In a letter to ACRI, member organization of FIDH in Israel on 30 January 2005, Attorney Mazuz made clear « that he had no knowledge of the decision and had never been informed of its existence », before issuing a statement regarding his position.
He then noticed to Finance Minister Netanyahu that the order should be given to immediately halt the application of the « Absentee Law » that enables the State of Israel to confiscate property in East Jerusalem with no compensation for the owners, on the ground the owner was not a resident of Jerusalem.
The FIDH is concerned at the fact that Attorney Mazuz’s decision was publicly rejected by some Ministers within the Israeli Government, and condemns the purpose of Benyamin Netanyahu who defended the application of the Absentee Law by arguing before the Knesset that « Jerusalem was a sovereign and united Israeli city » and as such, « Arab West Bank residents » had no real foothold in its territory.
In support of ACRI’s demand, the FIDH urges the Israeli Government to rescind the decison made on July 8, 2004 and to notify to the authorities not to apply the Absentee Property Law to assets in East Jerusalem and surrounding villages;
Furthermore; the FIDH demands that the properties that have already been confiscated since July 2004, in application of the Cabinet decision, be returned to their owners.