The Calendar of Recurring Closures: Israel Intensifies Restrictions on the Occupied West Bank During Jewish Holidays & in ‘Commemoration’ of 7 October

September 22, 2026
 |  No Comments

Between September and the first week of October 2026, and under two different pretexts: Jewish holidays and the commemoration of 7 October, Israel has announced a series of closures that impact the entirety of the occupied West Bank. As a successive period of Jewish holidays and religious occasions is being observed, beginning with Rosh Hashanah, followed by Yom Kippur and Sukkot, and culminating in Shemini Atzeret and Simchat Torah in early October, this period is a yearly occurrence accompanied by heightened Israeli measures across the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt). Every year, Palestinians anticipate Jewish holidays with great concern, one that does not lie in the observance of Jewish holidays or the exercise of religious practices in themselves, but rather in the annual, recurring measures imposed by the Israeli occupying authorities in connection with these occasions, as they restrict the rights of the Palestinian population or limit their access to fundamental rights, essential services, markets, transportation, places of worship, and the ordinary conduct of daily life.  

Closure of the West Bank and the Militarization of Movement Restrictions

On 4 October 2026, Israeli Defense Minister Katz issued an order imposing a general closure on the occupied West Bank, restricting Palestinians’ movement through checkpoints and crossings and suspending permits to Jerusalem. The closure was announced against the backdrop of events marking the third anniversary of 7 October 2023. Its timing is particularly significant because it followed the closure imposed during the Jewish holiday period, which ended on 4 October. The Israeli occupation authorities treated the holiday-related closure and the 7 October closure as distinct measures. The sequence therefore raises questions not only about the imposition of temporary security restrictions, but also about the manner in which specific dates and calendar-based occasions within the Israeli security framework become triggers for renewed restrictions on the movement of Palestinians living under occupation.

The holiday period was itself accompanied by heightened militarization and restrictions on movement. During Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, the Israeli occupation forces announced the deployment of two additional battalions to the West Bank, citing “security requirements.” In parallel, the Israeli occupation authorities imposed a comprehensive closure of the West Bank, including crossings and main entry points, for several days. The measures resulted in heightened restrictions on Palestinian movement and the suspension or limitation of permits, affecting movement within the West Bank as well as access to Jerusalem. They also affected Palestinians from inside the Green Line who require access to the West Bank for employment and other regular activities.

These restrictions have particular implications for access to Jerusalem, where entry from the West Bank is already governed by an Israeli permit regime and a system of checkpoints and movement controls. During the holiday period, restrictions affected Palestinians across religious communities. For Muslims, they limited access to Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Old City through checkpoints, barriers, movement controls, and exclusion orders affecting Palestinian Jerusalemites, including Waqf employees, guards, and worshippers. At the same time, settler groups entering the compound were accompanied by Israeli occupation police protection, producing unequal conditions of access to one of Jerusalem’s most significant holy sites.

The restrictions also coincided with increasing demands by extremist settler groups, particularly groups associated with the so-called “Temple Mount,” to alter the nature and conditions of Jewish presence within the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound. Reported demands have included extending the hours during which settler groups enter the site, permitting Jewish rituals within its courtyards, and calls for allocating part of the compound for the establishment of a permanent synagogue. These demands acquire additional significance during Jewish holidays, which such groups have sought to use to intensify their presence and religious practices at the site.

Palestinian Christians from the West Bank are similarly affected. Access to Jerusalem’s churches, monasteries, and other Christian holy sites is subject to the Israeli permit regime. Consequently, the closure of the West Bank and the restriction or suspension of permits during Jewish holidays can prevent Palestinian Christians from reaching places of worship and maintaining their religious and social ties with Jerusalem, including during periods when they would ordinarily be permitted to enter the city.

