To many, the calls for Justice Minister Amir Ohana, and in some cases Interior Minister Aryeh Deri and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to resign are more a function of political loathing and less to do with a deep commitment to lofty political standards. Still, the fact that so many in the Israeli discourse are incapable of making one normative statement without calling to oust Netanyahu should not dictate the public's treatment of the disaster.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter
Forty-five people lost their lives to the tragic stampede at Mount Meron, which took place under the watchful eye of the police. Police at the scene were dealing with intolerable conditions while trying to bring a little bit of order to what is at its very essence a very ecstatic event. They did this at a site that isn't equipped to handle the terrible crowding that took place. Even if this wasn't the result of deliberate policy, it was no natural disaster either. Nor it is the result of an error in judgment in the face of an external and uncontrollable risk factor such as a fire or attack. It is the result of failed planning, allocation of quotas, authorizations, management, and supervision given the known data and foreseeable conditions at the site.
It is both natural and necessary to expect the public security minister to resign. True, in Israel's aggressive and decisive political atmosphere, this would appear to be just another expression of the culture of lynch mobs, field trials, and guillotines in the public square. However, resignation is not an admission of guilt, nor is it punishment. It is first and foremost a recognition of the gravity of the disaster. It is a gesture that sends relatives of the dead and the injured the message that for the state, it's not business as usual, and this won't end with another committee or report.
Still, resignation is not a purely symbolic move. After such a tragedy, resignation is an expression of ongoing failures in both planning and management at all levels. As such, it is a necessary step in correcting the situation. To ensure this doesn't end up in another report for the protocols, an investigation into the circumstances and the officials involved must be carried out in the open, out of concern for the involvement or influence of those involved, in particular the minister and chief of police. They are at the top of the pyramid tasked with ensuring the security of those that participated in the Lag B'Omer event, and this happened on their watch. They bear responsibility, and this responsibility has meaning.
It is clear to every consumer of Israeli current affairs that 90% of the use of the term "oversight" in such a context serves the desire to mark those "responsible" for the oversight. The manipulations are obvious, as are those financing them. But that doesn't mean we need to hole up in the concept of personal justice. This was almost certainly a case of systematic and ongoing neglect that did not begin with Ohana. An objective investigation may very well find that given the circumstances, or in comparison with the past, the police chief and his people went above and beyond to ensure everyone was able to enjoy the event safely. Yet none of that detracts from their duty to rise above the personal and act in accordance with their roles as official government representatives and take responsibility.
This resignation will be made even more significant and appear even more genuine and mature if they have the courage to do so as soon as possible, and before the public's demands to do transform into cries of rage and despair.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
