On video: Demonstration in favor of the legal revolution in Tel Aviv (drone footage: Ronen Reuters)
The Regional Court in Haifa rejected (Tuesday) the petition of a senior attorney in the Haifa District Attorney's Office to allow him to demonstrate against the legal revolution.
The panel of three judges led by the president of the court, Judge Yigal Gelam, stated in its decision that "granting the applicant a permit to participate in the aforementioned demonstrations and protests will be a violation of public trust, the public service in general and the prosecutor's office in particular."
The attorney is expected to appeal to the National Labor Court.
The senior attorney who has been employed by the Haifa District Attorney's Office for more than 27 years, applied three weeks ago to the court to issue an order against the Civil Service Commission and the Ministry of Justice, instructing them to allow him to participate in the demonstrations taking place across the country against the legal reform.
The Israel Democracy Guard Association joined the proceedings as a "friend of the court".
The background to the lawyer's request is the intention of his son, who belongs to the LGBT community, to leave the country if the government succeeds in implementing the legal revolution. For this reason, the lawyer turned to the deputy director of the Ministry of Justice, and asked for her permission to take part in the protest demonstrations against the government's plan, that is In view of his personal circumstances and relying on the publications in the media, according to which a permit was given to the employees of the Mossad for Intelligence and special positions to take part in the demonstrations.
His application was forwarded to the Civil Service Commission for examination, "since his application has broad implications for all public service employees", after which he was informed that his request could not be granted.
As part of his appeal, two discussions were held.
Demonstrators against the legal revolution in Haifa, last month (photo: official website, Omri Rosenberg)
In his decision, Judge Glam noted that the State Attorney's Office's decision not to allow the attorney to participate in demonstrations and protests against the government's plan to change the legislation was examined by the Civil Service Commission, and in accordance with its opinion, and that their judgment "is not flawed by unreasonableness", and therefore their decision should not be interfered with .
"The individual's right to demonstrate is an important fundamental right, a derivative of freedom of expression, for its supreme importance. At the same time, the individual's fundamental right to demonstrate is not an absolute right, and must be balanced against other fundamental interests," he stated.
He rejected the lawyer's claim that the topic of the demonstrations is preserving democracy and therefore it is not a "political issue".
"The demonstrators are a large evening of people with different opinions, from all ends of the political map. It seems that the goal of the demonstrations is to promote different positions. Thus, in the demonstrations, chants are heard that support democracy and seek to promote the rule of law, as well as chants that go against the government and its leader in general and against a program The government in particular. Various protest chants are also heard in the demonstrations, for many other reasons, including in relation to women's rights, the rights of the LGBT community, the rights of various minorities, etc. In the demonstrations, various people also speak, some of them with political identification, who express their positions regarding the government's intentions promote different laws. Even if we assume that the participants in the demonstrations do not represent only one side of the political map, it cannot be determined that the multitude of issues underlying those demonstrations do not carry a political nature. It cannot be determined, as was determined in the Goren Square matter, that we are dealing with demonstrations that seek To promote only general values that are not at all politically controversial. Such a statement would be artificial."
More in Walla!
Are the citizens of the periphery second class?
It is not because of the legal revolution
To the full article
Demonstrators against the legal revolution in Haifa, last month (Photo: Yoav Itiel)
More in Walla!
Shikli attacks the governor: "Sabotaging Israel's economy"
The police officer who beat a protester arrived for questioning at the police station
Can you get rid of cataracts?
Discover the most effective and safest method
The judge noted that the panel did not lose sight of the lawyer's claim that the protesters see their participation in the demonstrations as taking part in a "struggle for the rule of law", but stated that even if this is the face of things, "it cannot be determined that this type of struggle is devoid of any political aspect and does not involve any issues at all politics that are in public controversy. It is clear that the mass protest has a political tone and is based on various claims, among other things, against the government's plan and the consequences attributed to it by the demonstrators," and his words: "The matters that the demonstrations seek to promote, or some of them, are matters of a distinctly political nature, since They inherently involve issues that are in political controversy."
He noted that the attorney is employed by the state attorney's office, which is part of the state's general prosecution, headed by the legal adviser to the government.
"The position of the legal advisor to the government is also, as we know, at the heart of the storm surrounding the government's plan to change the legislation. Under these circumstances, granting the applicant a permit to participate in the aforementioned demonstrations and protests will constitute an injury to the public's trust in the public service in general and the attorney general's office in particular."
It should be noted that, contrary to the publications in the media, Judge Yigal Glam stated that "no legal opinion has been compiled regarding the participation of soldiers in demonstrations recently and that the head of the ACA has the authority to determine that a soldier of the lower rank of lieutenant colonel may participate in a protest, however, a review of the aforementioned instruction shows that This does not apply to a demonstration or protest in a partisan or political matter.
Regarding the right of the Mossad employees to demonstrate - the employees of the Mossad Legal Bureau are prohibited from participating in demonstrations, while the state clarified that according to the opinion given by the Mossad, the demonstrations that are the subject of the proceedings were classified as demonstrations of a political nature.
"We respect and appreciate the desire of the applicant to express his protest due to his personal circumstances and on behalf of his son. However, as mentioned, in front of the fundamental right to protest, stand the applicant's duties as a state attorney," the judge noted on behalf of the panel.
Considering all the circumstances of the matter, the attorney was not awarded costs.
The lawyer Ila Honigman who represents the lawyer told Walla!
In response: "We intend to appeal as soon as possible to the national court."
news
News in Israel
Criminal and legal news
Tags
The legal revolution