Israel's Supreme Court Halts New Communications Law Amid Procedural Concerns

Israel's Supreme Court has temporarily suspended the implementation of a new communications law championed by Communications Minister Shlomo Karai. The court issued an interim order compelling the government to explain why the law should not be permanently canceled, following petitions that alleged significant flaws in the legislative process.

The court's decision focused on procedural irregularities, stating that it would first address whether the law should be voided due to these alleged defects before examining the substance of its provisions. The law, which passed its final readings in July, aimed to establish an independent statutory body, the Broadcast Communications Authority, to consolidate existing regulatory functions. It proposed an annual budget of NIS 25 million, to be deducted from the public broadcasting corporation's budget.

Several petitions were filed against the law, including one by the Movement for Quality of Government, which argued the law was designed to "silence free press" and was rushed through before elections. The petition detailed alleged fundamental flaws, including the law being advanced against the Attorney General's advice and published with an unprecedented note stating it lacked her approval. The Minister of Communications reportedly called this note an "order of courage."

Further claims in the petitions included the establishment of a special committee to bypass the Knesset's Economy Committee, contrary to the Knesset's legal advisor's opinion. It was also alleged that the law was split at the last minute, with a notification sent to lawmakers on a Friday afternoon for a Sunday vote, and that the final vote proceeded despite thousands of reservations. The petitions also highlighted provisions that allegedly undermine free media, such as giving the Communications Minister or his subordinates significant control over the new regulator and allowing government bodies access to Israeli citizens' viewing data, a practice reportedly unmatched in Western countries. Additionally, the law was criticized for dismantling the structural separation between channel owners and news companies and for lifting restrictions on cross-ownership, potentially leading to a few wealthy owners dominating the opinion market.

Responding to the court's decision, the Zulat Institute, one of the petitioners, welcomed the freeze, stating the law could have severely damaged free media. They argued the legislative flaws were substantive, not just procedural, and would have harmed the independence and reliability of news systems. The institute emphasized that the outgoing government lacked the public legitimacy for such a dramatic reform and that any changes to Israel's media structure should be handled by a new government and Knesset, ensuring press freedom.