N., aged 30, a resident of Har Brachah in the Shomron, was served with an administrative order forbidding him to enter his home or any area of Judea and Samaria for a period of three months. As was the case with the other 21 men served similar orders over the past few months, no explanation was given.
However, when N. appealed the order, the IDF explained to the court that N. is "characterized as one with an extremist ideology based on hatred of Arabs, took part in clashes with Arabs during which damage was caused to property, and took part in violent incidents that involve physical danger."
In the ruling handed down today, Judge Lt.-Col. Netanel Benisho ruled that though the above considerations are not to be taken lightly, "I have not been convinced that the appellant presents a concrete danger obligating the use of such an unusual and injurious measure."
The judge also took into account the fact that N., who was imprisoned for ten formative years beginning at age 14 for throwing a fatal grenade into an Arab marketplace, has had many hardships since then - but has been making good progress with the help of social worker working closely with him.
The judge also noted the appellant's claims that the orders would harm his right to earn a living, that he had no intention of carrying out forbidden acts, that he had never been previously warned by the Shabak (GSS), and that, in general, the order was issued with no basis whatsoever.
Similar Orders
Some 20 other distancing orders have been ordered under similar circumstances over the past several months, for between 3-12 months each. Despite weekly protests outside the home of IDF Central Commander Gen. Yair Naveh, who signed the orders, none of them have been nullified - except for that of N.
The Honenu civil rights organization hired Atty. Adi Kedar to represent N. in his appeal. Honenu head Shmuel Medad told Arutz-7, "We have seen that the courts barely respond to our opposition to these unfair and unjust orders - but in this case, the injustice was so obvious and blatant that we decided to go to court. N. himself said he didn't want to appeal, because he has seen how the courts treat us, but I told him that in this case we really have a chance - and thank G-d, it worked."
Medad said that the Shabak (General Security Service), the body behind the orders, simply doesn't care what the public thinks. "It even ignored a recent across-the-board Knesset motion condemning the orders," he said.
Just last month, all the Jewish parties in the Knesset approved a resolution stating, "The Knesset demands that the law authorities investigate and try every Israeli citizen suspected of a crime. Use must not be made of restraining orders, administrative arrests and other means in which there is punishment without trial, unless there is a clear suspicion of danger to national security."
Medad said that there has been some progress made, in that many of the administrative orders that expired were not renewed. "This cannot be taken for granted," he said, "as many times, orders of this sort are automatically renewed. But in some cases, such as with Ariel Gruner, the orders were renewed. Today's ruling regarding N. is the barest minimum justice that must be done; we demand that all these undemocratic orders be rescinded."
For related stories on Arutz-7, click here.
However, when N. appealed the order, the IDF explained to the court that N. is "characterized as one with an extremist ideology based on hatred of Arabs, took part in clashes with Arabs during which damage was caused to property, and took part in violent incidents that involve physical danger."
In the ruling handed down today, Judge Lt.-Col. Netanel Benisho ruled that though the above considerations are not to be taken lightly, "I have not been convinced that the appellant presents a concrete danger obligating the use of such an unusual and injurious measure."
The judge also took into account the fact that N., who was imprisoned for ten formative years beginning at age 14 for throwing a fatal grenade into an Arab marketplace, has had many hardships since then - but has been making good progress with the help of social worker working closely with him.
The judge also noted the appellant's claims that the orders would harm his right to earn a living, that he had no intention of carrying out forbidden acts, that he had never been previously warned by the Shabak (GSS), and that, in general, the order was issued with no basis whatsoever.
Similar Orders
Some 20 other distancing orders have been ordered under similar circumstances over the past several months, for between 3-12 months each. Despite weekly protests outside the home of IDF Central Commander Gen. Yair Naveh, who signed the orders, none of them have been nullified - except for that of N.
The Honenu civil rights organization hired Atty. Adi Kedar to represent N. in his appeal. Honenu head Shmuel Medad told Arutz-7, "We have seen that the courts barely respond to our opposition to these unfair and unjust orders - but in this case, the injustice was so obvious and blatant that we decided to go to court. N. himself said he didn't want to appeal, because he has seen how the courts treat us, but I told him that in this case we really have a chance - and thank G-d, it worked."
Medad said that the Shabak (General Security Service), the body behind the orders, simply doesn't care what the public thinks. "It even ignored a recent across-the-board Knesset motion condemning the orders," he said.
Just last month, all the Jewish parties in the Knesset approved a resolution stating, "The Knesset demands that the law authorities investigate and try every Israeli citizen suspected of a crime. Use must not be made of restraining orders, administrative arrests and other means in which there is punishment without trial, unless there is a clear suspicion of danger to national security."
Medad said that there has been some progress made, in that many of the administrative orders that expired were not renewed. "This cannot be taken for granted," he said, "as many times, orders of this sort are automatically renewed. But in some cases, such as with Ariel Gruner, the orders were renewed. Today's ruling regarding N. is the barest minimum justice that must be done; we demand that all these undemocratic orders be rescinded."
For related stories on Arutz-7, click here.