Get Plus

Sign in to baba News

One account across the web, iPhone and Android — your subscription follows it.

or use an email code

Search stories

Type at least two characters. Results come from every newsroom baba reads.

↑↓ to move · ↵ to open · esc to close

Sign in to baba News

Sign in to keep asking. News Plus removes the daily limit.

or use an email code

IcePolitics

Supreme Court Bans Real-Time Voter Tracking by Parties

Translated & summarized from Ice by baba

BusinessNeutral tone

Hebrew · 23 newsrooms covering

Israel's Supreme Court has banned parties from receiving real-time updates on voter turnout from polling stations, citing privacy concerns and lack of legal authority. The ruling is seen as a setback for parties relying on targeted voter mobilization.

The story in 4 lines · by baba

  • Supreme Court bans real-time voter tracking by parties.
  • Decision cited privacy violations and lack of legal authority.
  • Ruling impacts parties' targeted voter mobilization strategies.
  • Political commentator calls it 'bad news for coalition parties'.
Supreme Court Bans Real-Time Voter Tracking by Parties
Editorial illustration generated by baba News, not a photograph of the event.

Israel's Supreme Court has completely disqualified a decision by the Central Elections Committee that allowed party representatives at polling stations to report in real-time on who had already voted. This ruling effectively halts a key election day practice used by parties to encourage targeted voter turnout.

Political commentator Amit Segal of Channel 12 News described the decision as "bad news for the coalition parties," as it disrupts a significant method for mobilizing voters. The petitions against the practice were filed following attempts by parties, notably the Likud, to use digital tracking systems and applications, such as "Elector," to identify potential voters who had not yet cast their ballots and pressure them to vote.

The Supreme Court's ruling, authored by Justice Yael Vilner and agreed upon by Justices Alex Stein and Khaled Kabub, unequivocally stated that transmitting this information violates the Privacy Protection Law and constitutes an disproportionate infringement on citizens' rights. Furthermore, the judges clarified that the Central Elections Committee lacks the legal authority to approve such reporting without explicit legislative authorization.

The Supreme Court's decision is expected to reshape the digital strategies of election campaign headquarters on election day, forcing parties to re-evaluate their ground-level mobilization efforts.

IceOther · Tel Aviv

Sign in to baba News

Sign in to follow newsrooms, topics and people.

or use an email code

Sign in to baba News

Sign in to follow newsrooms, topics and people.

or use an email code

Mentioned

Full coverage · 28 outlets
First: Channel 13 · Sep 17

The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.

Open the Wire