The restrictions also extend beyond movement between the West Bank and Jerusalem to Palestinians’ ability to travel internationally. During the Rosh Hashanah holiday, Allenby Bridge (Karameh Crossing), a primary gateway for Palestinian residents of the West Bank to Jordan and onward international travel, was fully closed on 19, 20, and 21 September, preventing passenger movement through the crossing. Operations resumed on 22 September but under restricted operating hours, from 8:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. in both directions. The closure and subsequent reduction in operating hours further constrained Palestinians’ ability to travel and access employment, education, essential services, and family connections outside the West Bank.

Against this backdrop, the general closure announced for 7 October assumes a particular significance. Three years after 7 October 2023, Palestinians in the occupied West Bank were subjected to renewed movement restrictions in connection with a date carrying national and security significance for the occupying power. The sequence of measures, from the holiday-related closure to the separate closure announced for 7 October, raises questions concerning the limits of the occupying power’s authority to impose restrictions on protected persons and the extent to which commemorative or calendar-based occasions may lawfully serve as a basis for activating restrictions affecting an entire population. This is particularly significant where the restrictions are not linked to the individual conduct of the persons affected, but are instead imposed generally on Palestinians residing in the occupied territory.

The Gaza Strip

The Jewish holiday season has a direct and acute impact on the economic and living conditions in the Gaza Strip, particularly in the context of an ongoing humanitarian catastrophe resulting from the ongoing genocide, where the entry of commercial goods, humanitarian assistance, and fuel remains dependent on crossings controlled by Israel. Restrictions and closures during this period further disrupt the flow of essential supplies at a time when Gaza’s local production capacity, storage capacity, and ability to meet basic needs have already been severely undermined.

One of the most significant impacts is the closure or partial operation of commercial crossings, particularly the ‘Kerem Shalom’ crossing, which serves as the main entry point for goods and humanitarian supplies into the Gaza Strip. 

During the first half of September, the crossing was fully or partially closed for six days, further disrupting the movement of supplies. During the first half of the month, only 1,955 commercial trucks, 638 aid trucks, and 42 cooking-gas trucks were permitted to enter Gaza, while no commercial fuel was allowed to enter. These figures stand in stark contrast to the scale of the needs in the Strip: an average of only 200–250 trucks entered Gaza each day, compared with daily needs exceeding 700 trucks. The humanitarian protocol annexed to the ceasefire agreement provides for the entry of 600 aid trucks and 50 fuel trucks per day, highlighting the significant gap between basic needs and the supplies actually reaching the Strip.

The uncertainty associated with repeated closures and electricity shortages also pushes residents toward emergency stockpiling whenever food supplies are available.Such measures, combined with limited market supply, can generate sudden increases in demand and further contribute to price rises, as well as increasing the risks of hoarding and market manipulation. The restrictions on the movement of goods during the holiday season therefore extend beyond delays in the entry of trucks: they affect the availability of food and fuel, market stability, the prices of essential commodities, and the ability of households in Gaza to access their basic daily needs.

On 4 October 2026, Israeli Defense Minister Katz issued an order imposing a general closure on the occupied West Bank, restricting Palestinians’ movement through checkpoints and crossings and stopping permits to Jerusalem. The closure was announced against the backdrop of events marking the third anniversary of 7 October 2023. 

The timing of these measures is particularly significant. The closure announced for 7 October followed the closure imposed during the Jewish holiday period, which ended on 4 October. The Israeli-occupied authorities distinguished between the closure associated with the holiday period and the 7 October closure. Accordingly, the issue is not merely the imposition of a temporary security measure, but also the manner in which a specific date in the Israeli security calendar becomes a trigger for reimposing restrictions on the movement of the Palestinian living under occupation.

Three years after the 7 October 2023, Palestinians in the occupied West Bank are subject to movement restrictions in connection with the commemoration of that date, raising questions concerning the limits of the occupying power’s authority to impose collective restrictions on protected persons. The connection between the closure and a date carrying national and security significance for the occupying power raises questions about the extent to which commemorative and calendar-based occasions may lawfully serve as a basis for activating measures that restrict the movement of a population living under occupation, particularly where such restrictions are not based on the individual conduct of the persons affected, but are instead imposed generally on the population of the occupied territory.

