The extent to which public discourse undergoes infantilization processes will be taught by the following story about Judge Zion Sahrai of the Jerusalem Peace House. Sahrai was recently appointed to his post after serving as an advocate for many years. A little over a week ago, Sahrai refused a police request to extend by seven days the detention of all 11 suspects arrested in connection with the riot.Violence, very widespread and especially extreme by Arabs in East Jerusalem. Judge Sahrai’s decision provoked outrage against him on social media. Along with the publication of his photo, quite a few “congratulations” were written on the networks about his decision, which was presented as a scandal, to release the suspects.
A few days passed and the same judge, Zion Sahrai, who was presented as one of the sons of Haman the Agagite, issued a decision to revoke a restraining order issued against young Jews who recited “Shema recitation” on the Temple Mount. The dramatic decision won Saharai congratulations, this time without quotes, from the same right wing that only a moment ago despised him.
Call for condemnation
This time it was the turn of the left wing to rage. An Israeli government minister, not an anonymous tweet without a name and photo, called Judge Sahrai “stupid.” Issawi Frij wrote: “The decision to allow the violation of the status quo in the al-Aqsa compound is not only wrong, but also irresponsible and dangerous. One fool is enough to burn an entire forest. Postponement of its application. “Before we find ourselves in a whirlpool of violence as a result of the magnanimity of one justice of the peace.”
I am prepared to bet that Minister Farage, who was quick to condemn blatantly and vulgarly, did not read Judge Sahrai’s decision at all. I will soon explain why as well.
The decision to allow the violation of the status quo in the Al-Aqsa compound is not only wrong, but also irresponsible and dangerous.
One fool is enough to burn an entire forest and to stop the fire, the prosecutor and the prosecutor’s office must appeal the decision and ask for its postponement.Esawi Frej @EsawiFr @EsawiFr May 22, 2022
Deputy Minister Yair Golan also decided to contribute his thoughts on the matter. In an interview with Anat Davidov and Golan Yokpaz on 103fm, Golan defined Judge Sahrai’s decision as a “serious mistake.” He said, “The court should recognize that there are issues that are a matter of policy and not a case law. The Temple Mount, the most sensitive explosive in the Middle East, if not in the whole world, is first and foremost a political, national issue. “.
In favor of Fridge and Golan, I will explain that Judge Sahrai clearly did not change the status quo on the Temple Mount. The case before him dealt with an appeal against the decision of a police officer to keep them away from the Old City of Jerusalem for two weeks. The appellants claimed that they had not committed any criminal offense, contrary to the police claim, and therefore there is no ground for expulsion against them.
Close reading
Judge Sahrai accepted the claim and wrote: “It is not possible to say that bowing and reciting Shema – in the circumstances of the case before me – raises a reasonable suspicion of conduct that may lead to a breach of peace, as required by law. Which could lead to a breach of the peace. “
Sahrai referred to the fact that according to the police procedures at the entrance to the Temple Mount, “religious / ritual activity with visible signs is prohibited.” Despite this, Sahrai noted that six weeks ago the police commissioner was quoted as saying: “The Temple Mount is open. We allow all residents of the country and the territories who come to pray on the mountain to ascend and observe the worship of religion. “
Sahrai added that “when the appellants’ conduct is done in accordance with the public reading of the Commissioner of Police and in accordance with the Holy Places Preservation Act, they may not be suspected of committing a criminal offense as a result. To the extent that the police believe that any conduct that violates a procedure written by them will act as their understanding on the spot, however, the suspicion of a breach of procedure does not in itself establish a suspicion of committing a criminal offense. Such a suspicion, for the commission of a criminal offense, must be examined on a case-by-case basis separately according to its specific circumstances. “Such a suspicion, for the commission of a criminal offense by the appellants, was not placed before me.”
That is, in light of the commissioner’s call, there is reasonable doubt as to the mental element of committing the appellants’ criminal offense. Sahrai did not state that Jews are allowed to pray on the Temple Mount.
If things were not clear enough to the reasonable reader, Sahrai made it very clear at the end of his decision: “I can not sign my decision without clarifying, because it does not interfere with police work in enforcing public order on the Temple Mount in general, nor a determination regarding freedom of worship on the Temple Mount. These were not discussed in this decision. “
Sahrai added for the really difficult reader, and apparently saw in his holy spirit the struggling students Issawi Frij and Yair Golan, and clarified this for the third time: “Of interfering with a police officer in the performance of his duties or of conduct that may lead to a breach of the peace, which justifies their removal from the Old City for 15 days, nothing more.”
Judge Judge
The Sahrai decision can be disputed from several directions, and indeed while writing the column, Judge Einat Avman-Müller of the District Court accepted the state appeal and overturned the Sahrai decision. But one thing was supposed to be clear: Sahrai did not change the status quo and did not seek to set a new policy of its own. He did not deny the police the right to prevent (unfortunately the rabbi, Oda and not Abush) Jews from praying on the Temple Mount.
Golan’s claim that the judge should have left the decision to the government is a ridiculous claim in light of the fact that this is a criminal proceeding and a question about the mental element required for a conviction for committing an offense. Should the Deputy Minister of Economy or the Minister of Regional Cooperation determine instead of the court what was the mental element of the suspects?
Wait, what about Sahrai’s decision to postpone the police’s request to extend the detention of the 11 rioters in East Jerusalem for another seven days? Well, anyone who bothered to read the decision itself – could see that the police had no evidence that the suspects participated in the riot, and the only evidence against them was their presence at the scene of the violent riot. Anyone think a judge can order the arrest of a suspect without there being any actual evidence against him?
Sahrai’s case is not very unusual in itself. The discourse becomes infantile and shallow from day to day, with people gaining sheaming based on titles and parts of sentences. The coup within a week of stifling Israel to a stupid hill boy with a growing madness overall illustrates the need for an innovative solution that I recommend to all our readers, even ministers and deputy ministers: Read the material before you visit it. Original, creative, out of the box and revolutionary – but I think it’s not a bad idea. The Temple Mount is not really in our hands, but the words we take out of our mouths and keyboards are entirely up to us.