Israel Hayom | In the race for chief rabbi job, pesky laws get in the way

Apparently there is some opposition to changing the law regarding the age and term limits for the Chief Rabbi position. The move to change the law is motivated by the desire of some MKs to have Rav Yaakov Ariel serve as the Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi although he is over the age of 70 and to have Rav Shlomo Amar to serve a second term as Sephardi Chief Rabbi.

I also oppose the change. The original law prevents anyone over the age of 70 from running for the position of Chief Rabbi and limits him to one term. To change the law to allow a certain candidate to serve in the position strikes me as uncivilized. Mayor Bloomberg did it and dictators do it all the time.

That being said, I don't remember the Knesset members raising such a fuss when they they passed a similar law to allow Justice Grunis to become the President of the Supreme Court.

Israel Hayom | Israel airport guards may ask 'suspicious' tourists to open their email accounts

This is pretty interesting/disturbing. But I wonder, now that this is public knowledge, terrorists who want to harm Israel can easily evade this security measure by having multiple email accounts and giving the password to one of them to security staff and not telling them about the others. Or I bet there are a hundred different ways to get around this.

Israel airport guards may ask 'suspicious' tourists to open their email accounts

Israel Hayom Staff

Foreign citizens visiting Israel may be asked to open their email accounts for airport security when they land at Ben-Gurion International Airport, the Attorney-General's Office stated Wednesday in response to a petition by a leading Israeli civil rights group.

"The threat of using foreign citizens for terrorist purposes is a growing trend," the Attorney-General's Office warned, in a missive to the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, which had petitioned the Justice Ministry to overrule such invasive security measures. "Searching an email account is to be carried out in exceptional cases only after suspicious or pertinent information has been identified [by Shin Bet personnel]."

Though the Israel Security Agency [Shin Bet] can request access to an email account before the passenger passes customs and leaves the airport, it cannot demand passwords or personal information that would allow the agency itself to access private accounts. Rather, Shin Bet staff may ask the traveler to open his or her account in view of security personnel, who can then check emails for incriminating evidence that may be relevant to issues of public or national security, wrote lawyer Nadim Avod writing on behalf of the Attorney-General's Office.

In addition, the traveler can refuse access to his or her personal email to security personnel, but Shin Bet agents at Ben-Gurion airport can consequently deny the traveler entry to Israel. Avod cited the law of entry to Israel, written in 1952, which states that a foreigner does not have the explicit right to enter the country. The relevant authorities -- in this case the Shin Bet -- decide who can enter and who cannot, the statement explained, and in such cases of exceptional suspicion, access to private email may be required.

The Attorney-General's Office was responding to a petition by ACRI, which said that asking for passwords to email or social media accounts is against Israeli law. ACRI asked the Justice Ministry to clarify its position after reports in various media, such as The Associated Press, reported that airport security personnel had demanded Arab travelers open their email accounts.

The Associated Press reports that "The [Shin Bet] agent, suspecting [Sandra] Tamari was involved in pro-Palestinian activism, wanted to inspect her private email account for incriminating evidence. The 42-year-old American of Palestinian descent refused and was swiftly expelled from the country."

ACRI attorney Lila Margalit said, “Invading a computer or an email account constitutes a grave violation of privacy and dignity."

The Attorney-General's Office seemed to agree that requesting a password would be illegal, but stressed that the incidents in question were exceptional cases where security personnel did not ask for passwords, but rather asked the traveler to log in so his or her accounts could be surveyed.

Similar issues have been litigated in the US. See here for a discussion of a case where a party was ordered by the court to turn over his social media passwords. And see here for a discussion of your right to protect sensitive data (from 2011).

See here for tips on how to hide your data from law enforcement.

Calcalist: One Quarter of Lawyers in Israel Make Less than the Average Wage

According to this hebrew article 10% of lawyers in Israel gross less than 5,667 NIS per month. Another 10% make between 5,667 and 8,500 NIS per month. The average income across professions is 9,100 NIS per month.

Greenberg Traurig recently opened an office in Tel Aviv and now they've started a blog relating to laws effecting companies doing business in Israel. We wish them lots of luck here.

TANSTAFL- Israel Opinion, Ynetnews

I think this op-ed from Yediot Aharonot is right on.

No Free Meals - Israel Opinion, Ynetnews:

Orly Azoulay

People who are familiar with the codes in Washington know that in this town there are no free lunches. The president of a superpower does not visit a country overseas without knowing that the results of the trip have been assured ahead of time to his satisfaction and in accordance with his interests. Obama has decided to visit Israel because he understood from Netanyahu last week that a two-state solution is possible.