Legal Framework and Analysis 

The legal implications of the measures documented in this report must be assessed in light of Israel’s obligations as the occupying Power and the rights of the Palestinian population under international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The religious character of the occasions does not alter these obligations. 

A. Israel’s obligations as the occupying Power 

The West Bank, including Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip form part of the oPt. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has reaffirmed the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Hague Regulations, and international human rights law to the oPt. In its 19 July 2024 Advisory Opinion, the Court reaffirmed that the oPt constitutes a single territorial unit comprising the West Bank, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, and held that Israel’s obligations in Gaza under the law of occupation are commensurate with the degree of its effective control.

Occupation does not confer sovereignty. Article 43 of the Hague Regulations requires the occupying Power to restore and ensure public order and safety while respecting the laws in force in the occupied territory. Its authority is therefore temporary and constrained by the law of occupation and its obligations toward the civilian population. Security measures are permissible, but they must remain within these legal limits. The ICJ’s 2004 Wall Advisory Opinion further established that restrictions on Palestinian movement cannot be justified by security considerations where the measures adopted are not necessary or proportionate to the objectives pursued. Accordingly, the invocation of security during Jewish holidays does not, in itself, exempt restrictions from legal scrutiny.

B. Freedom of movement, access to services and non-discrimination

Restrictions on checkpoints, crossings, access routes and permits engage the protection of freedom of movement under international human rights law and the obligation to treat protected persons without adverse distinction. Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires protected persons to be treated humanely and without adverse distinction, including on grounds of religion, while respecting their religious convictions and practices. Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) protects freedom of movement and permits restrictions only where they meet the conditions established by law and are consistent with the Covenant’s other rights, including equality and non-discrimination. 

Moreover, Israeli restrictions during Jewish holidays are imposed in a blanket manner over the entirety of the occupied West Bank, over a “security” concern, and not for specific situations – that, notwithstanding that exercise of authority over Palestinian movement and access must be assessed within the wider context of Israel’s prolonged and unlawful presence in the territory and the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination.

C. Discrimination 

Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires protected persons to be treated without adverse distinction, including on grounds of religion, while the ICCPR prohibits discrimination in the enjoyment of rights. In particular, the ICJ concluded in its Advisory Opinion 2024 that Israeli movement restrictions differentiate between Palestinians and Israelis, and that such restrictions amount to prohibited discrimination under Article 2(1) and Article 26 of the ICCPR, and Article 2(2) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), as well as Article (2) of  International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). 

In this context, the legality of holiday-related restrictions cannot be assessed solely by reference to their stated security purpose, but also requires examination of their manner of application and their differential impact on Palestinians and Israeli settlers. Where Palestinian access to Jerusalem, Al-Aqsa Mosque, churches, or other areas is restricted or suspended during Jewish holidays, while settler groups are facilitated or protected in accessing the same or adjacent spaces, such measures may raise concerns of unequal treatment. 

D. Impact on Other Fundamental Rights

The restrictions imposed during Jewish holidays do not affect freedom of movement alone, but may disrupt essential aspects of daily life and impair the effective enjoyment of other fundamental rights protected under international human rights law, including the rights to work, education, health, an adequate standard of living, family life, and religious practice. Restrictions on access to workplaces, schools and universities, healthcare facilities, markets, places of worship, and family and social networks can therefore have consequences extending beyond mobility itself.

In Jerusalem, Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention further protects religious convictions and practices, including the ability of protected persons to access and use religious sites. Accordingly, restrictions preventing Palestinians from reaching Al-Aqsa Mosque, churches, monasteries, and other Holy Sites engage both freedom of movement and the protection of religious practice, and must be considered in light of the established Status Quo governing access, worship, administration, and the respective religious roles at these sites. Where measures adopted during Jewish holidays disproportionately restrict Palestinian Muslims or Christians from accessing their places of worship, the relevant concern is therefore not the religious occasion itself, but whether such measures unlawfully restrict religious practice or movement, discriminate between religious communities, or interfere with the established arrangements governing the Holy Sites.

