In this way, the situation is different, for example, from the criminal law regarding arrests. The legislature's mandate in this law is that a defendant may be arrested after an indictment has been filed against him only if "the purpose of the arrest cannot be achieved along the way... that the infringement of the defendant's liberty is less" (in the words of section 21(b)(1) of the Criminal Procedure Law (Enforcement Powers – Arrests), 5756-1996 (hereinafter – the Arrests Law), and compare the similar language in section 21A of the Criminal Procedure Law [Consolidated Version], 5742-1982, prior to the enactment of the Arrests Law). The legislature established a consequential preference. In this situation, it seems to me that the court is more obligated to examine the result in the concrete case according to the test of the application of the law. On the other hand, in a situation in which the legislature grants broad discretion to the authority without setting tests for the exercise of its discretion, the court must be more careful before determining which tests are appropriate. It is always easier to determine which tests are inappropriate because they are invalid. However, in the realm of reasonableness, there may be different results not only in the application of the test but also in its determination. The court is obligated to be careful not to impose on the authority a test that it deems fit. I will discuss this topic later.
(d) A balance that exists within the law:
The Enabling Law is an interesting compromise attempt. On the one hand, the legislature discussed the difficult issue of selling pigs, and on the other hand, it refrained from establishing a uniform national solution. The legislature did not prohibit or permit the sale of pig under these or other conditions nationwide, but left the matter to the discretion of each and every municipality. On the face of it, one can ask why the law in Haifa will be different from the law in Ramat Gan. However, from the broader aspect, the legislature took into account the differences between the different populations, and I would also add the differences between the different histories and the different characters. This is wise in directing the outcome. It is clear that not every municipality will reach the same result. There will be municipalities that will decide to impose a sweeping prohibition, and there will be municipalities that will decide to refrain from doing so. The dividing line will not necessarily be a geographical line between north and south or between east and west. In this way, even one who is harmed by the imposition of a prohibition of one extent or another – and any prohibition, even on one street, violates the right – will be harmed, for not far from the place that prohibits selling or buying, there will be a place where the permitter will be found.