A proportional and effective ruling

Before I comment on the ruling handed down by the High Court of Justice on the Anti-Infiltration Law, I would like to make two points:

1. Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked took to Facebook Tuesday to threaten the nine justices lest they strike down the third iteration of the law. Her troubling statements made it clear that if they defied her, by issuing a ruling that is not to her liking, she would find a way to circumvent the court and impose her will through the Knesset. She shared a video showing an African migrant assaulting a young girl, oblivious to the fact that the incident took place outside Israel. She eventually had to take it down. Such rhetoric is tantamount to contempt of court, but Shaked may very well want to go down that path. In that regard she has been even more provocative than one of her predecessors, Daniel Friedmann, who has served as her "Guide to the Perplexed." On Tuesday, someone even quipped that she might one day go by Ayelet Shaked-Friedmann. Shaked should tamp down her efforts to besmirch the High Court and dim its aura as a beacon of justice. It is Israel's last line of defense at home and abroad.

2. As long as there was a massive influx of African migrants into Israel, the Anti-Infiltration Law was necessary. But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wisely decided to have a security fence erected along the Egyptian border. This NIS 258 million ($1 billion) investment was a worthwhile endeavor as it essentially brought infiltration to an end. If it resumes, the Israel Defense Forces and the Border Police must employ all necessary means to stem the flow. This is what sovereignty is all about. The infiltration problem is not as great as it used to be and the rationale for the law has all but disappeared. The number of illegal migrants in Israel has not grown. Thus, the infiltrators must be convinced, not pressured, to go back to their home countries. The rest will have to be dispersed around the country, to lift some of the burden off the shoulders of Tel Aviv's southern neighborhoods. This would bring the problem to its proper end. To paraphrase Isaiah, a redeemer will come to the first Hebrew city.

With those two observations in mind, I can say that the High Court's decision on Monday -- despite the justices' various disagreements over how far to go -- was reasonable, proportionate, fair and effective. By telling the government to reduce the incarceration period for illegal migrants, it exercised the required amount of compassion without rewarding those who had broken the law. Unlike a certain British cabinet secretary, Israeli government officials have not used derogatory and provocative language against the Africans. But Israel must use every means available to protect its border. The severity of the measures should be a function of what happens along its borders.

The High Court of Justice is a national treasure. Its successive rulings have been consistently reasonable. The overwhelming majority of them helped human beings, the citizenry and the nation. Shaked-Friedmann and her operatives should stop lashing out at this bastion of justice. To paraphrase a famous verse in Psalms: "You shall not touch my anointed and you shall not harm my judges."