Recent reports surfaced at the request of the Southern District Public Defender’s Office, raising significant questions regarding the judgment of Eilat police investigators in minor detention proceedings. Key allegations presented by Public Defender representatives point to a pattern where minors remain in overnight detention even when there is no urgent investigative necessity, which the Public Defender argues contradicts the principles of the Youth Law and relevant case law.
One disturbing case involves a 13-year-old girl arrested on suspicion of trespassing and assaulting police officers. Data brought before the Eilat Magistrates' Court revealed that the girl was arrested while in her private home. Deputy Court President, Judge Shay Berger, criticized the police, noting that the case lacked reasonable suspicion for the alleged offenses. The judge added that the investigative unit failed to exercise proper judgment by keeping the girl in overnight detention while presenting a classified report containing inaccurate facts.
In another case, a 15-year-old boy was arrested by police. When the possibility of releasing him under condition of exclusion from Eilat arose, the police representative insisted that his parents arrive in the city, stating that if the parents did not arrive, the boy must remain in custody. This issue highlights the gap between the police's view on ensuring parental supervision and judicial criticism of using detention as a tool for pressure. Adv. Shlomo Levy, head of the Youth Department at the Southern District Public Defender’s Office, claims this is a systemic distortion violating the principle of restraint, under which detention is a last resort in criminal proceedings, especially concerning minors.
He maintains that these procedures cause significant mental harm and place unnecessary strain on the judicial system. Conversely, the Israel Police stated in response that it acts with the expected sensitivity and responsibility while strictly upholding the rights of minors. Regarding the 13-year-old, the police claimed officers acted after the minor refused to leave a private location and behaved threateningly. Regarding the 15-year-old, the police clarified that the representative's words were spoken in the context of ensuring his safe release to his family.
Judge Berger acknowledged the heavy workload on the Eilat investigative unit but emphasized that this does not justify flaws in the judgment of police officers when making fateful decisions regarding the deprivation of minors' liberty.