At the ongoing High Court hearing on petitions to cancel the election of State Comptroller Michael Ravilo, attorney Bart, representing the Knesset, argued that the law requires proving the alleged defect may have affected the outcome — a standard he says was not met. Justice Barak-Erez countered that the voting procedure is relatively simple and could be repeated without difficulty, according to N12.
Sunday's hearing at the High Court of Justice continued with legal arguments over petitions to annul the June Knesset election of attorney Michael Ravilo as state comptroller. Attorney Bart, representing the Knesset, urged the court not to overturn the vote, arguing that the statutory test for annulling an election requires proof that the alleged procedural defect could have altered the result — a threshold the Knesset maintains was not crossed, and calling annulment an "extremely drastic" step. Justice Daphne Barak-Erez challenged that position, noting the voting procedure (a secret ballot that was allegedly compromised by coalition lawmakers documenting their votes) is relatively simple and repeatable.
As The Zioneer reported in its initial Sunday dispatch at 09:11 Jerusalem, the expanded five-justice panel — Justices Amit, Barak-Erez, Ronen, Kanfi-Steinitz, and Solberg — opened the hearing that morning. Chief Justice Amit noted the court had previously issued a conditional order citing a "cloud of impropriety" over the procedure, and that the court's compromise proposal had been rejected by the Knesset speaker. By the same first report, petitioners including opposition parties and the Israel Bar Association argued the secret ballot was compromised when coalition lawmakers filmed their votes, undermining lawmakers' independence.
In a prior development reported by The Zioneer on Thu Jun 18, the court had signaled that the burden of proof would shift to the Knesset to justify the vote's validity. That same day, coalition MK Mati Tuchfeld described the court's intervention as an "unprecedentedly lunatic event" and warned about implications for future elections, as The Zioneer reported. The Knesset's legal adviser had earlier told Speaker Halevi she saw no grounds to annul the result but noted the self-recorded video evidence posed special difficulty, according to a Tue Jun 16 report.
No decision has been announced. The hearing remains ongoing.
6 developments
- StrongKnesset legal adviser urges High Court to reject petitions against Ravilo appointment
- StrongHigh Court conditional order on comptroller appointee Ravilo sparks backlash from right
- DevelopingState Comptroller-elect Ravilo tells High Court his election was lawful
- DevelopingLikud submits legal defense of Ravilo appointment to High Court
Source and signal
- Internal intake