Israeli Legal Advisors Urge Supreme Court to Strike Down Controversial Arrest Law Targeting Yeshiva Students
In a rare and dramatic session at the Israeli Supreme Court on Tuesday, legal representatives from both the government and the Knesset's legal advisor unanimously called for the annulment of the 'Arrests Law.' This law, promoted by Shas chairman Aryeh Deri, aims to prevent the detention of yeshiva students classified as draft dodgers. The hearing was held before an expanded panel of nine justices led by Deputy President Noam Solberg, following petitions challenging the law.
Notably, the government chose to boycott the hearing and did not present a defense, with Deri asserting that the court's rejection of the law was inevitable. Last week, the Supreme Court issued an injunction halting the law's enforcement even before its official publication.
Attorney Enar Helman, representing the government's legal counsel, sharply criticized the law as "harmful and unconstitutional," stating it fails to meet any criteria of the constitutional limitation clause. He emphasized the law's discriminatory nature and its violation of equality principles, especially problematic during wartime when reservists face extended service. Helman warned that continuing the law would lead to the dismissal of cases against those already arrested, which he deemed immoral during conflict.
Attorney Yitzhak Bert, representing the Knesset's legal advisor, echoed the call for cancellation, highlighting procedural flaws in the law's passage that contravened Basic Law requirements. He stressed that the legislative process itself was flawed beyond the law's content.
During the hearing, Justice Wilner challenged the argument that wartime conditions justify the law's discrimination, questioning whether such discrimination is acceptable in peacetime. The law was intended as a temporary measure until a new government resolves the broader conscription issue but faces fundamental legal opposition from judicial authorities.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
