In accordance with all of this, it would appear that in our case, the provisions of the Ashkelon Bylaw regarding the prohibition of the sale of pigs, as determined by my colleague Vice-President Y. Pilpel, should be given effect, in any event, insofar as it relates to the first part of the judgment in light of the fact that the bylaw was enacted before the commencement of the Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation.
In the Enabling Law enacted by the Chief Legislature, the Knesset, explicit authority was granted to local authorities to enact bylaws regarding the prohibition of the sale of pig meat. According to this authority, the Ashkelon Municipality enacted the Ashkelon Bylaw (Pigs and Pork), 5718-1958, and in the judgment in the Menashi case [1] it was stated regarding a similar bylaw, as quoted by my colleague Vice-President Y. Pilpel, that: "There is no basis for the claim that the municipality did not have the power to enact the bylaw in question, since the aforementioned Authorization Law granted the municipality this power. The Enabling Law gave the municipality the power to prohibit the sale of pig meat in its jurisdiction, and that's what the municipality did in the aforementioned bylaw."
Counsel for the appellants argues that this situation changed with the enactment of the Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation, which states that "every citizen or resident of the State is entitled to engage in any occupation..." (section 3 of the law) and that "the freedom of occupation is not violated except by a law that is appropriate to the values of the State of Israel, which is intended for a proper purpose and to an extent that does not exceed what is required, or according to such law by virtue of its explicit authorization" (section 4), and his argument is that the prohibition on the sale of pig meat constitutes an infringement of this freedom. However, section 10 of the Basic Law includes a temporary provision stating that "statutory provisions, if it were not for this Basic Law... If they were in force on the eve of the commencement of this Basic Law, they will remain in force until March 14, 2002, if they were not repealed earlier..." Accordingly, the provisions of the bylaw should be continued to be validated even if they contravene the freedom of occupation under the Basic Law, without entering into the question of whether the provisions of the bylaw are in line with the values of the State of Israel, were enacted for a proper purpose, and are not to the extent that is required. However, in the end of that section (section 10 of the Basic Law) it is stated: "However, the interpretation of the said provisions shall be made in the spirit of the provisions of this Basic Law."