The Disclosure Obligations of Recipients of Support from Foreign Government Entities Bill (Amendment) (Increased Transparency by Recipients of Support, when the Majority of their Funding is from Donations from Foreign Government Entities), 2015
The original bill, popularly referred to as the “Transparency Law” or the “NGO Law,” was a government bill that sought to impose a series of obligations on NGOs that receive the majority of their funding from “foreign government entities” (foreign countries, the European Union, the United Nations, government foundations, etc.). Amongst other things, the bill sought to obligate NGOs to which the bill applies to state and/or declare this fact in any publication, in any discussion attended by public representatives or elected representatives, for representatives of NGOs to wear an identification tag and so forth.
ACRI was strongly opposed to the bill and claimed that the bill was improper anti-democratic, and that it undermined basic rights. The purpose of the bill was not to increase transparency but to enable the political persecution and stigmatization of specific organizations. In ACRI’s view the bill was unnecessary, since existing law already requires NGOs to act in a transparent manner, particularly if they receive funding from foreign countries. Moreover, the bill made no reference to donations from private sources, which constitute a significant source of funding for NGOs that promote a right-wing agenda. Accordingly, it is obvious that the sole purpose of the bill was to delegitimize and hinder the activities of NGOs associated with the political ‘left’ and with human rights. The implication that these organizations act on behalf of foreign countries is misleading and is another element of the campaign of vilification against civil society organizations.
This bill was mentioned in the coalition agreement between the Likud and the Jewish Home parties, signed at the start of the 20th Knesset.
Status: The bill was approved on 11 July 2016 following second and third readings. The bill that ultimately passed seems to be less severe than the original proposal, as the requirements to wear a tag and to disclose funding sources at the start of every meeting were removed. However the very existence of the law in which intends to harm a specific type of organization, and the disclosure requirements that are included in the legislation, will harm the operations and influence of organizations. It has recently been published that the Prime Minister believes that the law he passed is too weak, and that he is interested in promoting a law that will completely prohibit donations by foreign countries to Israeli non-profit organizations.
For a detailed discussion of the bill and ACRI’s response, see: https://www.acri.org.il/en/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Position-Paper-NGO-Bill-Updated-Feb-2016.pdf
For a summary of the law in English: https://www.acri.org.il/en/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Summary-of-NGO-Law.pdf
In addition to the government bill mentioned above, a number of similar private bills were also tabled during the 20th Knesset:
- Foreign NGOs Bill, 2015, tabled by MKs Magal, Smotrich, Yogev, and Slomiansky (P/20/1729); for the text of the bill (in Hebrew), see: http://knesset.gov.il/privatelaw/data/20/1729.rtf
- Foreign Agents Bill, 2015, tabled by most of the MKs of the Yisrael Beitenu faction (P/20/1730); for the text of the bill (in Hebrew), see: http://knesset.gov.il/privatelaw/data/20/1730.rtf
- The Disclosure Obligations of Recipients of Support from Foreign Government Entities Bill (Amendment – Transparency Rules), 2015, tabled by MKs Smotrich, Amsalem, Ilatov, and Moses (P/20/1761); for the text of the bill (in Hebrew), see: http://knesset.gov.il/privatelaw/data/20/1761.rtf
The government approved the private bills, which passed the Preliminary Reading and were attached to the government bill.
Bill Declaring “Breaking the Silence” an Unlawful Association
In January 2016, the media reported that MK Shuli Moalem and other Members of Knesset were interested in initiating a bill to declare the NGO “Breaking the Silence” an unlawful association, thereby effectively outlawing the organization.
Status: Not yet promoted.
The Political Parties Funding Bill (Amendment No. 35), 5767 – 2017
This bill, also known as the “V15 Bill,” seeks to limit the activities of various non-party-political bodies that seek to influence the outcome of elections in Israel. To this end, the bill seeks to impose severe restrictions on institutional organizations and/or informal initiatives that are defined as bodies active in the elections. There is broad support for the goal of maintaining equality and preventing capital from influencing elections. However, the details of the proposed bill are extremely problematic and liable to damage freedom of expression, which is particularly important during an election campaign.
