The E1 Master Plan which received approval in 1999, is split into separate detailed plans. Of these, three (a water reservoir,74 industrial zone75 and police station76) have already been deposited for public review and subsequently approved by the planning committee, with the police station already constructed. Three other detailed plans – 420/4/3, 4204/7 and 420/4/10 pertain to a total of almost 3,700 housing units, and over 2000 hotel rooms, but have not yet received formal approval, largely on account of vocal international opposition. Following a successful Palestinian bid in 2012 to be admitted as a UN observer state, however, Israel sought to push forward with these outstanding plans, and the Civil Administration subsequently opened up the plans for filing of objections.77 Furthermore, the planned route of the Annexation and Separation Wall sees it surround the entire Adumim colony bloc, resulting in the de facto annexation of some 48,000 dunums (48 km2). Under Israeli plans, the remaining Palestinians in E1 are to be relocated to three townships: the first at the existing al Jabal site, and the two largest – Nuweimeh North and Armonot Hashmonaim – to be built near Jericho in the Jordan Valley. The far-reaching individual and societal benefits of the right to ownership and enjoyment of property is universally recognized. However, in exceptional circumstances this right may be curtailed, such as in the event of development projects which confer an overwhelming public benefit. Israel has attempted to use this utilitarian principle to justify its forced displacement of Palestinian communities in E1, arguing that the relocation plans are in the best interests of the affected communities. Consideration of this rationale, however, reveals it to be fallacy, with no rooting in international law. Firstly, in the context of belligerent military occupation, any forced transfer of the occupied population (as well as any associated confiscation and/or destruction of property) by the occupying power represents a gross breach of international humanitarian law.78 Therefore, any Israeli plans to permanently relocate occupied individuals and communities represent – regardless of any attempted Israeli framing of the situation as being for the benefit of the displaced – a war crime. The same is true for the act of implanting colonizers inside the occupied territory. Similarly, the legal concept of proportionality – i.e. whether the means is justified by the end – is utterly disregarded in the conception of these plans; the relocation of traditionally nomadic and pastoral Palestinian communities 74 75 76 77 78 28 “Plan 420/4/1 – for a Water Pool (storage of Water): 11 Dunams,” 1. “Plan 420/4/2 – for Industrial Zone: 1,340 Dunams,” 2. “Plan 420/4/9 – for a Police Station and the Roads to It (was Already Built): 191 Dunams,” 9. B’Tselem, “The E1 Plan and Its Implications for Human Rights in the West Bank.” Temporary evacuations are permitted, though only if necessary for the safety of these populations or for imperative military reasons.