He Ru Follow us: Make a7 your Homepage
      Free Daily Israel Report

      Arutz 7 Most Read Stories

      Blogs


      ‘If Court is Planning to Listen – Why has Peres Signed Files?’

      Some bereaved families hopeful over Supreme Court bid, others skeptical. ‘If court will listen, why is Peres signing files?’ one asks.
      By Maayana Miskin
      First Publish: 10/17/2011, 9:33 AM

      Supreme Court
      Supreme Court
      Flash 90

      Families that have filed suit against the expected release Tuesday of terrorist killers in the Shalit deal are split regarding their feelings toward the case. Some told Arutz Sheva they believe the appeals have a good chance of success, while others believe chances the Supreme Court will rule in their favor are non-existent.

      In the latter category was one bereaved mother who pointed out that while the court has agreed to hear cases against the deal on Monday morning, terrorists’ files were transferred to President Shimon Peres, Saturday night, in order for him to sign off on their pardons.

      If the appeals truly have a chance of success, she wondered, why would Peres not wait for the court’s approval before beginning the pardons process? “If the appeal stands, and this is a serious appeal, why is the president signing?”

      Aryeh Bachrach, whose son Ohad was murdered by terrorists in 1995, expressed similar sentiments. He has no hope that the court will take the appeal seriously, he told Arutz Sheva.

      In fact, he said, he would have preferred that the terrorists be released immediately with the cabinet’s decision, instead of being dragged out for several days, in his words giving families “false hope” and making a joke of the legal process.

      That said, Bachrach said he supports the current appeals. If the court is making a show of allowing appeals, families should use the opportunity to register their protest, he said.

      Others disagreed. While previous appeals against prisoner release have failed, this one stands a good chance of succeeding, Dan Shayon said. Shayon, who is one of the parties to the appeal, told Arutz Sheva that while previous appeals were dismissed by the court as intervention in military or diplomatic affairs, in this case the prisoner exchange is part of a deal based in perceptions of morality rather than Israel’s ties to the Palestinian Authority.

      Because the deal is moral and not diplomatic, the court will have no excuse to argue that the matter is outside its jurisdiction, he said.

      Meir Indor, head of the Almagor organization for victims of terror, expressed confidence in the suit’s chances as well. Indor’s group is leading the legal case against the trade.