{
  "id": 14412963,
  "title": "High Court hears petition demanding protection for lawyers from courthouse harassment",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/10/14/high-court-hears-petition-demanding-protection-for-lawyers-from",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-10-14T09:28:55.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Jerusalem Post",
    "slug": "jerusalem-post",
    "url": "https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-911647"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "The High Court of Justice is examining a petition demanding enhanced protection for lawyers facing harassment within courthouses. Human rights organizations allege that right-wing activists frequently follow Palestinian lawyers, film them closely, and accuse them of terrorism. Petitioners argue that merely preventing physical attacks is inadequate, as lawyers must conduct hearings, consult privately with clients, and advocate for them without intimidation.\n\nCourts Administration rejects claims that current policies warrant judicial intervention, stating that security measures have been strengthened and guards instructed to intervene against harassment. The organizations, represented by attorneys Michael Sfard and Einat Gayer, seek instructions prohibiting protesters from approaching and harassing lawyers, as well as a designated protest area inside the courthouse to separate demonstrations from legal proceedings.\n\nThe latest submission details confrontations during hearings on topics such as humanitarian aid to Gaza and prison conditions, identifying activists from Im Tirtzu involved in several incidents. One alleged incident occurred on March 30, 2026, during a hearing over displaced Palestinians' return to refugee camps, where an activist pushed an Association for Civil Rights in Israel attorney as he attempted to enter another courtroom. Another incident took place on October 29, 2025, during a hearing concerning Red Cross visits to detention facilities, after which lawyers and association staff were escorted out of the building.\n\nThese incidents, the petitioners argue, demonstrate the inadequacy of a policy that leaves lawyers fleeing and hiding from crowds in order to perform their duties. The dispute traces back to complaints dating back to 2020, with instructions developed following a June 2023 meeting treating intrusion, curses, and incitement to violence as disturbances requiring intervention. The administration defended the balance between lawyers' safety, freedom of expression, and public access, referencing a Bar Association room for private work.\n\nThe administration's December 2024 response cited additional training, planning for sensitive hearings, and inspections finding no departures from instructions, along with a December 2025 Supreme Court decision allowing advance restrictions on courtroom attendance during serious disruption. The administration rejects the proposal for an indoor protest area, stating that the courthouse is not a place for public protests, and that guards may respond to disturbances through various measures, ranging from instructions to removal from the building.",
  "summary": "The case concerns lawyers representing Palestinians and human rights groups who say right-wing activists follow them through the Supreme Court’s corridors and film them at close range.",
  "key_points": [
    "High Court examines petition for enhanced lawyer protection.",
    "Human rights groups claim right-wing activists harass Palestinian lawyers.",
    "Administration rejects policy changes, citing security measures and training."
  ],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 2,
    "also_reported_by": [
      {
        "outlet": "The Indian Express",
        "title": "Jharkhand High Court questions husband’s income claim, orders Rs 25 lakh alimony",
        "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/10/14/jharkhand-high-court-questions-husbands-income-claim-orders-rs-25",
        "published": "2026-10-14T08:00:37.000Z"
      }
    ]
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}