 

The president and his advisors do not really believe Netanyahu and are not concealing their suspicion towards him. But as far as they are concerned, Netanyahu actually lost the recent elections and will therefore do whatever is asked of him. He has no choice.

Obama is coming in order to apply pressure on Netanyahu's weak point after the people of Israel have spoken and after America's fear that Israel was shifting to the right proved to be, for the most part, unfounded. 

 

The fact that the White House announced the visit at a time when coalition negotiations in Israel are ongoing is not coincidental. The US is signaling to Lapid and Livni that this is the time to jump on the bandwagon and be a part of the next government, because the president is serious: He is not seeking revenge; nor is he indifferent; Obama is coming to Israel to complete the mission, and he needs them in the coalition.

 

Secretary of State John Kerry, who will be touring the region before Obama, is showing extraordinary enthusiasm about the possibility of establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Obama had his doubts, but they have diminished somewhat. As far as Obama is concerned, Netanyahu is the prime minister, but he is no longer king.

 

Obama will come to Jerusalem to speak to the Israeli public above Netanyahu's head. He will try to charm the Israeli public and allay its security-related concerns. He will give the Israelis what they crave for: A big hug from a foreign leader and an almost limitless line of credit.

 

After winning the hearts of the people, Obama will get down to business. His mission: Renew the alliance with the Israeli public and clarify to Netanyahu that playtime is over. He does not intend to let up until white smoke appears.

Israeli Physicians to be Told They Must Treat HIV Carriers- Haaretz

According to a report by Haaretz, the Israeli Medical Association-(IMA)'s ethics committee has decided that it is unethical for a doctor to refuse to treat a patient with HIV. (For the IMA's statement in Hebrew click here.) I'm not sure why doctors would refuse HIV patients any more than patients with other highly infectious and fatal diseases. The article suggests that it may be due to certain prejudices and a stigma that attaches to HIV patients. Now, this statement by the IMA is not a legal decision so if a doctor would refuse to treat a patient it seems that they would not be violating any law but they might be subject to discipline by the IMA.

This new stance is not so clear to me because the IMA's position, found on its website, is that "A physician must offer medical assistance in urgent cases or in life-saving situations. In any other instance a physician may decide not to provide medical treatment to a patient for personal or professional reasons." So I'm not sure whether this new statement is referring to urgent cases or non-urgent cases. If it is referring to non-urgent cases then it seems to signal a reversal of policy. (In Australia, doctors have a duty to provide care, at least in urgent cases, even where there is no previously existing doctor-patient relationship.)

The Old Paint and Tow Scheme in Tel Aviv

A woman got a parking ticket for parking in a handicapped spot that wasn't marked handicapped until after she had parked. The municipality painted it around and under her car and then towed it for being parked in a handicapped spot. She went to fight her ticket with the embedded video surveillance footage and the city waived the fine and apologized to her. 

Mitigating factors for the city: I did read somewhere that a sign had been put up there even though the street had not been painted yet. It also seems to me that the curb is painted blue, the color for handicapped spots. Also, I think I read that the people who painted the sign and probably the towers are subcontractors for the city.

Pelephone Rules Out Cyberattack- Class Action Filed

In what must be one of the fastest class-action filings ever, on Monday a law firm in Israel filed a NIS 450 million class-action against cellular phone company Pelephone for a four hour service outage that ended at 11 PM Sunday night. The JPost reported that the suit was filed on behalf of one Tom Lifshitz requesting "NIS 100 in damages and NIS 50 in emotional damages, citing the fact that mobile communications are an integral part of daily life and their absence left him unable to make personal or work-related calls, leaving him feeling 'helpless.'"

My wife was trying to call some people who use Pelephone yesterday and noticed that she could not get through. It was frustrating for her and it must have been even more frustrating for Israelis who have Pelephone as a provider, but a class action suit. Really? Emotional distress because your phone didn't work for four hours? Do you think this is the United States? If a car hit a power line and knocked out power to a whole city would that be grounds for a class action? I doubt it. I understand that people rely on their cellphones, sometimes to the exclusion of landlines but it doesn't seem like this is something that you can really sue for. You have to expect that even in our advanced technological age their will be some episodes of downtime every once in a while due to unforeseen circumstances. Besides, Pelephone is offering to compensate people with free minutes or data. That should probably be sufficient, instead of NIS 150 for each affected customer.

