{"id":8050,"date":"2014-03-04T07:43:46","date_gmt":"2014-03-04T05:43:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/law.acri.org.il\/en\/?p=8050"},"modified":"2014-03-30T07:57:50","modified_gmt":"2014-03-30T05:57:50","slug":"kru4mar14","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/law.acri.org.il\/en\/2014\/03\/04\/kru4mar14\/","title":{"rendered":"Knesset Roundup | March 4"},"content":{"rendered":"

 
\n 
\n 
\n <\/p>\n

 
\n 
\n 
\n 
\n 
\n

To receive the Knesset Roundup directly to your email, click here.<\/a><\/strong><\/center> <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n

Rights of Battered Women who Lack Legal Status<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Special Committee on Foreign Workers<\/em><\/p>\n

Tuesday, 04\/03\/14 | Committee Discussion<<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

ACRI\u2019s Position:<\/strong> Women who have entered into a relationship with Israeli men, immigrated to Israel, and begun the process of regulating their status, often find themselves as victims of violent relationships. Violent and abusive men can take advantage of the fact that their immigrant wives are entirely dependent on them for the regulation of their status. An immigrant with temporary status, or with no status at all, is at the bottom of the social hierarchy and may not know how, or may be afraid, to stand up for her rights.
\n 
\nIn many countries, the law encourages migrants who suffer violence at the hands of their local \u2018sponsor\u2019, whom they depend upon for the purpose of status, to leave the \u2018sponsor\u2019, and allows them in these circumstances to obtain status via a different route. In Israel however, if rumours reach an Interior Ministry clerk that an immigrant women has left the house of her Israeli \u2018sponsor\u2019, that is sufficient to immediately and irreversibly terminate status regulation proceedings.<\/strong>
\n 
\nAfter a protracted struggle in 2007, a procedure was established to deal with women who have separated from their Israeli partners due to violence. However, experience has taught that many women who have suffered severe violence or prolonged abuse have failed to meet the terms of the new procedure, and their application for permanent status has been rejected. It falls to the Interior Ministry to encourage foreign women who suffer violence or abuse at the hands of their partner to leave their home and deal with the ministry on their own. Unfortunately, this is still not the case.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n

Restricting Free Speech for NGOs<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

NGO Law (Amendment: Restrictions to Registration) 2013<\/em><\/p>\n

Ministerial Committee for Legislative Affairs <\/em><\/p>\n

Sunday, 02\/03\/14 | Determining the Government’s Position<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

ACRI’s Position:<\/strong> This amendment to the NGO Law, tabled by MK Miri Regev, would enable the State to prevent an organization\u2019s registration if any of its objectives contradict the definition of \u2018Israel as a Jewish and democratic state’. This marks a substantial departure from the current law, which prohibits non profit organizations from taking actions against the state\u2019s existence or denying its democratic character.
\n 
\nThe bill would endanger a giant swath of activities. Criticism, protest, combating religious coercion, the promotion of religious pluralism, the struggle for equal rights, protection of minorities\u2019 human rights \u2013 all of these are activities that might be interpreted as denying the Jewish character of the state of Israel. As such, a long list of organizations could be de-registered, including: the Reform, Conservative (Masorti) and other Jewish pluralistic movements; organizations supporting full civic equality for minorities in Israel within the framework of a democratic government; companies or organizations that work on the Sabbath; and many others.<\/a>
\n 
\nIf this bill is passed, Israel will join a dubious list of countries in which there is no freedom of activity for civil society organizations. This bill targets anyone whose outlook and actions are inconsistent with the positions of the present political majority.<\/strong>
\n 
\nAdditional Materials<\/span>
\nFurther background and additional information<\/a> on what activities this bill would affect.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n

Police Powers to Search & Seize<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Criminal Procedures Bill (Powers of Enforcement \u2013 Search, Entry & Seizure)<\/em><\/p>\n

Ministerial Committee for Legislative Affairs <\/em><\/p>\n

Sunday, 23\/02\/14 | Determining the Government\u2019s Position<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

ACRI\u2019s Position:<\/strong> This bill seeks to implement a set of comprehensive reforms to police powers to perform searches, to require suspects to produce documents during investigations, to seize evidence, and to enable access to electronic materials. ACRI welcomes the attempt to provide clarity to this issue and establish clear policies regarding police and judicial authority and discretion. However, these limits must be strictly enforced in order to prevent the abuse of wide-ranging police powers and the violation of privacy and other human rights. ACRI will continue to examine this bill, and insist on further discussions to ensure the inclusion of a rights-based perspective.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n
\n

Counter-Terrorism Legislation vs. Democracy<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Counter-Terrorism Bill \u2013 2011 <\/em><\/p>\n

Constitution, Law and Justice Committee <\/em><\/p>\n

Monday, 17\/02\/14 | Preparation for a Second & Third Reading<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

ACRI\u2019s Position:<\/strong> ACRI naturally appreciates the importance of effectively combating terrorism. Preventing terrorist activities lies at the forefront of the state\u2019s duty to protect its citizens, and it is appropriate that the state be granted significant powers to this end. However, the challenge in a democracy is to confront terrorism, while preserving human rights and fundamental democratic principles, which are the basis of a nation\u2019s existence. This bill, in its current form, seeks to normalize, and in some cases aggravate, draconian emergency provisions and defence regulations dating back to the British Mandate. The broad and ambiguous definitions included within the bill and the wide-ranging powers it grants to authorities, creates a dangerous pattern where human rights considerations are disregarded.
\n 
\nSome of the key concerns within this bill include:<\/p>\n