The saga of reporting from polling stations returns to the High Court: "There is something illegal here"

The High Court of Justice is again deliberating petitions against real-time reporting from polling stations to political parties. The petitioners argue that the practice is illegal and requires legislation, while Likud claims the information helps transport voters. Judge Wilner questioned the violation of privacy and equality.

The High Court of Justice is once again deliberating the saga of real-time reporting from polling stations to political parties, as part of petitions against the practice. The petitioners argue that this is an illegal practice that requires primary legislation, as it allows parties to track voter presence at polling stations. On the other hand, Likud claims that the information is used, among other things, to assist in transporting voters to polling stations. Judge Yael Wilner wondered during the hearing: "Why is it relevant to know in advance that they are identified with a particular party? Why does this not violate privacy?" and added that directing voters to a specific party harms equality and constitutes a specific party endorsement. The current hearing comes after the High Court previously accepted a compromise proposal, according to which the ban on real-time reporting would be re-discussed in the Central Elections Committee. In the committee, where Likud has a political majority, a decision was made contrary to the position of the committee chairman, Judge Noam Sohlberg, who banned real-time reporting of a person's presence at a polling station on election day.

The saga of reporting from polling stations returns to the High Court: "There is something illegal here"