Views: 3
Israel’s high-tech industry, trade unions and opposition parties have condemned the government’s decision to dismiss Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar, warning of a constitutional crisis after the move defied a High Court ruling.
The Israeli High-Tech Headquarters, representing top tech firms and investors, said on Friday:
“If the government decides to lead Israel with open eyes into a constitutional crisis, we will shut down the companies and launch a public struggle together with all the strength of Israeli society.
“We call on [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu to stop a moment before falling into the abyss.”
The Histadrut trade union’s chief, Arnon Bar-David, described the situation as “anarchy under government auspices”, saying refusal to follow the court’s ruling was a “red line”.
Reichman University also said it may suspend activity, calling on the government to uphold democratic values.
Opposition parties Yesh Atid, National Unity, Yisrael Beytenu and The Democrats petitioned the High Court to block the dismissal.
Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid said the prime minister has acted under a “severe conflict of interest”, citing Shin Bet’s recent criticism of government failures around 7 October.
Former minister Ayelet Shaked added, “In the State of Israel, everyone reports when called up for reserve duty, and everyone obeys the court’s ruling.”
Protests have continued outside the High Court in Jerusalem.
Thank you for helping to make Jewish News the leading source of news and opinion for the UK Jewish community. Today we’re asking for your invaluable help to continue putting our community first in everything we do.
For as little as £5 a month you can help sustain the vital work we do in celebrating and standing up for Jewish life in Britain.
The University of Cambridge has been granted a High Court order blocking Israel-Palestine protests on parts of its campus until the end of July.
Last month, a judge dismissed a request by the university for a five-year injunction blocking direct action related to the conflict on several sites without the university’s consent.
The university returned to the High Court on Wednesday, asking a judge for a four-month injunction preventing protesters from disrupting multiple graduation events on two sites planned up to July 26, the final graduation ceremony of the academic year.
The European Legal Support Center (ELSC) opposed the university’s bid, with its lawyers telling the court the injunction is a “disproportionate infringement” on the human rights of the protesters and would set a “dangerous precedent” for protesting on campuses.
In a ruling on Friday, Mr Justice Soole granted the injunction, stating there is an “imminent and real risk of a recurrence” of direct action on the campus and a “strong probability that this will otherwise occur” if the order is not issued.
He said: “I am satisfied that there is a compelling need for the granting of an injunction.” He added the “proposed terms are the minimum necessary in the circumstances”.
Lawyers for the university told the court in London that last year, pro-Palestine protesters staged demonstrations at Senate House Yard and Greenwich House, which “forced” a graduation ceremony to be moved.
Myriam Stacey KC, for the university, told the hearing there is a “real and imminent risk” of further action on campus, with protesters saying “we will be back” after leaving Senate House Yard at the end of November.
She said the protesters appeared to be mostly affiliated with the group Cambridge for Palestine, whose stated aims online include for the university to “divest from institutions and companies complicit in the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine”.
She told the court: “It is the activity we are seeking to stop, not the viewpoint. It is legally irrelevant who is doing this. It is what they are doing that we object to.”
Ms Stacey continued in written submissions that the university sought to prohibit protesters from entering, occupying or remaining on the sites for direct action without its consent, directly blocking access to the sites, or erecting or placing structures on them, such as tents or sleeping equipment.
Owen Greenhall, for ELSC, said in written submissions the university was discriminating against the “race and/or political belief” of protesters as it was only after pro-Palestine actions that it began seeking an injunction, allowing other demonstrations such as those for Ukraine or industrial action.
He said an injunction was “not necessary” and would have a “chilling effect on political expression at Cambridge”.
But Mr Justice Soole said the injunction “does provide a fair balance between the rights of all parties”.
Following the ruling, a spokesperson for the university said: “The University of Cambridge welcomes today’s decision at the High Court.
“We took this action to protect the right of students to graduate and to prevent access to buildings that contain sensitive, confidential information.
“This was never about preventing lawful protest. The injunction safeguards a very small part of the University estate from an occupation that would prevent graduations from going ahead.
“It also protects the right for our staff to work. Protests occur regularly at the university, including a rally held immediately outside Great St Mary’s church during the last graduation ceremony while an injunction covering the Senate House, a few yards away, was in place.”
Cambridge for Palestine said it “condemns” the decision, which it described as “a violent move to criminalise and police our movement”.
Anna Ost, senior legal officer at ELSC, said: “It is more important than ever to resist attempts to shut down protests for Palestinian liberation.
“The extent of the five-year injunction the university originally asked for demonstrated that they were seeking to restrict protests.”
She continued: “Instead of acting urgently to review their investments, the university has stalled and sought to silence their critics with this injunction.
“We remain deeply concerned about the broader trend of universities using legal measures to target solidarity with Palestine.”
Ruth Ehrlich, head of advocacy and campaigns at Liberty, which also intervened in the case, said: “Today’s judgment sets a dangerous precedent which will severely restrict protest rights on campus.
“Students have long been at the forefront of movements for social change, whether in opposing apartheid or rising tuition fees.
“It is not right that universities are curbing students’ ability to do so, and creating a hostile space for people simply trying to make their voices heard.
“We urge universities to allow students to speak up for what they believe in on campus, and to protect the right to protest.”
The University of Cambridge has been approached for comment.
Thank you for helping to make Jewish News the leading source of news and opinion for the UK Jewish community. Today we’re asking for your invaluable help to continue putting our community first in everything we do.
For as little as £5 a month you can help sustain the vital work we do in celebrating and standing up for Jewish life in Britain.