Oh, and totally coincidentally, I think we are switching to Pelephone tomorrow because we got a good deal for international calls and an American phone number on our cell phones and home phone. The recent outage gave me some pause, but not enough.

Legal Networking Event in Tel Aviv

One of the organizers asked me to post this information for a networking event geared toward Anglo lawyers in Israel.

Click here to register.

Israel Continues Boycott of UN Human Rights Council

Recently, Israel decided to boycott the UN Human Rights Council's session that was scheduled to examine Israel's record on human rights.  Every four years, each nation is reviewed through this process. Israel's boycott has thrown the forum's leadership into a tizzy- no country has boycotted these proceedings since they began in 2007.

Below is an article from the Gatestone Institute.

Showdown between UN Human Rights Council and Israel?

by Anne Herzberg

January 18, 2013 at 4:30 am

Another major confrontation is brewing between Israel and the United Nations. On January 29, Israel is scheduled for its quadrennial Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the Human Rights Council (HRC). Following the March 2012 Council session, however, Israel's foreign minister ceased all contacts with the HRC due to its obsessive bias and double standards targeting the Jewish State. As a result, Israel will not participate in UPR.

This has UN officials very worried, and for good reason. If Israel fails to show up for UPR, this may force the HRC to end the stranglehold of abusive regimes over the institution, and implement long overdue reforms.

Israeli Settlements' Legal Basis- USA Today

Israeli Settlements' Legal Basis: Opposing View

The oft-used term "occupied Palestinian territories" has no basis whatsoever in law or fact. The territories are neither occupied nor are they Palestinian. No legal determination has ever been made as to their sovereignty, and by agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, they are no more than "disputed" pending a negotiated solution, with both sides claiming rights to the territory.

Israel has solid legal and historic rights to the territory, in light of the undeniable historic fact that the Jewish people are, for more than 3,000 years, the indigenous people in the region, including the source of Christianity there. Add to this the legal rights granted to the Jewish people by the 1917 Balfour Declaration, the 1923 San Remo Declaration, the League of Nations Mandate instrument and the United Nations Charter.

Israel has thus a very well-based claim to sovereignty over the area, more so than any other people, but has nevertheless committed itself to negotiate the fate of the area with the Palestinians.

Further to Israel's solid basis of rights to the territory, the Oslo agreements with the Palestinians contain no prohibition whatsoever on building settlements in those parts of the territory agreed upon as remaining under Israel's control.

Israeli settlements are built on public land that is not owned by Palestinian residents of the area, and their construction is in full accordance with the norms of international law regarding the use of land in disputed situations.

Furthermore, the prohibition of mass transfer of populations to occupied territory as set out in the 1949 Geneva Convention is not applicable, and was never intended to apply to Israel's settlement policy. It was drafted to prevent the mass transfers as carried out by the Nazis in World War II.

Accordingly, as long as settlements do not violate local Palestinian private property rights, and as long as the issue of the fate of the areas remains a negotiating issue, there is no legal basis for preventing continued settlement, pending the outcome of the final status negotiations.

Alan Baker is the director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He formerly served as a legal adviser to the Israeli Foreign Ministry and as Israel's ambassador to Canada.

Israel Hayom | Election junkies can follow results online in real-time

Die-hard election junkies will be able to follow the incoming results on Jan. 22, the day of Israel's general election, online and in real-time after the polls close.

The Finance Ministry's Computer Service Directorate developed two unprecedented websites that will track ballot tallies on election day.

On the first website, the public will be able to watch in real-time on their mobile phones, as the Central Elections Committee counts votes after the polls close. Viewers will also be able to surf nationwide results and tallies sorted by municipality or party. The website will update results at 10 minute intervals from the moment the polls close until the last vote is counted.

The second website allows enthusiastic elections buff to follow the results from the polling station at which the voter is registered.

Israel Hayom 

Ilan Gategno and Zeev Klein

Elections for the 19th Knesset

The Knesset page for the elections for the 19th Knesset has some informative material in English, and this Hebrew warning from the Gripe Police:

 

(Translation: If you want to continue to gripe, fulfill your civic duty and go vote on Election Day. Remember, if you don't vote, your griping rights will be voided for the next four years. On Election Day, vote and then afterwards feel free to complain.)

There is scheduled to be a rally in Jerusalem's Kikar Shabbos tonight organized by the Eida Chareidis urging people not to vote. The Satmar Rebbe from Williamsburg is scheduled to attend.

