Public Comments Before Government Decisions
- ACRI
- 22 hours ago
- 2 min read
Before the weekly government meetings, the agenda is usually published along with attached appendices, which include proposed resolutions. The agenda and appendices are distributed to ministers and professional officials, and published for the public on the website of the Prime Minister's Office. But what was published before the government meeting scheduled for January 25, 2026 was unusual. An agenda was published, but nothing was published other than the title of a proposal submitted by the Minister of Justice, "Update to the Government Work Regulations” and a note: "material will be distributed separately."
It was indirectly revealed that this was a proposal to fundamentally change the involvement of the legal counsel to the government in the government’s work that would essentially establish the government's ability to operate without legal counsel. Ultimately, the government made no decisions regarding this proposal on the January 25 meeting, and postponed the decision to February 1, 2026.
On January 28, 2026, ACRI petitioned the Supreme Court, requesting that the proposed resolution and its reasoning be published for public comment, that adequate time be granted for receiving public comments, and that these be considered before any decision is made. We also requested an interim order that would prevent the government from deciding on the issue until a ruling on the petition. We argued that this is a dramatic change to government procedure. It has implications for all decisions the government makes, and therefore also for human rights and for the system of checks and balances in a democratic system. Even for legislative amendments on negligible matters, the government is required to invite public participation and opinion before the decision, so it is all the more important to solicit the opinion of the public on an issue that would have a dramatic impact on the public and the government. This process must take place before the government discussion and before the decision is made, not after the ministers have deliberated when a post-facto public hearing process becomes a mere formality.
The Supreme Court rejected our request for an interim order, and ruled that if the decision is made ACRI can continue with the proceedings and argue against it.
HCJ 84488-01-26 The Association for Civil Rights in Israel v. The Government
Attorney: Oded Feller
ACRI's petition, January 28, 2026 (Heb)
The Decision, January 28, 2026 (Heb)