The bill specifies four actions that will be defined as activity in elections: 1) Maintaining databases containing information about individuals’ political attitudes; 2) Transporting voters to the polling station according to their political positions, including assumed positions on the basis of their place of residence; 3) Urging electors with particular positions to vote or not to vote for a specific candidate or party; 4) Publication intended to influence voters to vote for or against a specific candidate or party, even if no payment has been made for the publication (the so-called “Israel Today clause.”)
Bodies that undertake such actions at a total cost exceeding NIS 100,000 will be defined as “bodies active in the elections” and will face the following restrictions:
- Funding restrictions: An active body will be able to raise up to NIS 22,000 from an individual donor (and if the body is active on the scale of NIS 400,000 – up to NIS 11,000 from a single donor). Donors must be Israeli citizens only. The bodies will not be able to receive donations from corporations, as in the case of the funding restrictions on political parties.
- Restrictions on freedom of action in elections: Political parties will be able to sue bodies active in the elections (indeed, the proposed law almost invites them to do so) and to request injunctions against activities by bodies alleged to be bodies active in the elections. Accordingly, even if a particular body is not a body active in the elections, the possibility that it will face an injunction, with all the legal expenses this incurs, may seriously deter citizen participation in the elections. Moreover, bodies active in the elections at a scope greater than NIS 400,000 will be liable to administrative sanctions (fines), while those with a scope greater than NIS 500,000 will also be exposed to criminal sanctions.
Thus the bill seeks to establish extremely broad definitions for determining that a non-party-political body is connected to a Knesset faction, thereby significantly restricting the activities of such bodies. This is liable to impair freedom of expression and association, as well as the fundamental political freedom of citizens to exercise meaningful influence over the elections in Israel.
Status: The bill passed in its Second and Third Readings on March 20th, 2017.
The Amendment of the Income Tax Ordinance Bill (Institution Operating for the Good of the State of Israel), 2017, tabled by MK Bezalel Smotrich (P/3667)
This bill seeks to deny the tax exemption under section 46A of the Income Tax Ordinance to organizations that “act against the State of Israel.” This is defined in the bill as organizations that promote a boycott or accuse Israel overseas of war crimes. The bill also seeks to establish that bodies that receive tax exemption must act for the good of citizens in Israel or Jews in the Diaspora.
This bill forms part of the campaign of defamation and delegitimization led by the government in recent years against civil society organizations whose agenda differs from government policy. The organizations stigmatized by this bill (primarily ones active in the field of human rights in the Territories, refugee rights, and so forth) operate lawfully, under the protection of the basic rights of freedom of association and freedom of expression. The bill seeks to determine what is damaging to the state and what is not, and accordingly to grant or deny tax exemption on a selective basis, according to a political opinion. It does not propose egalitarian administrative criteria for the receipt of the benefit, and instead introduces selective and discriminatory criteria based on the political agenda of those promoting the bill (what one person perceives as promoting democracy will be perceived by another as damaging the state). This process is accompanied by the delegitimization of specific organizations.
Status: The bill was passed at its Preliminary Reading on 8 March 2017.
See the Hebrew text of the bill
National Service Bill, 5767 – 2017
This bill seeks to regulate the subject of national (civilian) service, which has not previously been formalized in law. The bill integrates amendments proposed in a bill table by MK Amir Ohana that seeks to prevent organizations that receive over 50 percent of the funding from a foreign entity from receiving national service volunteers.
The final version of the bill separates the possibility to receive a position for a national service volunteer from the possibility to receive government funding for the position. It was decided that organizations that provide care for individuals will be able to receive a national service position, provided that they act for the population in Israel or for Israeli residents in the fields of education, health, welfare, and encouraging and absorbing Jewish immigration. Organizations that are active in general for the population in Israel in the fields of culture, the environment, road safety, and internal security will also be able to receive positions for volunteers. The ramification is that organizations that are active solely on behalf of Palestinian residents of the Territories will not be eligible for national service positions.
The bill also establishes that when a public body considers funding a national service position, the appointed minister’s approval will be required in the case of an operating body funded primarily by foreign entities.
The purpose of this law is to damage selected and specific organizations whose position differs from that of the current political majority and, above all, to delegitimize these bodies in public discourse.
Status: The bill was passed in its second and third readings on March 22nd, 2017.
Freedom of Information Bill (Amendment – Abolition of Exemption for Organizations Funded Primarily by Foreign State Entities), 2017, tabled by MK Shuli Moalem-Refaeli
Like the “NGO Law” (see below), this bill also targets NGOs funded by foreign state entities. The bill seeks not only to deny these bodies the exemption from the levy on applications to state bodies in accordance with the Freedom of Information Law, but also to establish that they will be required to pay a double levy. The bill is based on the claim that these NGOs operate against the state with the information they obtain. This is another bill that seeks to silence critical voices and to delegitimize organizations that are unpopular with the majority.
Status: The bill has not yet been promoted.
Proposed Basic Law: Adjudication (Amendment – Restriction of Standing), tabled by MK Miki Zohar and others (P/4123)
Years ago, the Supreme Court established in its rulings broad standing allowing public petitioners to present public or principled issues to the Court relating to human rights and proper government, even in the absence of a specific petitioner. This is very important in terms of the separation of powers and enables the Supreme Court to fulfill its vital role as a High Court of Justice: examining government actions, defending human rights and the rights of all types of minorities (national, economic, women, religious, political, and others); and ensuring proper administration, a fight against corruption, and administrative propriety.
According to the proposed law, the Supreme Court will not be able to hear petitions in which the appellant is not personally injured, or in which the cause of the injury is common to the entire public or to a certain part thereof. In other words: public petitioners will not be able to petition the Supreme Court at all.
The purpose of the proposed law is to damage the activities of civil society organizations whose agenda is unpopular among the current political majority. Above all, and overtly, the intention is to curtail the work of organizations that represent Palestinians in the Territories, and to prevent them from presenting principles issues to the Court regarding human rights in the Territories. This will damage the rights of the residents of the Territories, for whom the Supreme Court functions as the last defender of their rights as a population under Israeli occupation. More broadly, the amendment will affect all residents and citizens of Israel, whose principled affairs will no longer come before the Court unless a suitable petitioner can be found.
Public petitioners are important because they present the Court with principled issues that have a broad impact, and do not depend on finding a specific suitable petitioner at a given point in time. It is important to recall that a specific petitioner may not always represent all the types of cases that a principled issue can entail. Moreover, petitioners are sometimes reluctant to present their personal case due to the power imbalance with the authorities and their fear that they will be penalized. In addition, when there is a specific petitioner, the authorities can easily resolve the individual problem without taking a principled decision that will affect all the similar cases.
Status: the proposed law has not yet been advanced.
Proposed Basic Law: The Knesset (amendment – Summons to the Knesset Committees)
The Knesset Committee is currently discussing the possibility of reforming the relationship between the Knesset and the government. Among various initiatives, it is proposed that the authority of the Knesset committees to summons a wide range of participants to their discussions should be expanded. This applies to office holders and officials in the civil service as well as to private bodies, including office holders and officials in NGOs, public benefit companies, public companies, and cooperative associations.
It is desirable, and indeed important, that the Knesset committees be empowered to summons office holders and officials from public bodies and from bodies covered by the State Ombudsman. These bodies are obliged to ensure transparency and accountability, and their appearance before the Knesset committees in order to provide information and updates on their policies and implementation is vital in order for the Knesset to play its role in scrutinizing all arms of government,
However, ACRI’s position is that the committees should not be empowered to summons private individuals, since this deviates from the Knesset’s function. The Knesset is not empowered to inspect private bodies, except in the case of legislation for the regulation of all the private bodies to which it applies (companies, NGOs, etc.). Failure to meet the provisions of the law incurs administrative or criminal sanctions applied by the relevant enforcement bodies. The Knesset is not a judicial body and does not have the capacity to undertake investigations. If the Knesset believes that the actions of private bodies are harming the public, it can improve the regulation in their regard, including demanding greater transparency and accountability. Naturally, if their activities are illegal, the law enforcement agencies will attend to the matter. Granting authority to summons private bodies to the committees is liable to lead to the abuse of this authority and to the holding of “kangaroo courts” against private bodies in order to gain political or public benefit. In particular, there is reason to fear that this authority will be abused in order to attack NGOs and organizations that are unpopular among the political majority.