The Degel Hatorah party distributed flyers this morning countering those who say religious Jews should not vote in the elections. Their main argument was that not voting is not a neutral statement. It saps the strength of the religious sector and give the anti-religious parties a greater majority.  

If you are going to attend the rally, please send in some photos, and remember according to the Knesset Election Law: Any person who does one of the following can expect to be punished... Influences the voter's choice of a list of candidates through the use of oaths, curses, excommunication, or blessings.

*UPDATE*
According to the Times of Israel, the Degel HaTorah party did not heed my warning and was offering blessings to those who vote for the party. Disaster was averted, however, when:

Supreme Court Justice Elyakim Rubinstein, head of the Central Elections Committee suggested changing the text from “blessed with” to “merited with.” Another sentence that had the phrase “will be blessed from the source of all blessings” should be altered to “will merit all goodness from the source of all bounty,” Rubinstein ordered.

US Doctors to be Waived in to Israel- JPost

According to a JPost article, US doctors who have passed the USMLE need not take the Israeli medical licensing exam but will be waived in.

The exemption from the local licensing exam will be retroactive, granting a license to whoever has passed the USMLE in the past decade.

This is the first time that Israeli health authorities have accepted foreign test results for an MD license.

But someone who has taken an Israeli licensing exam and failed may not ask to take the USMLE exam and receive an exemption; he will be able, however, to resit the local exam instead.

I don't expect to see a similar rule for lawyers anytime soon. First of all, Israel seems to need more doctors so this will help ease the shortage while there is a glut of lawyers in the country. Second, the human body is the same in every country and medicine is fairly standardized whereas the legal system in the US and Israel, while similar, has many differences. On the other hand, lawyers who have passed the bar exam in one of the 50 states and has 5 years of experience need not pass the Israeli bar even if they can barely read Hebrew or know anything about the Israeli legal system. One can always hope...

Al Jazeera Explains How Israel's Elections Work

Here's a primer on Israel's electoral system from Al Jazeera of all places.

When voters go to the polls on January 22, few are expecting major changes. Binyamin Netanyahu, leading the right-wing Likud-Yisrael Beiteinu list, is almost certain to retain the post of prime minister in the 19th Knesset.

Netanyahu's would-be coalition partners, however, could play a role in changing government policy towards the prospects for peace with the Palestinians, domestic economic management and broader trends in international affairs, including how Israel deals with Iran's nuclear programme. Political analysts are split on whom Netanyahu would ask to join a coalition.

Security issues are high on this election's agenda, and social inequality has been emphasised by a number of the parties. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has not played as prominent a role in this year's campaigns as it has in previous election cycles.

How is the government elected?

Based on a system of proportional representation, where voters select a party instead of a specific individual, Israeli elections have always resulted in coalition governments. To win an outright majority, a party would need to win more than 60 seats in the 120-member Knesset.

The minimum required for a party to win a Knesset seat is two percent of the total votes cast.

The prime minister is normally - but not always - the leader of the party that wins the most seats. He or she then negotiates with other parties to form a governing coalition.

In the 2009 election, although the incumbent prime minister's party, Kadima, won the most seats in the parliament, the Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu was able to form a majority coalition government and become the new prime minister.

Why were elections called?

Netanyahu called for early elections in October 2012, saying he wouldn't be able to pass a "responsible" budget with his current coalition partners. He was pushing for deeper cuts to public spending.

If he hadn't called an early vote, the election would have happened in October 2013 - after the completion of the Netanyahu government's four-year term. In the past two decades, it has been rare for an Israeli government to finish a full term.

Who can vote?

Israeli citizens of all ethnic and religious groups above the age of 18 are entitled to vote. This includes Arab citizens of Israel, who generally vote in lower numbers than Jewish Israelis.

5,656,705 eligible voters can cast ballots at 10,128 polling stations, including 190 in hospitals and 57 in prisons. There are also 96 voting places at Israeli diplomatic missions abroad.

What are the election logistics?

There are 34 party lists competing for seats, reflecting a wide range of outlooks and beliefs. Prior to the elections, each party presents its platform and the list of candidates for the Knesset in order of precedence.

The Central Elections Committee, headed by a justice of the Supreme Court and including representatives of the parties holding seats in the Knesset, is responsible for conducting and supervising the elections.

Polls will open at 7:00am (0500GMT) and close at 10:00pm (2000GMT) on January 22. Election Day is a public holiday.

