Court ruling10/18/2026

High Court of Justice Barred Parties From Using Apps to Obtain Information on Who Had Voted

The High Court of Justice barred polling committee members and party-appointed observers from reporting to their parties during Election Day, through dedicated apps, which voters had already voted. Likud reacted sharply to the decision because the party views such technologies as an important tool for mobilizing supporters.

Key facts

•Body: High Court of Justice
•Decision issued: September 2026
•Source published: October 18, 2026
•The prohibition applies to polling committee members and party-appointed observers
•The case number and exact date of the decision were not specified
•The “Elector” app was mentioned

What the Court Ruled

According to a report in Haaretz dated October 18, 2026, the decision was issued by the High Court of Justice one month earlier. The prohibition applies to transmitting information to parties about voters’ identities through apps designed for that purpose. The case number, the exact date of the decision, and its detailed legal reasoning were not specified in the source.

To Whom the Prohibition Applies

The decision concerns polling committee members and observers acting on behalf of the parties. They were prohibited from transmitting information to their parties during Election Day, through apps, about who had already arrived to vote. The source does not indicate whether the decision applies to other methods of collecting information outside polling stations.

Likud’s Response

The party’s attorney and its representative in the plenary of the Central Elections Committee, Ilan Bombach, described the decision as extremely difficult for Likud. Nimrod Eliran, who had been responsible for the party’s use of the “Elector” app in the previous election campaign, claimed that the app had enabled Likud to gain an additional three to five seats. The source does not state whether evidence supporting this estimate was presented to the court.

What this means for you

For the ordinary voter, this means that the mere fact of arriving at a polling station is not supposed to be transmitted during the day to parties by polling committee members or observers through dedicated apps. The decision restricts the parties’ ability to identify in real time supporters who have not yet voted and urge them to go to the polls. Other implications and the limits of the prohibition are not detailed in the source presented.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings