Photo Credit: Wikipedia commons
Gen. Roni Noma

A Petah Tikva Magistrate Court judge on Tuesday ruled that a man accused of defying an administrative restraining order issued by the OC Central Command remain free until his trial, but refused to rule on the extent of the authority of the IDF Central Command within the “green line,” Honenu legal aid society reported.

Police on Sunday arrested a young Samaria resident in his 20s claiming he had violated an executive order handed him by OC Central Command Gen. Roni Numa. The order instructed the young man to remain in the community of Tzofim, northeast of Kfar Saba, in Samaria, and observe a curfew in his parents home in the same community. But the young man has chosen instead to reside in Beit Shemesh and, in fact, received the order in Jerusalem.

Advertisement

Honenu attorney Menashe Yado, representing the defendant, sent an appeal to the OC Central Command arguing that the law does not give the IDF chief executive in Judea and Samaria any legal jurisdiction inside pre-1967 Israel, so that the restraining order was inherently a breach of the military’s authority.

Last Sunday, about three weeks after said correspondence had taken place, the young man was arrested in the Beit Shemesh area and was indicted in the Petah Tikva Magistrate Court on five items of violating a restraining order, based on testimony of police who looked for him at his parents’ home and did not find him there. Police then asked for his detention, claiming that he posed danger to the public.

Honenu Attorney Avichai Hajbi, who represented the defendant at the hearing, argued that the chief of Central Command has no jurisdiction outside Judea and Samaria, noting the correspondence to that effect which had been conducted with the IDF. Hajbi also questioned just how dangerous police really considered his client to be if they had let three weeks lapse between the day they discovered his absence and the day they picked him up.

Judge Eti Craif ruled the defendant could go free, conditioned on providing alternative detention, but refused to rule on the issue of the IDF General’s jurisdiction, noting that as long as the restraining order itself is valid, the only place to discuss it is in a military appeals committee.

Attorney Hajbi expressed satisfaction at the fact that his client was released, even though the court completely ignored his main argument.

Advertisement