Sohlberg ruling to stop announcing voters' names 'restores respect,' says former deputy A-G

A recent ruling by Israeli Supreme Court Justice Noam Sohlberg prohibits observers at polling stations from announcing the identity of voters. This decision, according to former deputy attorney-general Mike Blass, serves to restore voter privacy and prevent the disclosure of sensitive personal and political information.

“

When the public appeals came up for discussion, several members of the public who wanted to ban the practice of reporting to the party who had already voted in order to encourage those who hadn't yet, sought to prevent it.

Blass explained in an interview that the practice of announcing names was intended to encourage those who had not yet voted. However, the ruling followed a comprehensive hearing where all relevant parties, including the Privacy Protection Authority and the attorney-general, presented their legal arguments. Justice Sohlberg conducted a thorough analysis of Israel's privacy and election laws, concluding that the practice infringes upon an individual's privacy in a manner that is legally difficult to contest.

“

He conducted a thorough analysis of Israel’s privacy protection laws and election laws, and reached the conclusion that this constitutes an infringement of a person’s privacy, which I believe is legally difficult to dispute.

The core issue, Blass elaborated, is that information provided for the sole purpose of voting, a voter stating their name to an observer who records it, was being used for other purposes. This constitutes an infringement of privacy, defined as tracking a person in a way that could lead to harassment or using personal information for reasons other than its initial collection. "What did Justice Sohlberg say? A person arrives at a polling station to vote and provides their details, and then someone takes the details provided for the purpose of voting and uses them to encourage other voters,” Blass said.

“

The voter enters the polling station and states their name, and the observer writes it down. An infringement of privacy is defined, for example, as tracking a person in a manner that could harass them.

Furthermore, the ruling addresses polling stations located in sensitive facilities, such as shelters for abused women or hospitals. In these locations, announcing a voter's presence could inadvertently reveal additional personal information about the individual. Justice Sohlberg concluded that reporting that a voter has cast their ballot constitutes an infringement of that voter's privacy. Blass also noted that in certain contexts, such as polling stations with a predominant party affiliation or low voter turnout, the information could potentially reveal a voter's political leanings, further underscoring the privacy concerns addressed by the ruling.

“

In addition, it involves using information about a person’s private affairs, or providing that information to someone else, for a purpose other than the one for which it was given.