Previous 2 / 59 Next

[10] HCJ 6972/07 Akiva Laxer, Adv. v. Minister of Finance, (March 22, 2009) [11] HCJ 84/82 Histadrut Po’alei Agudat Yisrael v. Minister of Religious Affairs, IsrSC 37(1) 813 (1984) [12] HCJ 828/90 Likud Faction of the Haifa Municipal Council v. Haifa Municipal Council, IsrSC 45(1) 506 (1991) [13] HCJ/149 Bejarano v. Police Minister, IsrSC 2 80 (1949) [https://versa.cardozo.yu.edu/opinions/bejerano-v-police-minister] [14] LCrimA 10141/09 Ben Haim v. State of Israel, (March 6, 2012) [15] HCJ 2918/93 Kiryat Gat Municipality v. State of Israel, IsrSC 47(5) 832 (1993) [16] HCJ 5128/94 Federman v. Minister of Police, IsrSC 48(5) 647 (1995) [17] HCJ 8600/04 Chair of the Hof Azza Regional Council v. Prime Minister, IsrSC 59(5) 673 (2005) [18] HCJ 11163/03 Supreme Monitoring Committee for Arab Affairs in Israel and others v. Prime Minister of Israel, (Feb. 27, 2006) [https://versa.cardozo.yu.edu/opinions/suprememonitoring-committee-arab-affairs-israel-and-others-v-prime-minister-israel] [19] HCJ 144/50 Dr. Israel Sheib v. Minister of Defence, IsrSC 5 399 (1951) [https://versa.cardozo.yu.edu/opinions/sheib-v-minister-defence] [20] HCJ 4374/15 Movement for Quality Government v. Prime Minister, (March 27, 2016) [https://versa.cardozo.yu.edu/opinions/movement-quality-government-v-prime-minister] [21] CA 9183/09 Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Anon., IsrSC 65(3) 521 (2012) [22] HCJ 7721/96 Israeli Insurance Adjusters Association v. Supervisor of Insurance, IsrSC 55(3) 625 (2001) [23] HCJ 6579/99 Filber v. State of Israel, (Nov. 1, 1999) [24] HCJ 551/99 Shekem Ltd. v. Director of Customs and VAT, IsrSc 54(1) 112 (1999) [25] 5860/16 Facebook Inc. v. Ben Hamu, (May 31, 2018) [26] LCA 1239/19 Shaul v. Nayadli Communications Ltd., (Jan. 8, 2020) [27] HCJ 11163/03 Supreme Monitoring Committee for Arab Affairs in Israel and others v. Prime Minister of Israel, IsrSC 61(1) 1 (2006) [https://versa.cardozo.yu.edu/opinions/supreme-monitoring-committee-arab-affairsisrael-and-others-v-prime-minister-israel]

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Adalah Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel v. State Attorney’s Office

Case Law

Country

Israel

Country Location

Latitude: 31.832202543391414

Longitude: 34.822003841400154

Country Location (linked Case Law): Israel

Decision Date: Apr 12, 2021

Case Status: Closed

Case Outcome (Procedural)

Dismissed

Case Outcome (Disposition)

Judgment in Favor of Defendant/ Acquittal

Keywords

Content Moderation
Content Regulation / Censorship
Digital Rights
Social Media

Judicial Body: Supreme Court (court of final appeal)

Court Name: Supreme Court of Israel

Case Number: HCJ 7846/19

Case Summary: In April 2021, the Supreme Court of Israel denied a petition regarding the allegedly unlawful voluntary enforcement procedure of the Cyber Department in the State Attorney’s Office. The petitioners contended that the procedure through which the Department notified online platform operators of suspected harmful content violated constitutional rights to freedom of expression and due process under Basic Law. The Court held that the Department’s voluntary enforcement procedure constituted a governmental act since the state influenced its interactions with operators and end users. The Court concluded that, in the absence of specific authority for its activity in primary legislation, the Department’s voluntary method could rely upon the residual power granted to the government under Section 32 of Basic Law, if its activities did not breach fundamental rights.

Case Significance: The decision of Israel’s High Court of Justice reviewed the constitutionality of government takedown requests concerning illegal content online. By considering that the Cyber Department had the authority to operate under the voluntary track mechanism, the Court ignored the constitutional and administrative constraints that state actions are traditionally subjected to, making it impossible for users to appeal the Department’s findings. Moreover, by stressing that it was ultimately up to the online platform in question to decide whether to assist or resist the government’s recommendation, the Court disregarded the state’s positive obligations to ensure human rights.

The decision establishes a binding or persuasive precedent within its jurisdiction.

Related Analysis

Case Law on Content Moderation and Freedom of Expression

Source URL: Global Freedom of Expression

Collection

Columbia

Date Updated: Jul 19, 2024

Primary Documents

Supreme Court of Israel
English
Download View

CYRILLA: Global Digital Rights Law

Select target paragraph3

Adalah Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel v. State Attorney’s Office

Primary Documents

Notifications