Israel's Election Laws Lag Behind Digital Age, Experts Warn

Israel's election laws, particularly the Election Propaganda Law enacted in 1959, are struggling to keep pace with the rapid spread of digital propaganda, according to experts. A 2017 reform proposal aimed to update regulations for the digital era, but only parts have been implemented. The core issue is the significant gap between the speed at which prohibited campaign material can go viral and the slow pace of legal enforcement and deterrence.

A notable example occurred during the March 2020 elections when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's campaign disseminated a doctored video of Benny Gantz, making it appear he urged supporters not to vote for his own party. While the Election Committee chairman, Justice Niel Hendel, ordered the video's removal and fined Netanyahu's Likud party, the damage was already done as the clip had become widely shared. "The damage was done, so what does it matter if the video was eventually taken down?" asked Dr. Sharon Halaba-Amir, a researcher of political communication and a jurist.

Calls for updating election propaganda laws have been ongoing for decades. As far back as 1999, then-Election Committee Chairman Justice Eliyahu Maza urged a review of the laws' relevance to changing realities. This call was echoed by justices Mishael Heshin and Dorit Beinish, and later by Supreme Court President Aharon Gronis. Heshin, in a 2001 ruling, acknowledged the need for legislative action on internet propaganda, stating it was a matter for lawmakers.

In 2015, researchers Tehila Schwartz Altshuler and Guy Lurie from the Israel Democracy Institute proposed a comprehensive reform. Their recommendations included unifying regulations across all media, imposing stricter spending limits, and enhancing transparency regarding who funds political advertisements. A public committee chaired by former Supreme Court President Dorit Beinish submitted its recommendations in 2017, suggesting the abolition of election propaganda bans on TV and radio in the 60 days before elections and extending transparency requirements to the internet and social media. The committee also highlighted weak enforcement, with legal proceedings often occurring only after violations had spread.

Despite these efforts, implementing substantial changes faces political hurdles. Politicians often benefit from loopholes and weak enforcement, making them reluctant to support legislation that would restrict their own activities. While a 2022 amendment mandated transparency for online political ads, identifying the advertiser and the entity they represent, the broader reform, particularly regarding significant financial penalties for violations, remains incomplete. Experts like Lurie emphasize the need for rules that apply to propaganda regardless of the technology used, and for addressing coordinated inauthentic activity, such as networks of social media accounts acting in concert to create a false impression of public support.

The issue of enforcement remains a critical challenge. The recommendation for the Election Committee chairman to impose substantial financial sanctions, deducted from state funding, has not been adopted. Attorney Shachar Ben Meir advocates for utilizing existing criminal enforcement provisions, suggesting prosecutors should pursue indictments in severe cases. Former Election Committee Chairman Hanan Melzer proposes granting the chairman explicit authority to mandate pre-screening or immediate removal of content, including that generated by AI, while also cautioning against creating a "freedom of expression police."