The Jerusalem Prosecutor’s Office has informed the Jerusalem District Court it will represent a former policeman who served in the Binyamin Region who was documented attacking civilians during the course of his duties.

The letter of defense submitted two weeks ago in response to a civil suit filed against the policeman by attorney Menashe Yado of the Honenu organization indicates that the state will represent the policeman despite the fact that the complaints of citizens against him were found justified. A police committee even recommended his dismissal from the force.

In the statement of claim filed by Yado, nine civilians who were injured by the policeman in three separate incidents, including a violent arrest, delays and illegal searches of vehicles, and a search of the bodies of minors.

The first incident included the delay of spouses for the purpose of illegal search and violence against the husband. In the second incident, the policeman unlawfully detained two other couples while conducting a lengthy search of their personal belongings. In the third incident, the officer detained a boy and two minors for search, while he wanted to look under the underpants of one of the minors.

In the wake of the incidents, complaints were lodged with the Department for the Investigation of Police, which responded that it intended to initiate a disciplinary proceeding against the policeman. The defense statement submitted by the policeman in response revealed that a police complaints officer recommended that the policeman be fired following the complaints, and that during the dismissal process, he resigned himself.

According to the law, a police officer can conduct a search only if there is a “reasonable suspicion”, while updating those involved in the reason for the delay or clarifying that they do not have to cooperate. The officer’s search was illegal, and there was no suspicion whatsoever of the people who had been detained.

Attorney Yado criticized the decision of the State Attorney’s Office to represent him, saying: “It is not clear why the Israel Police and the State of Israel decide to give legal representation and backing to a policeman who trampled on the rights of people, adults and minors.

“I think that such a person did not act as a police emissary, and the police think so too, but he acted very drastically in contradiction of the police and its goals, and he must bear the damage he incurred and the expenses involved.

The Jerusalem District Prosecutor’s Office stated: “The prosecution filed against the Israel Police, and personally against a policeman who was serving at the time, contends that the policeman acted while he was on duty and as a result of his actions as a policeman. In the statement of defense, the state clarified by verifying the policeman’s actions were flawed, but the plaintiffs did not cause any real damage.

“Sometimes, in such cases, at the request of the police, the State Attorney’s Office considers the defendant as represented in this case as well, and the decision to represent was made in accordance with the binding instructions and since the policeman acted within his position, although some of his actions are not acceptable in themselves.

“The policeman completed his work in the police, partly because of some of the events that were claimed in the statement against him, and it is also noted that the state is willing to compensate the plaintiffs with amounts commensurate with the court’s ruling regarding such incidents.”

(YWN Israel Desk – Jerusalem)