Settler to court: Allow protests outside Shas MKs' homes

Psagot resident petitions High Court after police refuse to let him demonstrate outside Yishai, Attias houses.

By DAN IZENBERG
November 18, 2010 02:03
2 minute read.
Shas MK Ariel Attias

311_ariel attias. (photo credit: Ariel Jerozolimski)

 
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

Ro’i David Reeder, a settler from Psagot, petitioned the High Court of Justice on Wednesday, after the police rejected his request to hold protest vigils outside the homes of Interior Minister Eli Yishai and Construction and Housing Minister Ariel Attias.

Yishai and Attias reportedly intend to abstain if the security cabinet votes on whether to impose another building moratorium on settlements in the West Bank.

Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


Reeder’s lawyer, Itzhak Bam, said the police refusal was based on a guideline issued by then attorney-general Elyakim Rubinstein in 2003 on the question of the right to hold quiet protest vigils in front of the homes of public figures.

The guideline allows the police to reject a request for a permit to hold such a vigil in front of the public figure’s home “as opposed to in front of his office.

“If a permit is necessary, and the protest involves a public figure’s private home that he does not normally use for his public responsibilities, holding a protest may be forbidden if there is an effective alternative to which the protesters can be directed,” according to the guideline.

Another paragraph states that “In order [for the police] to refuse a permit, there must be information or circumstances pointing to real danger of rioting or injury, such as information that the organizers of the demonstration plan to disturb the peace.”

Bam said the High Court has ruled several times that the right to freedom of expression is equal to the right of public figures to their privacy.



But the implication of the attorney-general’s guideline was that “all quiet protest vigils in front of the house of a ‘public figure,’ which can be held in front of his office, will be forbidden, whether or not the protest requires a permit.”

In general, a protest involving fewer than 50 people does not require a police permit. In many cases, even demonstrations of more than 50 people do not require one. But when it comes to demonstrating in front of the homes of public figures, a permit is required no matter how many people are involved.

Bam wrote that Reeder and other protesters, who were in the midst of building their own homes, wanted to protest precisely in front of the homes of those who were preventing them from continuing to build them, to emphasize the gap in circumstances between the two sides.

Related Content

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

By SHARON UDASIN