According to police, Zuaretz forbidden to approach GOC’s residence

Tuesday, August 23, 2016, 14:43 Approximately two and a half weeks after Itiel Zuaretz, an Adei Ad resident and father of five, returned home after serving a 10-month administrative order, he received a new order distancing him from his home for an additional four months. Both orders were signed by the GOC of the Central Command Major-General Roni Numa.
On Monday, August 22, Zuaretz went with his wife and infant daughter to the street on which Maj-Gen. Numa lives in order to protest the order. When Zuaretz wanted to leave policemen stopped him and for approximately 40 minutes prevented the couple from leaving the site. No reason was given and after various clarifications one of the policemen claimed that Zuaretz is under an order distancing him from the street and the surrounding area, and ordered him to leave. The policeman also threatened Zuaretz with arrest if he returned to the area.
Zuaretz asked under which order or law he was distanced from the area. The policeman stated that, “You are forbidden to approach this area and you know that better than I do,” and claimed that the prohibition was written in “the order”, apparently referring to the administrative order served to Zuaretz on the night of Wednesday, August 17.
However the order distances Zuaretz from Yehuda and Shomron, not from Ramat Gan. The conduct of the police was especially inappropriate being as the GOC of the Central Command does not have the authority to issue an order distancing someone from a region “within the Green Line”.
Honenu would like to remind readers that in March 2016 the Central Command claimed that the arrival of an individual under an administrative order at a protest opposite Maj.-Gen. Numa’s residence constituted proof that he was a “dangerous” activist.
Honenu: “It appears that because Major-General [Numa] issues stringent administrative distancing orders wholesale to Jewish residents of Yehuda and Shomron, the system takes care to prevent any legal protest of the decision. This is a serious violation of freedom of expression and we will consider legal action against the policemen who illegally took advantage of their authority.”