Supreme Court returns Elector application issue to the Central Elections Committee

The issue of using Elector will return to the Central Elections Committee: The Supreme Court accepted Likud's position today, Wednesday, and returned the decision regarding the parties' use of the application to the Central Elections Committee.

The justices stated they do not accept the position of the committee chairman, Noam Solberg, nor the position of the Attorney General that he was authorized to make the decision alone. Solberg initially opposed but eventually agreed, and the discussion in the Central Elections Committee is expected to take place on Sunday.

"In our opinion, there is a difficulty regarding the authority," announced the three-judge panel: Yael Willner, Alex Stein, and Khaled Kabub. They added: "We do not think the head of the committee has full authority, but rather the entire committee, as Attorney Bombach argued." The justices also questioned how a situation could exist where the State Attorney's Office represents the Attorney General, the committee chairman, and the Central Elections Committee, all of whom hold opposing positions on the matter.

After a consultation break, the justices suggested that the Central Elections Committee discuss the issue. "If there is no agreement to the proposal, we will issue an order nisi," they concluded. Subsequently, Solberg announced his agreement.

As recalled, the chairman of the Central Elections Committee, Judge Noam Solberg, had accepted a petition and ruled that reporting to parties in real-time during elections about citizens who are not voting, including through the Elector application, violates citizen privacy and is contrary to the law. Likud petitioned the Supreme Court against the decision, arguing that there was no authority to make a decision alone without all members of the Central Elections Committee, and additionally that the decision should be canceled due to its content.

The Central Elections Committee has a majority for the coalition, so if the decision reaches it, it is expected to be overturned. At the same time, it will be possible to petition again against the renewed decision of the Central Elections Committee. In such a case, the Supreme Court will move from a discussion regarding the authority of the decision-maker to the content itself, on the question of whether the use of reporting on citizens who do not vote is illegal.

Regarding this, Justice Willner said that "there is a basis for the claim that this is a violation of privacy. A person does not want it to be known if they voted or did not vote in the elections. This is an intrusion into their autonomy, into their private space."