put ate ▁their ▁legs . ▁ ▁On ▁ 1 5 ▁April , ▁four ▁Isra eli ▁human ▁rights ▁organizations , ▁Yes h ▁Din , ▁G ish a , ▁Ha M oked , ▁and ▁the ▁Association ▁for ▁Civil ▁Rights ▁in ▁Israel ▁joint ly ▁pet ition ed ▁the ▁Isra eli ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁to ▁re voke ▁the ▁rules ▁of ▁eng agement ▁used ▁by ▁the ▁ID F ▁in ▁response ▁to ▁the ▁protest s . ▁They ▁argued ▁that ▁" there ▁is ▁no ▁prohib ition ▁on ▁demonstr ating ▁in ▁Gaz a ▁and ▁that ▁if ▁inc idents ▁of ▁violence ▁or ▁attempts ▁to ▁cross ▁the ▁f ence ▁occur ▁during ▁demonstr ations , ▁they ▁alone ▁const itute ▁civil ▁dist urban ces ▁of ▁the ▁peace . ▁In ▁such ▁dist urban ces , ▁the ▁law ▁perm its ▁live ▁fire ▁only ▁in ▁cases ▁of ▁immediate ▁mort al ▁danger ." ▁In ▁response , ▁the ▁Isra eli ▁government ▁refused ▁to ▁disc lose ▁its ▁rules ▁of ▁eng agement ▁public ly , ▁but ▁said ▁they ▁" comp ly ▁with ▁Isra eli ▁law ▁and ▁with ▁international ▁law ." ▁The ▁government ▁indicated ▁that ▁it ▁views ▁the ▁protest s ▁as ▁" part ▁of ▁the ▁armed ▁conflict ▁between ▁the ▁Ham as ▁terror ▁organization ▁and ▁Israel , ▁with ▁all ▁that ▁this ▁implies ." ▁On ▁ 2 4 ▁May ▁ 2 0 1 8 , ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁rejected ▁the ▁pet ition , ▁r uling ▁that ▁the ▁protest s ▁were ▁not ▁un ar med ▁protest s ▁but ▁a ▁part ▁of ▁an ▁armed ▁conflict ▁which ▁were ▁used ▁as ▁a ▁cover ▁to ▁carry ▁out ▁terror ▁attacks ▁against ▁Israel