High Court of Justice Hears Petitions Against Temporary Order No. 50 Concerning the Budget

What the Knesset Changed

The amendment entered into force on August 24, 2020, one day before the original date for the Knesset’s dissolution. It postponed the deadline for passing the budget from August 25 to December 23, 2020, and provided for the addition of NIS 11 billion to the continuing budget. It made the expenditure of these funds contingent on the approval of a detailed action plan by the government and the Knesset Finance Committee.

Who Petitioned the Court

The petitions were filed by citizens and public organizations, including Stav Shaffir, Yael Cohen-Paran, the New Contract Association, the National Responsibility — Israel My Home organization, and the Movement for Quality Government in Israel. The respondents were the Knesset, the government, the Knesset Finance Committee, Finance Minister Yisrael Katz, and the Attorney General. The petitioners sought the annulment of the amendment, arguing that it constituted an abuse of the Knesset’s constituent authority. Some also sought to apply equality requirements and budget-related legislation to the allocation of the additional funds.

Why a Constitutional Dispute Arose

Under Basic Law: The State Economy, in the absence of an approved budget, the government was permitted to spend each month an amount equal to one-twelfth of the previous year’s budget, with indexation adjustments. These funds were allocated, first and foremost, to meeting the state’s obligations, essential services, and purposes previously approved. The petitioners argued that the addition of NIS 11 billion effectively created a substitute for a full budget without its approval by the Knesset through the ordinary legislative process.

The Court’s Approach

The excerpt from the judgment formulated a two-stage test for abuse of constituent authority. First, it is examined whether the norm bears the characteristics of a constitutional norm—stability, general applicability, and compatibility with the system of Basic Laws. Then, if these characteristics are absent, the state must justify entrenching the norm at the constitutional level. The Court noted that Section 2 of the amendment was temporary, targeted a specific government and Knesset, specified an exact amount for one year, and was inconsistent with the logic of a continuing budget.

The Outcome Known From the Source

The 23rd Knesset was dissolved on December 23, 2020, because the budget was not passed even by the postponed deadline. The respondents therefore argued that the petitions had become theoretical, while the petitioners maintained that the issue was of principled importance. The provided source excerpt ends before the operative section and does not state the final outcome of the petitions.

Latest legal news

• Court allows parents of late Maj. Ofek Bachar to use his sperm
• High Court issues order nisi over regional radio reform
• Supreme Court decision in BSA 8455/17 addresses appeal classification