Reduction in Court Activity During Wartime
A "special state of emergency" has been applied over the years due to security crises, the COVID pandemic, and now the war with Iran. How does this affect the regulation of the courts and the power of the Minister of Justice?
Entrance to the Jerusalem Magistrate's Court, Archive | Photo by Nati Shohat/Flash90
Following the outbreak of the war with Iran on February 28, 2026, courts across Israel shifted to an emergency operating format known as a "special state of emergency". Minister of Justice Yariv Levin announced the reduction of court activity due to this special state of emergency in a notice first published on February 28, 2026. The declaration was initially valid until March 2, 2026, and has since been extended by the Minister of Justice (at the time of writing, until April 9, 2026).
Other adjudicative bodies have also transitioned to similar emergency formats under separate legal arrangements applicable to them, including the labor courts and religious courts (rabbinical courts, Druze religious courts, and Sharia courts).
The authority of the Minister of Justice to declare a reduction in court activity due to a special state of emergency is grounded in regulations promulgated by the Justice Minister in 1991, which have been amended from time to time, including during the current war.
The Courts Law authorizes the Minister of Justice to enact procedural regulations for the courts and, more generally, provides that the Minister is responsible for the implementation of this law, which governs the operation of the courts.
The regulations establish special procedural rules that apply when the Minister of Justice issues a declaration to that effect due to a special state of emergency.
Under these regulations, a "special state of emergency" is defined as a situation in which normal life is disrupted in all or part of the state of Israel due to security conditions, a real concern of serious harm to public health, or a natural disaster.
Over the years, Ministers of Justice have invoked these regulations in defined areas of Israel during previous security crises, such as rounds of hostilities between Israel and the Gaza Strip. They were also applied more broadly during the COVID-19 pandemic (at which time the regulations were amended to enable their use in public health emergencies), during the "Iron Swords" war following October 7, and during the previous war with Iran in June 2025.
During a special state of emergency, court activity is limited and only urgent proceedings, as specified in the regulations, are conducted. These include, for example, detention hearings, urgent interim relief in civil matters, and urgent petitions to the High Court of Justice.
The President of the Supreme Court, or their deputy or a justice designated by them, determines whether a particular petition to the High Court of Justice is urgent. In this context, it should be noted that since the appointment of Justice Isaac Amit as President of the Supreme Court, the Minister of Justice has not recognized him as holding that office.
It should also be noted that a separate declaration issued by the Minister of Justice on February 28, 2026 expanded the possibility of conducting detention hearings via video conference, pursuant to a temporary statute enacted recently (and based on a similar temporary statute enacted during the "Swords of Iron" war that has since expired). This allows such hearings, which are considered urgent proceedings, to take place without the detainee being physically present in the courtroom.
Under the regulations, the court system retains a degree of discretion regarding the proceedings that will be heard. Presidents of the courts may determine that a proceeding listed among those specified in the regulations will not be heard, or conversely that a proceeding not listed will be heard. In addition, the Director of the Courts (who is responsible for the administrative operation of the Israeli judicial system) is authorized to designate additional categories of matters that may be heard during a special state of emergency.
During the COVID-19 period, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel petitioned the Supreme Court against the then Minister of Justice’s declarations invoking these regulations, and against the validity of the regulations themselves. The petition argued that restrictions on court activity must be established through primary legislation enacted by the Knesset, as such restrictions implicate the principles of separation of powers, the rule of law, and the right of access to the courts.
In April 2020, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition (without prejudice to the petitioner’s right to reapply), owing to the state’s commitment to examine whether the authority to issue such regulations should be anchored in primary legislation enacted by the Knesset, but to do so after the COVID-19 crisis ended. This undertaking did not include a commitment to promote legislation following that examination. No such legislation has been advanced to date.
