High Court postpones ruling to imprison Emmanuel mothers

June 20, 2010 14:47


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Show me later Don't show it again

The High Court of Justice on Sunday afternoon ordered a further postponement in its ruling to imprison the mothers from Emmanuel, and will reach a decision on the matter in a closed hearing this Tuesday. The ruling also applies to Yehuda Fuksman, whose wife Devora gave birth on Thursday.

In its decision, the court stressed that despite their claims, the parents were well aware of the verdict ruling them to prison issued last Tuesday, and “despite them being provided with many opportunities to fulfill it without coercion, they acted in various ways to thwart [the ruling].” The court also noted that it took into account requests from parents to cancel or postpone their imprisonment.

The court also noted the “irregular remarks” against the institution and especially one of the justices, referring to Edmond Levy, which were voiced “as part of the legitimate public discourse,” including by public nominees. “The attorney-general is requested to examine whether these are to be considered contempt of the court,” the High Court's decision read, “and to instruct the public nominees according to what is necessitated by their status and position.”

Related Content

Breaking news
August 20, 2018
Greece exits final bailout successfully