Police re-arrested a young man with no criminal record, the judge ruled: "You acted against my decision"

The police's request to re-arrest a young man from Eilat, suspected of drug offenses, ended in sharp criticism from the court and his immediate release. Judge Roi Peri determined that the police arrested the suspect after a previous request to issue an arrest warrant against him was rejected, instead of appealing the decision or summoning him to an orderly hearing. "I am not comfortable with the conduct of the investigating unit," wrote the judge, who ordered his decision to be forwarded to the district investigation officer for the purpose of drawing lessons.

The suspect, who will be 20 next month and has no criminal record, is accused of drug trafficking and possession of drugs not for personal use. According to the court's decision, it had already been determined in the past that there is an evidentiary basis of reasonable suspicion and also grounds for arrest due to statutory danger. After being in custody for 20 days, the court ordered his release in early August under restrictive conditions, and the conditions were later extended by consent. Another request by the investigating unit to extend the conditions was rejected after not all opinions were received from the drug laboratory and there was no expectation of filing an indictment.

Later, an additional opinion was received stating that the suspect possessed four grams of cocaine. Following this, the police approached the court with a request to issue an arrest warrant against him in his absence, but the request was rejected. Despite this, on the morning of the hearing, the suspect was arrested and brought to court as part of a request for reconsideration.

The police representative argued at the hearing that the investigating unit had previously come to court to issue an arrest warrant in absentia, and that after the request was rejected, it was decided to bring the suspect as part of a request for reconsideration. According to him, "He was not arrested against the decision, we brought him here in a request for reconsideration. We arrested and brought him to court in a request for reconsideration."

On the other hand, Adv. Assi Levy on behalf of the Public Defender's Office attacked the way the police acted and asked to release the suspect immediately. "The person has been under de facto arrest since the morning. You could have brought him without arresting him," he argued. According to him, this is a young man with no criminal record who had already been in custody for 21 days to receive an opinion and was then released. The defense attorney argued that after the court refused to issue an arrest warrant in his absence, "nevertheless and contrary to the court's decision, the investigating unit took the law into its own hands and ordered his re-arrest." He asked the court to order the suspect's release without conditions and even to award costs.

Judge Peri accepted the main argument regarding the manner of the arrest and criticized the conduct of the investigating unit. "If the investigating unit intended to file a request for reconsideration, it should have summoned the suspect to court and notified his attorney, but not arrested him and placed the court before a fait accompli, while not respecting the court's decision," he ruled.

The judge also noted that even at the time of the hearing, there was no expectation of filing an indictment, and cast doubt on whether the conditions justifying a reconsideration of the decision were met. "It is not clear to the court how the circumstances changed significantly, how significant time passed, or new facts were discovered," he wrote.

In his decision, the judge reiterated and clarified that the police could have appealed his decision or requested to hold an orderly hearing in the presence of the defense attorney, while summoning the suspect while he was released. According to him, "The police acted against my decision, and arrested the suspect this morning, instead of the possibility of filing an appeal against the decision, and instead of a request to hold an orderly hearing."

Although the judge rejected the defense attorney's request to impose costs on the police, he determined that his decision would be forwarded to the district investigation officer "so that he will draw all the lessons regarding this case," and that the matters would be forwarded to the investigators and police officers in the district. In conclusion, he determined: "This is a young man with no criminal record, there was no place to arrest him, especially not after my decision of 20.8.2026." Accordingly, he ordered: "The police will release the suspect immediately."