National Labor Court Upholds Suspension of Arab Employee for Participating in a Demonstration
On 11 February 2009, the National Labor Court rejected a motion to submit an appeal filed by Adalah against a decision to suspend Ms. Juheina Hussein, an employee of the Israeli Ministry of Health (MOH), as a result of her participation in March 2008 in a demonstration against the siege on the Gaza Strip. Adalah, which is representing Ms. Hussein, is examining the possibility of launching an appeal to the Supreme Court as the decision blatantly violates her rights to express her opinion and to employment, in addition to other principle constitutional issues.
Ms. Hussein has been a MOH employee from over thirty years, during which she assumed various positions, the latest of which was a regional family health clinic inspector in the Akka area. During her career she was considered an excellent employee and received a prestigious award for her work from the MOH for the year 2000-2001.
Ms. Hussein was suspended on the pretext of infringing directives applicable to state employees by participating in a demonstration to protest the siege on Gaza organized by the High Follow-up Committee for Arab Citizens in Israel in the Arab town of Umm el-Fahem on 4 March 2008. She allegedly raised a sign on which the words “Hitler’s children are visiting the same fate on the children of Gaza” were written and she allegedly stated in a television interview that, “The Zionist people are massacring our brothers in Gaza”.
During the hearing at the Civil Service Commission, before which she was summoned to appear, Ms. Hussein clarified that her participation in the demonstration against the siege was an expression of her opposition to all forms of violence and all harm committed against innocent people.
Commenting on the court’s decision, Adalah Attorney Orna Kohn stated that the suspension of Ms. Hussein, due to political statements that she made on a single occasion that fall within the scope of freedom of expression and do not constitute a criminal offense, is an extreme measure.
Attorney Kohn further argued that there was no relationship between the statements attributed to Ms. Hussein and her work, in particular given that she did not make the statements at her work place or while carrying out her professional duties. Furthermore, there is no connection between these statements and the nature of her position in the MOH, and the statements were not directed at her colleagues or subordinates. Thus the decision to suspend her pending the completion of an internal disciplinary tribunal is a violation of her constitutional rights.
