Muna al-Kurd, speaking on behalf of the Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah, rejects Israel's high court deal that would have given a protected tenant status, speaking on November 2. The High court will now have to rule on an appeal against the eviction of the families. Jewish settler groups claim ownership of the land and seek to evict the Palestinian families. The latter dispute the claim.

Following Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem, Jewish settler groups launched legal battles to take over the area, claiming that the land ownership, where the homes in question are, was Jewish property lost in the 1948 war.

The Palestinian families, elKurd, Iskafi, elQasem and elJaouni, al Dajani, el-Qasem have rejected a proposal from the court and the settler groups to sign a lease agreement that would allow them to continue to live on the property. They believe the fight with Jewish settlers over Sheikh Jarrah isn't a legal one but political.

Visuals filmed on 2nd November show Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah who are threatened with evictions, Jewish settler home in Sheikh Jarrah and various shots of Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood.

Translation of the soundbite with Muna al-Kurd, Sheikh Jarrah resident and activist:
[0:04-0:31]
– We the families of the Sheikh Jarrah have unanimously rejected the proposed compromise made by the [Israeli] occupation court that would have made us protected tenants before the settlement organisation Nihlat Shimon but [also] would have gradually paved the way to negate the right to our lands. This rejection stems from the belief in the fairness of our case and the right to our homes.
Translation of the soundbite with Ahmad Rweidi, PA official:
[0:57-1:23]
– Our position is clear, and that is the official position, we reject all Israeli measures and the [jurisdiction of] Israeli courts because they are part of the government of occupation and its agenda. Therefore we reject all proposals by them because [accepting] these proposals carry with it serious legal and national repercussions.

This footage was filmed and produced 2 November 2021.

Muna al-Kurd, speaking on behalf of the Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah, rejects Israel's high court deal that would have given a protected tenant status. The High court will now have to rule on an appeal against the eviction of the families. Jewish settler groups claim ownership of the land and seek to evict the Palestinian families. The latter dispute the claim.

Following Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem, Jewish settler groups launched legal battles to take over the area, claiming that the land ownership, where the homes in question are, was Jewish property lost in the 1948 war.

The Palestinian families, elKurd, Iskafi, elQasem and elJaouni, al Dajani, el-Qasem have rejected a proposal from the court and the settler groups to sign a lease agreement that would allow them to continue to live on the property. They believe the fight with Jewish settlers over Sheikh Jarrah isn't a legal one but political.

Visuals filmed on 2nd November show Palestinian residents of Sheikh Jarrah who are threatened with evictions, Jewish settler home in Sheikh Jarrah and various shots of Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood.

Translation of the soundbite with Muna al-Kurd, Sheikh Jarrah resident and activist:
[0:04-0:31]
– We the families of the Sheikh Jarrah have unanimously rejected the proposed compromise made by the [Israeli] occupation court that would have made us protected tenants before the settlement organisation Nihlat Shimon but [also] would have gradually paved the way to negate the right to our lands. This rejection stems from the belief in the fairness of our case and the right to our homes.
Translation of the soundbite with Ahmad Rweidi, PA official:
[0:57-1:23]
– Our position is clear, and that is the official position, we reject all Israeli measures and the [jurisdiction of] Israeli courts because they are part of the government of occupation and its agenda. Therefore we reject all proposals by them because [accepting] these proposals carry with it serious legal and national repercussions.