On 21 March 2007, ACRI demanded that the Attorney General instruct the General Security Services (GSS) to halt all actions intended to interfere with legitimate political activity. The position of the GSS – that it is authorized to thwart all “subversive” activity, even if it is not specifically prohibited by law – in itself undermines the foundations of democracy.
Mr. Meni Mazuz
Attorney General
Ministry of Justice
Jerusalem
Re: The response of the GSS to Fasal al-Makal
Dear Mr. Mazuz,
We were astonished to read the response of the General Security Services (GSS) to the newspaper Fasal al-Makal in which the GSS states that it is obligated “to thwart subversive activity of parties that wish to harm the character of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, even if their activity is carried out using the tools afforded them by democracy, based on the principle of ‘defensive democracy’”.
This response was submitted to Fasal al-Makal following a request by its editor-in-chief for the reaction of the Prime Minister’s Office to an article in Ma’ariv. The article claimed that Yuval Diskin, Director of the GSS, defined Palestinian citizens of Israel as a “strategic threat” in a closed conversation with the Prime Minister, and that they discussed the four documents calling for a change in the character of the state, which were written by bodies or activists that represent the Palestinian minority in Israel, including: the ten point document by the organization Mossawa; “The Future Vision” by the National Committee for the Heads of the Arab Local Authorities in Israel; “The Democratic Constitution” by Adalah: The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel; and the “Haifa Covenant”, which was not yet published.
In response to Fasal al-Makal, the GSS also noted that “there is nothing inherently improper in the formulation of documents like these and others intended to be constitutive or founding papers, unless they reflect or encourage unacceptable phenomena of political subversiveness as noted.”
At the outset, we wish to emphasize that the position of the GSS that it is authorized to thwart activity that is not specifically prohibited by law in itself subverts the foundations of democracy and reflects a fundamental lack of comprehension of the essence of democracy.
The concept of freedom is a supreme value in democracy and, derived from this concept and the principle of lawfulness, all activity that is not specifically prohibited by law is permissible.
Despite our efforts, we were unable to reconcile the logical contradiction in the response of the GSS, in which a particular act can be considered subversive even though it does not violate the rules of the democratic game and is not a criminal offense of any kind.
Furthermore, the option of restricting the political freedom of citizens is the responsibility of the legislative authority, not the GSS. Thus, the GSS is not permitted or authorized to monitor political activity that is not prohibited by law. The attempt by the GSS to redraw the boundaries of the democratic process constitutes a serious breach of the rule of law and the principle of the separation of powers.
The GSS is charged, inter alia, with safeguarding state security and the democratic order and its institutions, and among its functions is the thwarting and prevention of illegal activity intended to harm state security, the democratic order, or its institutions (Parag. 7 of the General Security Service Law [2002]). Safeguarding the Jewish character of the state is not among the missions or roles of the GSS.
The right of Palestinian citizens to express their collective identity, collective memory, and common vision is an unequivocal reflection of the spirit of democracy. If some or all Palestinian citizens of Israel believe that the definition of Israel as a state only of the Jewish people or a Jewish state harms their right to be equal citizens in the country, they are entitled to voice this view and express it using any means that is not specifically proscribed by law.
Although the term “political subversiveness” is not clear to us, the GSS is not authorized to use this ambiguous concept to thwart legitimate political activity in which a wide variety of basic human rights are realized, including the freedom of opinion and thought, the freedom of expression, the right to participate in political life on an egalitarian basis, the right to spiritual autonomy, and the right to dignity.
In addition, the treatment of Palestinian citizens of Israel as a “strategic threat” is no less undermining of the foundations of democracy, as it delegitimizes an entire public of Palestinian citizens of Israel, violating their dignity and right to equality, as well as fanning the flames of racism and discrimination, which are the daily lot of Palestinian citizens of the country.
In light of the above, we request that you instruct the GSS to immediately halt any actions intended to harm legitimate political activity.
Yours very truly,
Sonia Boulus, Attorney
Dan Yakir, Attorney
Chief Legal Counsel
