Legislation9/4/2026

High Court of Justice Strikes Down Law Protecting Draft Evaders and Restricts Fast-Track Legislation

An expanded panel of nine High Court of Justice justices struck down a law that blocked criminal enforcement against Haredi draft evaders. This occurred 51 days after the law was passed by the Knesset in its second and third readings—and, according to the source’s assessment, faster than ever before in an Israeli constitutional proceeding.

Key facts

•Court: High Court of Justice, expanded panel of nine justices
•The law was struck down 51 days after its passage
•Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty
•Previous procedural precedent: Multiple Apartments Tax, 2017
•The proceeding number and date of the judgment were not specified in the source

What the Court Struck Down

The law considered in the petition temporarily prohibited arrests, investigations and other criminal enforcement measures against Haredim evading the draft. The High Court of Justice permanently struck it from the statute book. The proceeding numbers, date of the judgment and names of the petitioners were not specified in the source.

Two Grounds for Striking It Down

Supreme Court Deputy President Noam Sohlberg based the decision to strike down the law on both a defect in the legislative process and the law’s substance. The Court ruled that the law infringed equality and failed to meet the limitations clause of Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. Four justices also found an infringement of the rule of law, while Justice David Mintz supported striking it down solely on procedural grounds.

The Bill Was Fundamentally Changed

The initiative, formulated during the Bennett–Lapid government, originally concerned integrating yeshiva students into the IDF. After the continuity rule was applied to it, it first became a proposal for a permanent exemption of the Haredi sector from military service, and later a prohibition on criminal enforcement against draft evaders. The final text did not pass its first reading, and the Court therefore ruled that the required legislative process had not taken place.

A New Standard for the Knesset

The Court set out criteria for identifying a “new subject”: the differences between the proposal’s original and final purposes, the issue regulated, the group of people affected and the means selected. A substantial departure by the final text from the scope of the original subject will now, as a rule, be considered a defect that goes to the root of the legislative process. According to the source, this is only the second case in which an Israeli law has been struck down because of a procedural defect, following the 2017 judgment concerning the Multiple Apartments Tax Law.

The Temporary Provision Did Not Save the Law

The law was formally intended to remain in force for three months, but because of the election period it could in practice have applied for at least twice as long. The Court ruled that the temporary status of the norm does not preclude judicial review, particularly when it involves a profound infringement of equality. The government did not appear to defend the law, even though Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara permitted it to immediately retain separate representation.

What this means for you

It will be more difficult for the Knesset to use a bill that has already passed its first reading as the basis for enacting a provision whose purpose and content are fundamentally different. For ordinary citizens, this strengthens procedural safeguards: substantive changes must undergo the prescribed stages of deliberation, and even a temporary law may be struck down if it disproportionately infringes fundamental rights.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings