Judge Solberg Rules to Protect Voter Privacy by Banning Real-Time Voting Reports

Attorney Mike Bels explained on 103FM the reasoning behind Judge Noam Solberg's recent ruling that prohibits election observers from reporting in real time who has voted at polling stations. The decision aims to restore voter privacy and prevent the disclosure of sensitive personal and political information. The issue arose when members of the public petitioned to stop the practice of observers informing political parties about who had voted to encourage others to do so.

A comprehensive hearing was held before Judge Solberg, involving all relevant political parties, the Privacy Protection Authority, and the Attorney General's office, where legal positions were presented. Bels noted that Solberg conducted a thorough analysis of Israeli privacy laws and election regulations, concluding that the practice infringes on individual privacy rights.

The process under scrutiny involves voters announcing their names at the polling station, which observers record and then use to mobilize others. Solberg highlighted that this constitutes misuse of personal information beyond its intended purpose. He also pointed out heightened sensitivity in certain voting locations, such as facilities for people with disabilities, women's shelters, and hospitals, where revealing voter presence could expose additional private details.

Furthermore, Solberg observed that in polling stations with low turnout or where voters predominantly support a particular party or bloc, it becomes possible to infer an individual's political views, intensifying privacy concerns. Bels emphasized that the ruling reinstates respect for voters' privacy rights and clarifies that election observers, as temporary public officials, lack authority to engage in such reporting.

Reflecting on past practices, Bels recalled that decades ago, when privacy laws were less developed, observers routinely reported voter participation. However, legal frameworks have since evolved, including the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty, which enshrines privacy as a constitutional right. This ruling marks a significant legal development ahead of the 2026 elections, reinforcing protections for voter confidentiality.