A majority of the justices of the Beersheba Regional Court
have rejected the appeal of 22 shop owners in Ashkelon who
sell pork. The proprietors had appealed against the decision
of Yitzchak Yitzchaki, justice of the Ashkelon Magistrates'
Court, who forbade the continuation of the sale of pork
throughout Ashkelon according to the provisions of the local
laws.
The extensive public battle against the sale of pork in
Ashkelon was undertaken a number of years ago by a public
committee headed by Moshe Sa'id Ben-Chaim and UTJ
representatives in the Ashkelon Municipality, Rabbi Yehoshua
Buchnick and Rabbi Nissim Calfon. These dedicated communal
leaders consulted with Ashkelon's rabbonim every aspect of
the struggle, making outstanding efforts to preserve Jewish
values in the city. They conducted a broad explanatory
campaign in order to bring about the closing of the
stores.
An indictment was filed against the 22 shop owners who were
accused of violating an auxiliary municipal law forbidding
the sale of pork and its products as well as the permitting
or causing of its sale for purposes of consumption. The first
legal proceeding took place before the Magistrate's Justice
of Ashkelon, Yitzchak Yitzchaki.
A year-and-a-half ago, at the end of a protracted period of
deliberations, Justice Yitzchaki issued a decision which
stated that the proprietors had indeed violated a municipal
law. At the first stage, the proprietors appealed to the High
Court to cancel the indictment, but the appeal was rejected.
The High Court instructed them to present their claims to the
Tel Aviv Regional Court.
After representatives of the prosecution and the Ashkelon
Municipality presented their proofs, Alex Shmerling -- a
member of the Ashkelon Municipality and the guilty Parties's
attorney -- announced that his clients had chosen to exercise
the right to remain silent and that they did not intend to
bring any proofs. In his summary, he spoke at length about
the undermining of the Basic Laws of human respect and of
freedom of employment, and noted that a third of Ashkelon's
residents are Russian immigrants who do eat pork.
The panel of justices, consisting of Chief Justice Ephraim
Laron, Deputy Yehoshua Palpel, and Justice Nil Hendel, issued
their decision last week. The detailed verdict was written by
Justice Palpel, who rejected each of the petitioners' claims
and sanctioned Yitzchaki's decision. He even amended the
indictment by appending the seventh clause of the Municipal
Auxiliary Law, which states that the guilty parties are to be
fined.
Justice Palpel reviewed at length all the salient points
which had been examined in the Magistrate's Court, such as
whether the prosecution had succeeded in proving the charges
beyond doubt, and whether the Auxiliary Law forbidding the
sale of pork undermines the Basic Laws.
Justice Palpel determined that the prosecution succeeded in
proving the charges beyond any reasonable doubt. The proofs
were not refuted, he explained, and the petitioners did not
bother to testify in their defense nor to cross-examine the
prosecution's witnesses who testified that the meat which was
seized was indeed pork. Justice Palpel also quoted from
various history books, citing instances in which Jews
resisted attempts to eat pork and were murdered for upholding
their religious beliefs.
Justice Nil Hendel, who was guided by the concept that the
State of Israel is a Jewish, democratic state, agreed with
Justice Palpel. Justice Hendel then strengthened this idea by
noting that the phrase, "In G-d we trust" appears on every
American money note and said that although America is a
democratic country and not a Jewish democratic one, a
declaration of religious faith appears on all of its
bills.
The judge then wrote: "Sometimes the very same court does not
interfere when a petition is filed against a municipality
which passes an auxiliary law forbidding the sale of pork in
its city, and at the same time does not interfere when a
petition is filed against a different municipality which
permits the sale of pork in its city. If this occurs, can't
we accuse the court of inconsistency? The consistent point in
these decisions stems from the function of the court, which
is not to decide on the issue itself, but to enable each city
to decide according to its wishes, so long as there is no
legal flaw in its decision. . . . "
The petitioners announced that they intended to appeal to the
High Court.
Rabbi Moshe Gafni, who participated in the demonstration in
Ashkelon held at the beginning of the struggle, said at that
time: "The battle against all those who try to sell
treif food when a decisive majority of the country's
citizens refrain from eating pork and oppose its sale will go
forth from Ashkelon."
Rabbi Gafni praised the work of Rabbi Yehoshua Buchnick and
Rabbi Nissim Calfon who are dedicatedly and consistently
making efforts to preserve Jewish values in Ashkelon, and who
are in constant touch with the city's rabbonim.
In response to the decisions of the Regional Court of
Beersheba, Rabbi Gafni said: "It has become clear that when a
battle is waged with mesiras nefesh and in conjunction
with rabbonim, as was the case with the UTJ representative of
Ashkelon, Hashem grants siyata deShmaya. It seems as
if
most of the judges in Beersheba's panel have come to the
inevitable conclusion that we have reached the red line which
distinguishes between a life in the State of Israel with some
Jewish elements and a which is totally devoid of all Jewish
values.
Rabbi Gafni praised the decision of the Regional Court of
Beersheba, and expressed the hope that in its deliberations
on the appeal against the decisions of the two lower courts --
the Ashkelon Magistrates' Court and the Regional Court of
Beersheba reported here -- the High Court will understand
that the ongoing stripping of the State of Israel of all
Jewish values must be halted. He also said that he hopes that
the High Court will authorize the decisions of the first two
courts.
