Think tank urges greater transparency in government decision-making
The entity responsible for deciding which government meetings would be transparent and which would remain classified for 30 years - is the government itself.
By TOBIAS SIEGALIsrael Katz chats with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a cabinet meeting(photo credit: MARC ISRAEL SELLEM)
The Israeli government has been systematically hiding important information about decisions reached at the coronavirus cabinet from the public, preventing any kind of effective criticism on the cabinet's decision-making process, the Zulat Institute for Equality and Human Rights stated in a report. The institute is a new think tank focused on reestablishing the legitimacy of democracy.The report explains that information is able to be kept from the public due to section 35 of Basic Law: The Government, which stipulates that the entity responsible for deciding which government meetings would be transparent and which would remain classified for 30 years - is the government itself.The Zulat Institute noted that this situation is becoming increasingly problematic, as more claims are being levelled that decisions are being made as a result of certain political agendas, and often in contrary to the professional opinion of medical experts.In particular recent attempts have been made by the media and various organizations to try to make sense of the chaotic reality of decision-making. They have demanded the publication of protocols from coronavirus cabinet meetings by petitioning the High Court of Justice, but most of these attempts have met a legal barrier."Especially during these confusing times of a world pandemic that has serious financial implications, better transparency is needed from the government regarding its decision-making processes, in order to improve the public trust in government institutes, which has drastically declined," the report noted.Additionally, the institute's report stresses the fact that preventing the public access to this kind of information violates the public's right to know, a basis for the freedom of information basic right legislated for in many democratic countries, including in Israel in the 1990s. The report therefore suggests amending section 35 of the Basic Law: The Government with an update that will be compatible with the idea of protecting the public's right to know.Specifically, the report suggests defining a legal differentiation between government meetings relating to security and foreign affairs issues, which are usually more sensitive, and meetings about all other issues, which are not strictly sensitive and may provide essential information to the public. According to this suggestion, the government would be required to receive a 61 Knesset majority for classifying meetings that fall under topics unrelated to security and foreign affairs.
