Judicial Jurisdiction over Jerusalemites According to the Oslo Accords

Abstract

This study examines the issue of legal jurisdiction over Palestinian residents of Jerusalem, one of the most prominent legal challenges in the contemporary Palestinian landscape, where a contradiction exists between the theoretical jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority and the de facto control exerted by the Israeli administration over the city. The research demonstrates that while the Oslo Accords reorganized judicial jurisdiction across the West Bank and Gaza Strip, they excluded Jerusalem from direct application. Consequently, Jerusalemites have been subjected to the Israeli judicial system in most criminal, civil, and personal status matters, thereby creating a gap between formal legal texts and the practical reality on the ground. Furthermore, this research analyzes the practical and political repercussions of this jurisdictional overlap, including its impact on fair trial guarantees, individual constitutional, political, and civil rights, the difficulties of enforcing judicial rulings within Jerusalem and across different administrative zones, and the complications arising from the competing legal authorities. The study concludes that resolving these dilemmas requires developing a comprehensive Palestinian legislative framework to regulate the personal jurisdiction of Jerusalemites outside the direct control of the Palestinian Authority. Such a framework would enhance the protection of fundamental rights and reduce jurisdictional overlap, while remaining committed to international humanitarian law and human rights standards, thereby ensuring legal stability that balances the national identity of Jerusalemites with the realities on the ground.