Bishara v. Attorney General

HCJ 11225/03 Bishara v. Attorney General (2006)

This content is not available in the selected language.

Juridiction : Cour suprême d’Israël siégeant en tant que High Court

L’appelant invoquait l’immunité parlementaire pour des propos qu’il avait dit en Chambre et qui lui ont valu une poursuite au criminel pour apologie du terrorisme. La Cour a statué, à la majority que: Under the Immunity Law, expressions of support for ‘an armed struggle of a terrorist organization against the State of Israel’ are not protected by parliamentary immunity. This exclusion of immunity should be interpreted strictly. It does not include all expressions of support for a terrorist organization, only those that contain support for an armed struggle of a terrorist organization against the State of Israel. In the present case, the petitioner’s speeches did not contain clear support for an armed struggle of a terrorist organization against the State of Israel, although they did contain support for a terrorist organization. Consequently, the statutory exclusion of immunity does not apply.

This content has been updated on 1 May 2016 at 13 h 49 min.