"If our legal system were weak - a vacation village would have been built in Palmahim, Haifa Chemicals would have continued to pollute the Kishon, we would have had to pay to enter the beaches and asbestos would have harmed the health of the residents of the Western Galilee," the association's CEO, Attorney Amit Bracha, wrote to the members of the Knesset
In a letter sent last night by the CEO of Adam Teva and Law, Attorney Amit Bracha, to the members of the Knesset, Attorney Bracha demands that the members of the Knesset act against the intention to act on the legislation of the enhancement clause which is expected to harm not only the Supreme Court but also the public.
Attorney Amit Bracha, CEO of Adam Teva and Law: "Harming the Supreme Court means real harm to the entire public. Throughout the years of the country's existence, in many public struggles, the last line that protected the public against narrow economic and political interests was the Supreme Court. So that any damage to the independence of the judiciary will inevitably lead, whether in the short or long term, to damage to the public and its rights in the environment and in general. Any attempt to promote legislation that aims to overcome the authority of the judiciary to be the final interpreter of the law, the law, the basic laws and the principles of the rule of law arising from our democratic legal system, will lead Adam Teva and Din to examine the possibility of petitioning against the constitutionality of the law."
Main points from the letter sent:
Adam Teva Vadin expresses concern regarding the attempt to damage the independence of the Supreme Court in particular and the legal system and the law in general as part of the coalition negotiations, among other things in the calls to adopt in the upcoming term the superseding clause and to turn the committee for the selection of judges into a political committee subordinate to the executive authority, as well as to damage the institution of the State Comptroller and the courts more An independent and strong legal system is essential to protect the public and the environment in Israel.
If our legal system were weak - a vacation village would have been built in Palmahim, Haifa Chemicals would have continued to pollute the Kishon, we would have paid to enter the beaches and asbestos would have harmed the health of the residents of the Western Galilee.
As an organization that has been working for three decades with legal tools to protect the environment, Adam Teva and Din states that only the independent authority of the judiciary to make decisions, without these being overturned according to political whims, when the law enforcement officer is the only judge in front of its eyes, is what has made it possible to advance human rights and the environment in Israel .
A partial list of court decisions in Israel, which prevented a series of environmental, social and health hazards:
- The Carmel Beach Towers: The Supreme Court states that the beaches belong to the public and that construction on the beach cannot be used for residences. The Supreme Court rules that the beaches belong to the public and that the use of the buildings that have already been built should be designated for hotels and not for residences, and the rest of the construction rights will depend on the environmental consideration (1997), thus protecting the right of everyone - poor and rich alike, to enjoy open and free beaches
- Restoration of the Kishon River: A series of legal actions require the "Haifa Chemicals" company to stop polluting the stream. (2006)
- Prohibition of collecting payment at bathing beaches:The Supreme Court states that the bathing beaches belong to the public and its right to enjoy them in a popular way, without being charged entrance fees. (2006)
- Protection of unique areas of land: Emek Sasgun in the Arava, Palmachim Beach in the center and Batz Beach in the north are just some of the Berashit landscapes, which with the help of a determined and joint struggle with environmental organizations and citizens in the courts, were protected and saved from demolition and transformation into real estate areas that do not belong to the public. The court protects everyone's right to visit nature and enjoy the country's landscapes, instead of turning them into a currency that entrepreneurs and capitalists enjoy.
- Asbestos removal: legal battles for over two decades, leading to precedent decisions by the courts, including the Supreme Court, on the obligation to remove the dangerous asbestos waste in the Western Galilee and the obligation of the asbestos producer, Itanit, to pay half of the cost of the project to clean the lands of the Western Galilee from asbestos. (2011 ). And let's remember - asbestos waste is a distinct health hazard, exposure to which can lead to illness and even death. Where the authorities and the industry failed in their duty, the Supreme Court required them to remove the waste and protect the health of the residents.
- Genizat of the oil shale program:A legal and public struggle together with the residents of the Yehuda Lowlands and a broad coalition of organizations, removes from the chapter the plan to extract oil shale in the Yehuda Lowlands and turn the rural and unique area into a petrochemical industrial zone (2014)
- Remediation of contaminated soils: Following legal proceedings, the High Court of Justice requires the state to clean up within four years the water and soil pollution caused by the Nof Yam Industrial Complex, a dangerous pollution for the Israeli public. (2015)
More of the topic in Hayadan:
6 תגובות
Utilization of the issue of environmental quality for political needs.
If the Supreme Court had only intervened in general issues and not entered into politics with the aim of dominating the left's views on the public, they would not have tried to remove its authority today.
As soon as they entered into political issues, for example the question of illegal immigrant workers, then the attitude towards them is also political for everything that entails.
Let them go back to taking care of the quality of the environment and human rights (both Jewish and religious and right-wing, not just the Hebat and the Arab) and we will all be happy.
my father
Fetuses don't have the right to vote either and Getz doesn't protect them. I think they are just as important as plants...
They say this because the animals and the plants and the clean air do not have the right to vote for the Knesset, and there is no one to protect them other than the GETZ.
What they are actually saying is to hell with the elected officials and the main majority decision that the Beget dictatorship supports us.
There is no connection between the superseding clause and the ability of the judicial system to impose environmental legislation.
And also, the quality of life of the residents of South Tel Aviv, for example, would have increased if the High Court had not interfered with the legitimate activity of the State of Israel to remove infiltrators.
Is it true, in the beginning we chose the bib full of sakhi, and now we are complaining and protesting - oh really!?