ACRI Petitions High Court to Block 500 Million NIS Budget Transfer
ACRI has filed an urgent High Court petition seeking to block the transfer of 500 million NIS from Arab sector development funds to security agencies, citing a flawed government process.
The Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) filed an urgent petition with the High Court of Justice on Thursday seeking an interim injunction to block the transfer of 500 million NIS from the socioeconomic development plan for the Arab sector, known as Taqadom 550, to the police and the Shin Bet. This legal move follows a state announcement on October 26, a day before the elections, stating that budget transfer requests had been submitted to the Knesset Finance Committee for approval.
In a previous submission earlier this month, the state conceded that the decision had been adopted through a deeply flawed procedure, yet urged the court to uphold it, citing the government's broad budgetary discretion. ACRI is also requesting an injunction to halt the implementation of the cabinet decision authorizing the Shin Bet to handle civilian crime. The petition argues that without an interim injunction, the government's decision will become a fait accompli, inflicting irreversible harm on the targeted programs and fundamental rights the petition seeks to protect.
Over the past year, National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and Social Equality Minister May Golan made multiple attempts to slash the funding of Taqadom 550. Until last July, they had only managed to cut about 200 million NIS from the initiative. However, on July 15, ahead of the elections, the cabinet resolved to reallocate 497 million NIS from the program to the police and the Shin Bet, while tasking the internal security agency with combating crime in the Arab sector despite its strictly civilian nature.
In response to the initial petition filed on July 30 by human rights organizations and the National Committee of Arab Local Authority Heads, state attorneys Jonathan Berman and Amir Bachar admitted that the government resolution was fast-tracked under tight time constraints. They acknowledged that this pressure hindered proper inter-ministerial reviews, despite formal legal warnings attached to the proposal cautioning against significant legal flaws in the decision-making process.
