Today (23.7.2020), Hadas Shtaif, the Army Radio’s Police Correspondent, reported an inappropriate involvement of the Minister of Public Security Amir Ohana in an attempt to prevent demonstrations in front of the Prime Minister’s residence. According to the report, the Minister met with neighbors of the residence, who complained to him of a severe impact to their quality of life due to the noise and other such hazards, and to whom he recommended they petition the High Court of Justice. And so, two days ago (21.7.2020), 61 neighbors filed a petition to the High Court against the Commander of the Jerusalem District. Following this, the Minister held a meeting yesterday including the Acting Commissioner, Commander of the Jerusalem District, and the Legal Counsel of the Police, demanding them to discontinue the demonstrations in front of the Prime Minister’s residence and relocate them to Sacher Park or elsewhere. The Legal Counsel of the Police clarified to the Minister that both the law and ruling of the High Court mandate the police to approve the demonstrations, to which the Minister suggested challenging the High Court’s ruling in the case.
In response, we appealed to the Attorney General today, for the second time, and reiterated our request to immediately inform the Minister of Public Security that he is forbidden from meddling in the work of the police. Furthermore, we requested the Attorney General to provide full support to the police in refusing to meet with the Minister on issues outside his jurisdiction.
In the appeal, ACRI’s Chief Legal Counsel Dan Yakir explains that there is a severe systemic disruption - a Minister recommending citizens to file a petition to the High Court, against the body he is assigned to; unjustly instructing the police on how to act; calling the police to limit the constitutional right to demonstrate, and especially in regard to demonstrations against the Prime Minister with whom he is closely politically and constitutionally affiliated; and attempting to inappropriately influence the position of the judiciary in a pending legal proceeding.
The appeal states: “the Minister of Public Security is refusing to accept the fact that while he is ministerially responsible for the police, he is not its Commander-in-Chief. In this case, the Legal Counsel of the Police took a stance and clarified to the Minister that his demands are illegal… [but] there is a serious concern that the Minister’s message will spread down to lower ranks, and impact their considerations when giving out permits for demonstrations.”
Following ours and similar appeals, the Attorney General appealed to the Acting Commissioner, emphasizing the duty of police to assist in fulfilling the right to demonstrate and enact its authority in an independent, equal, and straightforward way, without external input.