"Setting a clear limit for the police": The Supreme Court issued an order nisi against the placement of roadblocks in Arab towns

The Supreme Court issued an order nisi today (Tuesday) regarding the petition of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, against the police policy of placing concrete blocks for extended periods in neighborhoods and at the entrances to Arab towns.

The court ordered the police to explain "why it will not refrain from placing rigid and unmanned roadblocks as described in the petition, without explicit legislative authorization to do so," and ordered it to submit an affidavit of response by the beginning of next October. The order was given while the practice at the center of the petition is still continuing on the ground: in I'billin and Jisr az-Zarqa, concrete blocks placed by the police months ago are still in place.

In I'billin, concrete blocks have been standing since November 2025 on Bir al-Sabil Street, in a neighborhood where about a thousand residents live. The blocks prevent residents from having direct access to Route 781 and force them to take a long detour on a narrow road that is not adapted for the volume of vehicle traffic.

In Jisr az-Zarqa, a block that was placed in May 2026 under the pretext of "crime prevention" is still standing. According to the head of the local council, Murad Ammash, the block did not achieve its goal, and during the period it has been in place, there has even been an increase in crime and shooting incidents in the neighborhood, and the council has suffered heavy damage to infrastructure.

The order was given after the court allowed the police to submit a directive and a legal opinion clarifying the legal basis for the policy. At the beginning of August, the police submitted documents based on the general powers appearing in the Police Ordinance and announced that it intends to continue using this type of block. In the response submitted on behalf of the Association, it was clarified that the general powers do not allow for the prolonged blocking of entire neighborhoods or entrances to towns, and it was emphasized that such a severe infringement of constitutional rights requires explicit authorization by law and clear criteria for its operation.

In recent months, blocks have been placed in Tarabin, Jisr az-Zarqa, Lod, Salem, I'billin, and Segev Shalom. The petition was filed in February on behalf of four residents of Lod and the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, following blocks that the police placed in neighborhoods in the city. Even after the blocks in Lod were moved, the Association insisted on clarifying the petition due to its principled nature and the recurrence of the practice in other Arab towns.

In the petition, it is claimed that prolonged and unmanned blocks effectively impose a collective restriction on all residents of the neighborhood, regardless of their involvement in crime, and infringe on freedom of movement, dignity, and equality, as well as access to health and emergency services, educational institutions, and essential services.

Advocates Abeer Jubran and Nitzan Ilani from the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, who filed the petition, stated that "the order nisi is a significant step on the way to setting a clear limit for the power of the police." According to them, "the fight against crime in Arab society is extremely important, but it cannot serve as a justification for mass and collective infringement of the rights of citizens and residents."

"The concrete blocks disrupt the lives of thousands of people for weeks and months and infringe on freedom of movement, dignity, and equality, and on access to medical treatment and emergency services, education, and other essential services," they explained. They clarified that "precisely in view of the severity of the crime and the exceptional measures that the fight against it may require, strict adherence to the limits of authority and the rule of law is required."

"Especially serious is the fact that the police continue to use this offensive measure even while its legality is under the examination of the Supreme Court, and even announced that it intends to continue doing so," they concluded.