Anti-judicial reform activists created a group called “Searching for Simcha” in which they made plans to follow the politician during a vacation with his family in the Golan Heights.
By Lauren Marcus, World Israel News
A Jerusalem court denied a petition filed by MK Simcha Rothman (Religious Zionism) for a restraining order against some 400 members of a WhatsApp group specifically focused on tracking his movements during an upcoming vacation.
However, the court did rule that the members of the group – who are targeting Rothman due to his role as one of the chief architects of the now-paused judicial reform legislation – must not take photographs or videos of the lawmakers’ children and cannot demonstrate when the minors are in the vicinity.
“I’m happy that the court saw fit to draw a clear line that differentiates between freedom to protest and the right to demonstrate – which are very important – and harassment, bullying and harm to the family of an elected official,” Rothman tweeted immediately following the ruling.
“Even if I believe the line should be moved elsewhere, the very drawing of the line is very important. Civil lawsuits will follow in accordance with the Privacy Protection Law and the judge’s recommendation,” he added.
Last week, anti-judicial reform activists created a group called “Searching for Simcha” in which they made plans to follow the politician during a vacation with his family in the Golan Heights. The existence of the group triggered Rothman’s petition, as he argued that they had crossed the line from engaging in legitimate protest into essentially stalking him.
“Are you in the area? Let’s tell him that fascists like him that destroy democracy are not welcome anywhere! In the skies, on the land or in the sea, and don’t forget to pass on confirmation [of his location] so that we spread this shame to the masses,” wrote the group’s organizers, according to Rothman’s restraining order request.
Anti-judicial overhaul activists and left-wing protesters have frequently utilized WhatsApp groups in order to share real-time information regarding the location of politicians who support the reforms, oftentimes descending upon restaurants, theaters,and other public spaces in which they are present.
The demonstrators have argued that any restrictions on their ability to protest – including police preventing them from blocking private residential roads near lawmakers’ residences – constitute a violation of their freedom of speech.