Netanyahu on the arrest law: "There will be no such law in the next government"

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed today (Sunday), during a closed-door meeting, the temporary arrest law that the Supreme Court ordered to be frozen. According to him, the law was intended to reduce tension and lead to an increase in the number of recruits from the ultra-Orthodox public, but it did not achieve its goal.

"The temporary arrest law was intended to lower the flames and increase the number of recruits in the ultra-Orthodox public. In practice, it did not succeed, and therefore there will be no such law in the next government," said Netanyahu.

The Prime Minister declared that after the elections, he intends to establish a broad national government that will work to pass a full conscription law that meets the needs of the IDF: "Whoever does not study Torah will be drafted — or will go to prison."

As recalled, last week the Supreme Court justices issued an interim order instructing the suspension of the entry into force of the arrest law, which was intended to prevent the arrest of yeshiva students. In their brief decision, the nine justices wrote: "After considering the arguments of the parties, in writing and orally, an interim order is hereby issued, according to which the entry into force of Amendment No. 28 (temporary provision) to the Security Service Law will be suspended until another decision is given. The verdict will be given soon."

The decision came after a dramatic hearing with an expanded panel of nine justices, as part of the petitions filed against the amendment to the law. During the hearing, the Knesset representative, Adv. Yitzhak Bart, presented an unusual position according to which the amendment does not comply with the legislative rules in the Knesset, as it is a "new subject" that is not related to the original bill. According to him, "there is no choice but to cancel the law."

Bart explained to the panel that the original bill dealt with the integration of yeshiva students into the IDF, national service, and employment alongside reducing inequality, while the amendment that was actually approved deals with freezing enforcement procedures — an issue that, according to him, is fundamentally different from the purpose of the original legislation.