In a preliminary response to the High Court of Justice, the Knesset’s legal adviser acknowledged that photographing ballots during the election for state comptroller created real problems for vote secrecy, but argued the process followed an agreed framework reached in real time with opposition representatives. The Knesset is asking the court to reject petitions that seek to void the vote, saying there is no explicit legal ban on photographing a ballot and that canceling the result would amount to an unprecedented blow to parliamentary sovereignty.
The petitions were filed, among others, by the Movement for Quality Government, the Israel Bar Association, Yesh Atid, and Blue and White. They argue that secrecy was severely damaged after coalition lawmakers were filmed photographing their ballots behind the voting booth curtain to prove they had voted for attorney Michael Rabillo, whose election is now under challenge.
According to the Knesset’s filing, once reports spread during the second round in the plenum that lawmakers were being pressured to photograph their votes, the legal adviser, who was on a flight to Israel, texted the plenum’s legal adviser, Adv. Eyal Lev Ari, to act immediately and instructed the Knesset secretary to bar members from taking mobile phones behind the curtain. The legal reasoning was to prevent informal social pressure and protect the secrecy of other lawmakers’ votes. Still, the legal staff said the second vote, which had already begun, should not be stopped or canceled, because doing so could itself distort the outcome.
After the uproar, Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana suspended the session and convened an urgent consultation that produced a cross-party compromise, described as a “three-part arrangement.” It canceled the partially held second round and restarted it from the beginning, declared from the podium that any instruction or demand to photograph a vote was illegal and invalid, and decided not to impose a ban on bringing phones behind the curtain. The Knesset says the opposition fully joined those terms and therefore cannot now challenge the procedure.
The filing also says the so-called “selfie ballot” phenomenon is especially problematic in a closed electorate of 120 MKs, but insists claims that Likud or the faction leadership forced members to photograph their votes remain unverified media rumors. It rejects arguments that the change from Justice Elron’s lead in the first ballot to Rabillo’s win in the repeated vote proves improper pressure, saying political persuasion and media reports can explain the shift. It also argues there is no current legal, procedural, or customary prohibition in Israel on voluntarily photographing a ballot, and that retroactively changing the rules would violate precedent. On the challenge to Rabillo’s suitability because of his ties to the prime minister, the Knesset says the claim should be dismissed on the merits and that any concern about conflict of interest should be handled through a strict recusal arrangement, not by canceling the appointment after the fact. The Knesset adds that the electorate changed after MK Boaz Toporovsky resigned and MK Oz Haim entered, so a fresh vote would be improper, and asks the court to dismiss the petitions and award costs.