Who is in the current government?

Likud-Beiteinu, the governing electoral alliance led by Netanyahu, currently holds a combined 42 seats in the Knesset. 

Likud ["The Consolidation"] first came to power in 1977 under the leadership of Menachem Begin, a former head of the Irgun armed paramilitary group. Yisrael Beiteinu ["Israel Our Home"], founded by Avigdor Lieberman in 1999, has policies further to the right of Likud and is seen by many as extremist.

Kadima ["Forward"], the party founded by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2005, holds 28 seats. It is led by Shaul Mofaz, who is seen as a centist. The party promotes a two-state solution with the Palestinians. It is not polling well in the upcoming election and may struggle to win a single seat.

Labour, led by Shelly Yachimovich, holds just eight seats, and is trying to focus its campaign on economic issues, rather than on security. 

HaBayit HaYehudi ["The Jewish Home"] is set to make some of the biggest gains in this election. Currently it only holds three seats but the right-wing, religious party led by Naftali Bennett, a former special forces commander, has gained popularity.

In its first election, HaTnuah ["The Movement"] led by former foreign minister Tzipi Livni, says it supports a return to negotiations with the Palestinians and claims to be an alternative to Likud. It is expected to win about seven seats.

Led by TV host Yair Lapid, Yesh Atid ["There is a future"] is a new party that portrays itself as an alternative to the established groups. It is set to win more than six seats, according to polls.

Shas, a religious party comprised of Jews originally hailing from North African and Middle Eastern countries, currently holds 11 seats.

What are some other parties?

Yahadut HaTorah ["United Torah Judaism"], another religious party, caters primarily to Ashkenazi Haredi groups and holds five seats.

Meretz ["Energy"], a secular party newly led by Zahava Gal-On, is seen as pro-environment and left-leaning, and holds three seats.

Ra'am-Ta'al [an acronym for "The Arab Movement for Renewal"], an alliance primarily supported by Arab-Israelis, holds four seats.

Hadash [an acronym for "The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality"], a leftist party led by Mohammed Barakeh with support from Arabs and Jews, also holds four seats.

Balad [an acronym for "National Democratic Assembly"], a secular Arab nationalist party led by Jamal Zahalka, holds three seats.

The task of forming a government and heading it as prime minister is assigned by President Shimon Peres to the Knesset member considered to have the best chance of forming a viable coalition government in light of the results.

Parties remaining outside the government comprise the opposition. The Knesset member to whom the task is assigned has a period of 28 days to form a government. The president may extend this term by up to 14 days.

Chief Rabbi Amar Bans Debt Settlement Haircuts - Globes

I just saw this small article from Globes:

Sephardi Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar yesterday issued an unprecedented Halakhic ruling against debt settlements involving sharp discounts (haircuts) by the controlling shareholders and executives of financial institutions. At a press conference with the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, Rabbi Amar said that controlling shareholders should bear the costs of heavy losses. The Halakhic ruling also bans cross-ownership.

Rabbi Amar's ruling states that executives and controlling shareholders of large companies should take responsibility for the financial losses caused to the public, and that controlling shareholders and money managers cannot evade this responsibility even if they were negligent and without bad faith.

Rabbi Amar also banned investment in institutions owned by them, or in affiliated institutions; i.e. he banned cross ownership.

For more articles on Business and Halacha regarding bankruptcy and corporate structures see these:

• "Bankruptcy: A Halakhic Perspective"
  Rabbi Yitzchok A. Breitowitz
• "Bankruptcy - A Viable Halachic Option?"
  Steven H. Resnicoff
• "A Jewish Law Perspective on the Propriety of Discharging Personal Debts"
  Prof. Steven H. Resnicoff
• "Jewish Law and Modern Business Structures: The Corporate Paradigm"
  Michael J. Broyde & Steven H. Resnicoff
• http://www.businesshalacha.com/hotline-articles/limited-liability

Breaking News!! Chareidi Cartel Disqualified from Charish Tender

Just a short time ago the Israel Lands Administration committee that determines which bids win the tenders to develop land auctioned off by the government published the results for the city of Charish.

A group of 12 Chareidi non-profit buyers' groups were disqualified because they were illegally organized under one (for profit) company. That left one Chareidi non-profit that won two plots for 291 apartments. It seems that the winners of the biggest plots were therefore a bit surprised to learn that they had indeed won. Also, the disqualification left 4 plots for 319 apartments without a winning bidder.

