This article was originally published by Haaretz and is republished with permission.

Israeli policemen clash with Jewish settlers in the unauthorized outpost of Amona, close to the West Bank Jewish settlement of Ofra. (Moti Milrod, Maan Images)

Now, it's official: Palestinian property in the West Bank no longer enjoys constitutional protection. This is what could be gleaned from Defense Minister Ehud Barak's decision, made casually but without any legal basis, that houses in the settlement of Ofra, which were built on stolen, private Palestinian land, in violation of both international and local law, will be permitted to remain in place. Barak's stand was expressed in a statement he made in response to a High Court petition filed by Palestinians, aided by the Israeli human-rights organizations Yesh Din and B'Tselem, requesting the enforcement of work-termination and demolition orders that had been issued against such recently erected structures.

The Defense Ministry acknowledged that the building that was the subject of the petition is indeed illegal. So, we can only conclude that Barak, a self-described guardian of the rule of law, who recently declared that "illegal construction must not be tolerated," is suffering from some manifestation of split personality. As someone supposedly exercised by every illegal tent or trailer in the West Bank, the noises he has been making about his ostensible support for evacuation have been audible all the way to Washington. Yet, when it comes to land theft in broad daylight, Barak's shield of law melts away, and felony receives the government's stamp of approval.

But this is nothing new. The Defense Ministry has for many years responded to the plundering of Palestinian land in a two-faced manner: On the one hand, it would condemn the illegal construction and issues demolition orders against it; on the other, it winked and nodded, giving assurances that the orders were only meant to appease the courts and would not be enforced.

This has changed. Tired of all the contradictory facial gestures, Barak has now openly admitted that the government does not, and never did intend to enforce the law, or restore such property to its rightful owners. An array of excuses, but not a single legitimate explanation, were presented to the High Court in an attempt to rationalize the non-enforcement of standing demolition orders and the failure to return stolen lands to their owners.

For years, state representatives squirmed and fidgeted before the court, spreading promises even they did not believe, about "scheduled enforcement," "work plans in the process of being drafted" and "the duty to protect property." The State Attorney's office came up with all sorts of complicated arithmetic formulas that falsely claimed to outline the order of priorities for enforcing the law against illegal construction projects in the West Bank, supposedly with a goal of creating a semblance of legal protection for the Palestinians and their property.

	Related Stories
	Privately run checkpoint stops Palestinians with 'too much food' A journalist beaten - one year later Recovery battle for Gaza war injured

They spoke loftily about the fundamental and constitutional need to defend property rights, and made grand promises suggesting that the ancient Hebrew nation always keeps its word. Who, they asked, if not Defense Minister Barak, could be counted on to come to the rescue of those principles? Each time they appeared before the court, the attorneys sounded more sincere, more convincing. "Very shortly," they implored, they would be able to attain and display some meager achievement, and in so doing, demonstrating that the world's most moral army, and none other, is the defender of the downtrodden.

But then, like a bolt of lightning, came Barak's statement on Ofra, in effect announcing, Forget it! "Please understand us," Defense Ministry staffers mumbled. "The construction in Ofra is entirely illegal, but no one has the power or the will to deal with it," simultaneously hinting at the fact that such action "would not keep the Iranian bomb at bay."

In straightforward terms, Barak let the court know that "the minister does not intend to order the implementation of demolition orders at this time." The legal hot potato is now back in the court's court. In truth, we can only welcome the defense minister's statement. It shows that he is tired of years of playing games and making excuses, and is now ready to acknowledge a single, terrible truth: There is no intention of imposing the rule of law in the occupied territories. If to date we had empty promises that concealed an impotent law-enforcement system, now even these promises have been shed, leaving us only violent, brutish and racist anarchy.

Shlomy Zachary is an attorney and a member of the legal team of Yesh Din: Volunteers for Human Rights.