 In Gaza, restrictions on crossings and the entry of essential goods may further affect access to food, fuel, healthcare, and other basic necessities, with implications for the rights to health and an adequate standard of living. Accordingly, these measures should be assessed in terms of their cumulative impact on the effective enjoyment of interconnected fundamental rights, rather than as isolated restrictions on movement.

E. The distinction between security measures and measures that entrench control

The central analytical issue of this report is therefore the distinction between temporary security measures permitted under the law of occupation and measures that contribute to the consolidation of permanent control over the occupied territory. This broader legal context matters when assessing measures that recur during religious holidays. A restriction should not be examined only as an isolated three-day closure or temporary security deployment. Its significance must also be considered cumulatively. In this sense, the calendar itself is not the legal problem. Rather, it is the use of recurring religious occasions as moments in which the existing system of control is intensified, and Palestinian civilian life is further restricted. When restrictions repeatedly coincide with major religious occasions and affect millions of Palestinians across the oPt, their cumulative effect must be assessed rather than treating each closure as an isolated security incident.

F. Collective Punishment

The legal significance of the 7 October 2026 closure lies not simply in the restriction of movement, but in the apparent use of a commemorative date as a trigger for imposing a general restriction on a population living under occupation. While Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention permits an occupying power to adopt measures of control and security where required by the circumstances of war, such authority does not extend to automatically subjecting the protected population to collective restrictions on the basis of a date associated with the conduct of particular actors three years earlier. The relevant legal question is therefore whether the closure responds to a demonstrable and current security necessity, or whether the date itself has effectively become the basis for restricting the movement of Palestinians as a population. Where a measure is imposed generally, without being linked to the individual conduct of those affected, its characterization as a security measure does not by itself resolve the concern under Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention concerning collective penalties. The issue is consequently the use of 7 October as a recurring trigger for a blanket closure transforms an ostensibly security-based measure into a restriction imposed upon a protected population by virtue of its collective association with an event for which its individual members bear no established responsibility.

G. Gaza: Obligations concerning food, medicine and essential supplies

In Gaza, restrictions on crossings directly affect the population’s access to food, medicine, fuel and other essential goods. The ICJ has recognized Gaza as an integral part of the oPt and held that Israel’s obligations under the law of occupation continue in proportion to its effective control. Article 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires the occupying Power, to the fullest extent of the means available to it, to ensure food and medical supplies for the population and to bring in necessary supplies where local resources are inadequate. Article 59 requires the occupying Power to agree to and facilitate relief schemes when the population is inadequately supplied.

These obligations are complemented by international human rights law. Article 11 of the ICESCR protects the right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food and freedom from hunger, while Article 12 protects the right to the highest attainable standard of health. Accordingly, closures or restrictions affecting the entry of food, medicine and other essential supplies cannot be treated solely as logistical or commercial measures. Their legality must be assessed against Israel’s continuing obligations toward the civilian population. The occurrence of such restrictions during a religious holiday does not suspend those obligations.

H. Cumulative Assessment 

Taken together, the recurring use of Jewish holidays as periods of intensified closures, movement restrictions, permit suspensions, restrictions on access to Holy Sites, and disruptions to the flow of essential goods raises a broader concern than temporary measures. The issue is whether measures adopted ostensibly for security during religious occasions are, in practice and cumulatively, reinforcing a system in which Palestinian civilian life, movement, worship, access to Jerusalem, and access to essential supplies remain subject to intensified external control. 

The protection of Jewish religious observance is not incompatible with Palestinian rights. Rather, Israel’s obligations as the occupying Power require it to protect religious practice while simultaneously safeguarding the rights and welfare of the Palestinian population under its effective control. Religious holidays cannot operate as an exception to those obligations. Where, instead, recurring measures deepen territorial fragmentation, alter established arrangements governing Holy Sites, restrict access according to identity, or obstruct the provision of essential goods and services to the civilian population, they must be assessed as part of the broader system of control and subjugation.

 

References: