Editoriale di Haaretz: Liberate i manifestanti del Negev
Sintesi personale
La prassi di arrestare i manifestanti viola il loro diritto alla libertà e il diritto alla libertà di espressione.
Haaretz Editoriale | Dicembre 8, 2013
Negli ultimi anni la pratica di arrestare i manifestanti è diventata più comune. Questo viola i diritti umani due volte ,infatti ,viola il diritto alla libertà e il diritto alla libertà di espressione. Ogni arresto, anche se è solo per una notte, priva una persona della sua libertà e deve quindi essere l'ultima risorsa. Ed è ancora peggio quando le persone che vengono arrestate sono manifestanti dal momento che questo li scoraggia inaccettabilmente ad esercitare il loro diritto di manifestare in futuro.
Già nel 1980 l'allora giudice della Corte Suprema Aharon Barak ha dichiarato che la libertà di manifestare è uno dei diritti umani fondamentali per Israele. Eppure l'assalto a questo diritto continua a crescere in varie forme: molestie ai manifestanti, dispersione automatica delle manifestazioni, falsi arresti, violenze contro i dimostranti, rinvii a giudizio di persone che tengono veglie di protesta considerate "raduni illegali", fotografie ai manifestanti , richiesta ai media perchè consegnino le fotografie dei manifestanti.
L'uso di arresti e l'uso eccessivo della forza contro i manifestanti è diventata pratica comune in molte lotte sociali come le manifestazioni a Gerusalemme Est nel quartiere di Sheikh Jarrah, le proteste contro la barriera di separazione e le proteste sociali per la giustizia. In molti casi in passato i giudici hanno rimproverato alla polizia di portare i manifestanti arrestati in tribunale per un'udienza cautelare, invece di rilasciarli non appena hanno raggiunto la stazione di polizia.,ma purtroppo i tribunali non agiscono sempre in questo modo.
Durante le recenti manifestazioni contro il piano della legge Prawer per il reinsediamento dei Beduini del Negev, 23 persone sono state arrestate e 13 persone, tra cui cinque minorenni, sono ancora in carcere da quasi 10 giorni .
A UNO la detenzione è stata prorogata giovedì per altri sei giorni dalla Corte di Be'er Sheva e resterà in prigione per almeno due settimane solo perché ha preso parte a una manifestazione. Né l'affermazione della polizia che i detenuti si oppongono all' arresto giustifica la detenzione per un periodo così lungo, dal momento che non stiamo parlando di pericolosi criminali.
Nel 1995, la Corte Suprema ha sancito il diritto costituzionale alla libertà stabilendo che qualsiasi legge che violi la libertà umana deve essere interpretata con molta prudenza , dal momento che questo diritto può essere violato solo nella minima misura necessaria. Così, anche quando i dimostranti vengono arrestati, non vi è alcuna giustificazione per tenerli in carcere più a lungo del necessario.
Quando un giudice si rifiuta di liberare i detenuti in tali circostanze, aiuta lo stato a calpestare la libertà e la libertà di espressione. Il sistema giuridico non deve inviare il messaggio che il governo sta sopprimendo la legittima opposizione ad un progetto come il Piano Prawer, perché ciò costituirebbe una minaccia per la democrazia. I giudici farebbero meglio a rifiutare di estendere gli arresti di manifestanti che protestano contro la politica del governo.
http://www.haaretz.com/
In recent years, the practice of arresting demonstrators has become
more common. This violates human rights twice over – both the right to
freedom and the right to freedom of expression. Every arrest, even if
it’s just overnight, deprives a person of his freedom and must therefore
be a last resort. And it’s even worse when the people being arrested
are demonstrators, since this unacceptably deters them from exercising
their right to demonstrate in the future.
As far back as the 1980s, then-Supreme Court Justice Aharon Barak ruled that the freedom to demonstrate is one of Israel’s fundamental human rights. Yet the assault on this right keeps growing in various forms: harassment of demonstrators, the automatic dispersal of demonstrations, false arrests, violence against demonstrators, indictments of people who hold protest vigils for “illegal gatherings,” photographing demonstrators and even demanding that the media provide their photographs of the demonstrators.
The use of arrests and excessive force against protesters has become common practice in many social struggles, like the demonstrations in East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, the protests against the separation barrier and the social-justice protests. In several cases in the past, judges have rebuked the police for bringing arrested demonstrators to court for a remand hearing instead of releasing them as soon as they reached the police station. But unfortunately the courts don’t always act this way.
During recent demonstrations against the Prawer Law’s plan for resettling the Negev Bedouin, 23 people were arrested. A few who complained of police brutality were released. But 13 people, including five minors, are still in jail almost 10 days later.
One, whose detention was extended for another six days on Thursday by the Be’er Sheva Magistrate’s Court, will end up being jailed for at least two weeks just because he took part in a demonstration. Nor does the police’s claim that the detainees resisted arrest justify detention for such a long period, since we aren’t talking about dangerous criminals.
In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional right to freedom means any law that infringes on human freedom must be interpreted narrowly, since this right can be infringed only to the least extent necessary. Thus even when demonstrators are arrested, there is no justification for holding them in jail longer than absolutely necessary.
When a court refuses to free detainees under such circumstances, it helps the state ride roughshod over liberty and freedom of expression. The legal system must not send the message the government is suppressing legitimate opposition to a program like the Prawer Plan, because this would constitute a threat to democracy. The judges would do better to refuse to extend the detentions of demonstrators who protest government policy.
As far back as the 1980s, then-Supreme Court Justice Aharon Barak ruled that the freedom to demonstrate is one of Israel’s fundamental human rights. Yet the assault on this right keeps growing in various forms: harassment of demonstrators, the automatic dispersal of demonstrations, false arrests, violence against demonstrators, indictments of people who hold protest vigils for “illegal gatherings,” photographing demonstrators and even demanding that the media provide their photographs of the demonstrators.
The use of arrests and excessive force against protesters has become common practice in many social struggles, like the demonstrations in East Jerusalem’s Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, the protests against the separation barrier and the social-justice protests. In several cases in the past, judges have rebuked the police for bringing arrested demonstrators to court for a remand hearing instead of releasing them as soon as they reached the police station. But unfortunately the courts don’t always act this way.
During recent demonstrations against the Prawer Law’s plan for resettling the Negev Bedouin, 23 people were arrested. A few who complained of police brutality were released. But 13 people, including five minors, are still in jail almost 10 days later.
One, whose detention was extended for another six days on Thursday by the Be’er Sheva Magistrate’s Court, will end up being jailed for at least two weeks just because he took part in a demonstration. Nor does the police’s claim that the detainees resisted arrest justify detention for such a long period, since we aren’t talking about dangerous criminals.
In 1995, the Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional right to freedom means any law that infringes on human freedom must be interpreted narrowly, since this right can be infringed only to the least extent necessary. Thus even when demonstrators are arrested, there is no justification for holding them in jail longer than absolutely necessary.
When a court refuses to free detainees under such circumstances, it helps the state ride roughshod over liberty and freedom of expression. The legal system must not send the message the government is suppressing legitimate opposition to a program like the Prawer Plan, because this would constitute a threat to democracy. The judges would do better to refuse to extend the detentions of demonstrators who protest government policy.
Commenti
Posta un commento