaluation of residents’ integration.

To read the objections [Hebrew], click here.

To read the decision to reject the objections [Hebrew], click here.

To read the petition [Hebrew], click here.

To read the respondents’ response [Hebrew], click here.

To read the ruling from 25 June 2025 [Hebrew], click here.