Analysis: The ruling that flattens the Hametz Law

It'll be interesting to see whether more stores in Jerusalem sell flour products this Pessah.

By DAN IZENBERG
April 4, 2008 00:49
2 minute read.
bread 88

bread 88. (photo credit: )

 
X

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

It will be interesting to see whether more stores in Jerusalem will sell bread and other products made of flour this coming Pessah than did last year. This is in the wake of a ruling handed down on Thursday by Judge Tamar Bar-Asher-Tsaban in which she quashed indictments against two businesses in the capital, a pizza parlor and a grocery store, that sold hametz to customers last year. The state indicted the four businesses on criminal charges of violating the 1986 Prohibition on the Display of Hametz Law. The defendants were the first to have been criminally charged under this law. Bar-Asher-Tsaban found that the allegations in the charge were incorrect and therefore had to be dropped. The law states that "No merchant will display a hametz product in public for purchase or consumption. For the purposes of this law, 'a hametz product' includes bread, a bun, a pita or any other product made of flour." According to the judge, while the law defined the term "hametz product," it had not defined the term "in public." Bar-Asher-Tsaban went to the Criminal Code, where she found a distinction in the definitions given for the terms "public place" and "in public." While the four establishments included in the indictments met the criteria for "public places" according to the law, the fact that they sold hametz did not answer the charge of "displaying it in public," according to the legal definition. According to the Criminal Code, "in public" refers to "an act which takes place in a public place and a person can observe... from wherever he is situated." The judge referred to a case in which the court acquitted a man charged with committing an indecent act in public because he had committed the act in the toilet stall of a public bathroom. Although the bathroom was a "public place," the act was not committed "in public." Attorney Gilead Barnea, who represented the Retrobar restaurant, one of the defendants in the case, told The Jerusalem Post that none of the owners of the enterprises that had been indicted had displayed hametz in a window facing the street. Therefore, the display did not fulfill the definition of the law. The hametz was, indeed, displayed in a public place, but could not be observed from every possible location. The case never reached the stage of giving testimony. Ben-Asher-Tsaban threw out the indictments after hearing preliminary arguments by the defense lawyers and the state.

Related Content

Jisr az-Zarq
April 3, 2014
Residents of Jisr az-Zarqa beckon Israel Trail hikers to enjoy their town

By SHARON UDASIN