The High Court should refrain from intervening in matters of national defense, according to Adv. Nitzana Darshan-Leitner, Chairwoman of legal NGO Shurat HaDin. Leitner came out in support of a law proposed by MK Yaakov Katz (National Union) that would prevent the High Court from interfering in security questions, in cases like the recent decision on opening Highway 443 for Palestinian Authority Arab traffic.
"Judges lack knowledge in certain fields and they usually consult experts on matters of medicine or construction,” she noted in an interview with Arutz Sheva's Hebrew service. “But for some reason, when it comes to security matters, the judges do not ask for expert opinions and they make up their minds on their own, despite having no professional knowledge.”
The judges have “no right” to make decisions with security implications, Adv. Leitner emphasized. “In the verdict regarding [Highway] 443 they explicitly said that they do not know the best way to protect passengers' lives. So how, then, could they announce that the road would be opened? I am concerned that their desire to publish a verdict that conforms with a certain mindset causes them to take decisions without an [expert's] opinion.”
Adv. Leitner noted that the High Court is a “fast and simple” framework for discussing appeals and does not use interrogations and counter-interrogations of witnesses. Therefore, she explained, “the High Court cannot put itself in the shoes of the IDF and its commanders. They are the ones who will determine what the security needs of the citizens of the State of Israel are. They have studied this field and unfortunately, the judges are not well versed in it.”