The committee decision comes after a lawsuit was filed by some of the other buyers' groups against the Chareidi bloc alleging illegal coordination of bids and anti-competitive behavior. The Chareidi groups were being led by a number of ex-politicians. 

According to a person interviewed in one article, Chareidim will probably still own 1 out of every 5 apartments in Charish.

Personally, I think that while the city might be end up being more mixed than the Chareidim had hoped for, they will eventually find a way to buy some of the land for a reduced price. I'm not sure how, but that's the way things seem to happen.

Here is a link to the Hebrew article about this.

According to this article if the Chareidi groups appeal the decision, they may incite the Land Administration to bring criminal charges, something they have not decided to do yet. 

Here is the list of the results of the Charish tender from the press release.

And here is an English article 

Is Refusing Orders Really Illegal?

The recent brouhaha over Naftali Bennett's statement and subsequent retraction calling on soldiers to disobey orders to evacuate Jews living over the Green Line is confusing to me. Many took Bennett to task for calling for soldiers to refuse orders, saying that it is a dangerous statement.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said:

"This is a serious issue. Israel's existence is based on its army. I was quite surprised to hear that Naftali Bennett supports insubordination as a personal example. I heard Moshe (Bogie) Ya'alon, who was once the IDF chief of general staff, say the right thing: 'Israel's existence is based on the IDF. The existence of the IDF is based on following orders. There can be no insubordination. Not from this side or from that side.' No one who supports insubordination will serve in my government."

But I thought the Nuremberg Trials put the "Just Following Orders" defense to rest. There are times when a soldier is expected to disobey a direct order.

I think that Moshe Feiglin had it right when he referenced the Torah portion discussing the Jewish midwives who disobeyed Pharaoh's order to kill the Jewish newborns. 

He also said:

"A country which sanctifies liberty must reserve a place of honor for conscientious disobedience.

If we refuse to do so, then we must all request Eichmann's forgiveness for executing him and throwing his ashes into the sea, as this is exactly what he claimed: 'I followed orders'."

And he later clarified: 

"The comparison I made was not intended to compare anyone with anyone else, but rather a comparison regarding the underlying principle. The principle is that a person must be able to draw a moral line for himself, and that any general statement about the requirement to follow any orders at anytime is fascist."

I think the argument made by the Prime Minister that a soldier must always follow orders is not strictly correct. I think what he, and others, mean to say is "A soldier must always follow an order to evict people from areas that the government deems necessary, whether it be for 'Peace' or for any other reason." The issue is not so much about obeying an order but about obeying orders to remove Jews from their homes, a la Gush Katif.

I found this editorial making a similar point as well.

Does the New Law Against Too-Thin Models Violate the Basic Law?

The JPost had an article stating that: 

Starting on Tuesday, female and male models who have a body mass index (BMI) of less than 18.5 may not be shown in the media or on Israeli websites or go down the catwalk at fashion shows...

The law, also sponsored by Likud-Beytenu MK Danny Danon and believed to be the first of its kind in the world, does make violations a criminal offense bearing a fine. But violators can be sued in court by interested citizens, including families whose relatives have suffered or died due to eating disorders encouraged by images of overly thin models.While the media that publish or present illegal images are not liable, they will get a bad image for doing so; the company that produced the ad, ran the fashion show or used the overly skinny presenter can be taken to court.

In addition, any advertisement made to look with Photoshop or other graphics programs as if the model has a BMI under 18.5 has to be labeled with the warning that the image was distorted. The warning must be clear and prominent, covering at least 7 percent of the ad space.

Even the Wall Street Journal has picked up the story.

I wonder, however, whether this law is against the Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation which states that: Every Israel national or resident has the right to engage in any occupation, profession or trade. What if there is a model who naturally has a BMI of less than 18.5? Is she going to be forced to give up her career?

The Basic Law does have two provisions which might protect the law from being overturned:

Section 4: There shall be no violation of freedom of occupation except by a law befitting the values of the State of Israel, enacted for a proper purpose, and to an extent no greater than is required, or by regulation enacted by virtue of express authorization in such law.

Section 8: A provision of a law that violates freedom of occupation shall be of effect, even though not in accordance with section 4, if it has been included in a law passed by a majority of the members of the Knesset, which expressly states that it shall be of effect, notwithstanding the provisions of this Basic Law; such law shall expire four years from its commencement unless a shorter duration has been stated therein.

We'll have to wait and see if this law is challenged in court.