The right to protest has held lofty status in Israel since the passing of Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. This right is not absolute, and sans a specific law pertaining to this right, the Supreme Court has had to repeatedly re-balance and redefine it opposite the rights of the individual and the public interest.
On Wednesday, last week, Deputy Attorney-General for Special Issues Nurit Litman issued surprising new directives that the state prosecution should be more lenient with protesters who get into low-key altercations with the police. These directives were not meant for prosecutors' eyes only, rather were disseminated to media outlets with the aim of sending a message to specific protesters – those opposing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
These are not normal directives, rather an open challenge to the Supreme Court's ruling, the law, the authority of the police, the public order and interest, and Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. Some would even say these aren't directives, but rebellion in contravention of Israeli penal law.
Litman's directives, drafted in conjunction with Attorney General Avichai Mendelblit, grant protesters immunity from prosecution on the condition that they riot, demonstrate illegally, block thoroughfares and disrupt the daily lives of citizens, whose lives are disrupted enough due to the coronavirus pandemic. The cherry on top of this guided anarchism is the permission granted to citizens to ignore the calls of police to disperse.
Litman-Mendelblit add insult to injury by determining that if violence is perpetrated against police officers – for example throwing objects at them or pushing security barricades into them so as to "foil the police officer in the exercise of his duty," based on clause 274 of the penal code – the maximum punishment should not exceed two years behind bars instead of the existing five-year maximum sentence. Thus, essentially, the directives annul the law and abandon the police officers to the whims of the protesters.
These are not directives, but an outrage stemming from the personal interests of one man, Avichai Mendelblit, for whom the protests provide a tailwind for his legal pursuits against Netanyahu. The unusual step should keep the prime minister's opponents and supporters alike up at night. Had these directives been limited both in time and scope to a specific location, my views would be less harsh, even despite the odor of selective law enforcement. My concern does not stem from political affiliation. This will reverberate even after the Netanyahu era ends. These directives will be used by rioters to justify disturbing the public order, spontaneously block roads, endanger lives, and assault officers of the law. There is no balance here between the right to free expression and protest, and the public's right to peace and security. It delivers a problematic message that could haunt us and undermine stability for many years to come.
About a year ago, when the Ethiopian community erupted in protest following the unfortunate shooting death of Solomon Tekah, the State Attorney Office didn't issue any directives to provide even slight relief for the demonstrators, who were expressing authentic, heartfelt pain. Simply stated, there were no personal interests at stake.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
The light at the end of the anarchy tunnel is that those opposed to the festering corruption in the State Attorney Office and the outrageous conflicts of interest of the Supreme Court justices, can and should capitalize on the situation by protesting en masse and spontaneously outside the Supreme Court in Jerusalem, outside the home of Deputy State Attorney Liat Ben-Ari in Moshav Herut, in Tzhala near the home of Supreme Court President Esther Hayut, and outside Mendelblit's home in Petach Tikva – just as long as they don't forget a copy of the new directives, to present after they are inevitably arrested.
