Behind the Headlines Mks Encouraging Settler Resistance in Sinai Pose Ethical Problem for Knesset

Three members of the 120 member Knesset have recently taken up residence in or near Yamit, the main township in the Rafah region of northeast Sinai which Israel will evacuate next April. They are Geula Cohen and Hanan Porat of the Tehiya faction and Rabbi Haim Druckman of the extreme right wing of the National Religious Party. A fourth MK, Tehiya leader Yuval Neeman, says that he too is contemplating the move.

Their declared purpose is to express in this way their opposition to the pullout from Yamit and the rest of the Rafah region, scheduled for next April under the terms of the Israel-Egyptian peace treaty. As such, these MKs are breaking no law or violating no regulation. Nevertheless, their move raises questions of public ethics and parliamentary responsibility.

NATURE OF KNESSET IMMUNITY

Under the “Members of Knesset Immunities Law: Rights and Duties” enacted in 1951, a Knesset member” shall not be subject to either civil or criminal process, and will be immune from any legal action against him, in regard to his vote, or his opinion, or any action he has taken — either inside the Knesset or outside the Knesset — if that vote, that expression of opinion, or that action was a part of the way in which he fulfills his role as a member of the Knesset.”

This deliberately wide and catch-all formulation gives effective protection to MKs against any attempt to prosecute or sue them because of their political activities. The legislature intended — and indeed succeeded — in providing its members with well nigh perfect freedom to function as representatives of the public. It enabled them to describe their political activities — even if such activities would be illegal if done by others — as “part of the way in which he fulfills his role as a member of the Knesset.”

So far Cohen, Porat and Druckman have not violated any law. The Yamit/Rafah area is open to free movement and normal access and the three MKs followed the normal procedures in setting up homes there in empty houses. Moreover, their decision to leave their homes and take this symbolic step of resettling themselves and their families in Yamit can most certainly be defined as “part of the way in which they fulfill their roles as members of the Knesset.” Their purpose, after all, is to make a legitimate demonstration of their political views.

But the ethical and democratic problems arise not out of strict legalism, but out of the fact that the Knesset itself, by an overwhelming majority, has resolved that this area is to be evacuated as part of the peace with Egypt. Furthermore, the anti-withdrawal, anti-peace treaty views of these three MKs were very recently put to the ultimate democratic test — that of the ballot-box — and found to represent only a very small proportion of Israeli public opinion. Tehiya won three seats in the last election.

It is therefore most relevant to ask of these three MKs: What is the moral basis of their act of demonstration against the implementation of the peace treaty?

But the problem is more serious — and more down-to-earth than a mere ethical debate.

Though the three MKs have not broken any law, they have clearly given inspiration and encouragement to others who, it appears, do intend to break the law and take illegal actions in their struggle against the evacuation.

Cohen, Porat and Druckman are at the spearhead of a growing movement — mainly Gush Emunim youngsters — of people moving into the Rafah area.

Some of these people, according to the security authorities, are indeed likely to resort to illegal acts and even violence in the political battle against the withdrawal. There are even indications that they would use weapons. The area is seething with rumors of underground schemes by some of these people.

By giving the lead to the new settlers of Yamit and Rafah, Cohen, Porat and Druckman have taken upon themselves a heavy responsibility with serious social and constitutional significance. They may well find themselves in the months ahead at the head of an active resistance movement which will violate both the decisions of the Knesset and the law of the land.