Attorney Howard Grief reveals the illegality of the Disengagement Plan in the January 2005 issue of Nativ, Israel’s premier journal. In addition to the plan’s violation of the Law of Return and basic laws of the State as well as Jewish law, the evacuation of Jews from Gaza and Northern Samaria,

will impair the sovereignty of the State over all regions of the Land of Israel presently under its control, exposing those responsible for the Disengagement Plan, particularly Prime Minister Sharon, to a charge of treason under section 97(a) of the Penal Code. Since the Disengagement Plan also involve territorial withdrawal, a charge of treason can also be brought against him under sections 97(b) and 100 of the law. However, this would only take place if and when a true Zionist government comes to power and initiates prosecution.

This last observation implies that no relief can be expected from Israel’s Supreme Court. Indeed, Attorney Grief, on behalf of prominent citizens of Israel, has submitted learned petitions to the court challenging the legality of the Oslo or Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles, of which the Disengagement Plan is a derivative. His scholarly and persistent efforts have been in vain.

The Supreme Court has refused to deal with the merits of these petitions, even though Chief Justice Aharon Barak has audaciously stated that “everything is justiciable.” Quite apart from his anti-Zionist predilections, Judge Barak is not about to give publicity to a case in which Prime Minister Sharon would be accused of violating, prima facie, the Penal Code governing treason. Indeed, if Mr. Sharon were convicted, scores of other Israeli politicians would suffer the same fate—not a pretty commentary on the government of Israel. No one wants to contemplate the possibility that perfidious politicians are making the laws and policies of the Jewish state and do so with impunity.

Here is the way Mr. Grief has elsewhere addressed the issue. Israel’s Penal Law defines four kinds of acts as treason:

1. acts which "impair the sovereignty" of the State of Israel—section 97(a);

2. acts which "impair the integrity" of the State of Israel— section 97(b);

3. acts under section 99 which give assistance to an "enemy" in war against Israel, which the Law specifically states includes a terrorist organization;

4. acts in section 100 which evince an intention or resolve to commit one of the acts prohibited by sections 97 and 99.

The punishment prescribed in the Penal Law for the first three kinds of acts of treason is death or imprisonment for life. The harshness of the punishment emphasizes the seriousness with which the State of Israel views the crime of treason, which it seeks to prevent by the punishment it imposes upon offenders.

Of course, most people are afraid to use the “T” word, especially today when the heavy hand of tyranny is descending on Israel. Those resisting “disengagement” will not only be subject to as much as 5 years of imprisonment, but detention camps are being constructed for resisters. And one should bear in mind that decisions of the Barak court regarding the “security fence” indicate greater concern for the conveniences of Palestinians than the lives of Jews.

The fact that Israeli citizens cannot get a redress of grievances from the courts or from the Knesset cannot but lead to violence. This is the inevitable consequence of a system of government that lacks institutional checks and balances, without which the arbitrary rule of men takes the place of the rule of law.

Therefore, “disengagement”—a policy Sharon campaigned against in the 2003 national elections,—is not only a question of treason. It also represents a nullification of that election, in which an overwhelming majority of the people voted against “disengagement.” This means that Israeli democracy is little more than a facade for what Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin calls a “gang” that makes the law. It follows that the prosecution of those who have or may have violated the above mentioned sections of the law concerning treason will not take place until Israel has a very different system of government. This is precisely why the present ruling elites will fight teeth and nails to preserve the present system.