Diagonal Accountability
#24Key Findings
Israel performs relatively poorly (rank 24) in the area of diagonal accountability.
Freedom of the press is based on Supreme Court rulings rather than constitutional protections. Media outlets are frequently critical of the government. The public broadcaster is independent. The government regularly attacks the media for providing one-sided coverage, but no formal legislation has been introduced to limit press freedom.
Freedom of association and assembly are protected by court rulings. Protests are frequently held. Some attempts have been made to limit civil society organizations, especially left-wing and externally funded human rights groups. Police sometimes use excessive force, especially against Arab, Palestinian, Ethiopian-descent and ultraorthodox protesters.
While labor unions have lost influence, when major civil society organizations in the economic sphere make proposals, the government tends to respond. Social welfare organizations have a strong influence on decision-making and often help implement policy. Some environmental groups have sophisticated capabilities, but the issue is not high on the state’s agenda.
Freedom of the press is based on Supreme Court rulings rather than constitutional protections. Media outlets are frequently critical of the government. The public broadcaster is independent. The government regularly attacks the media for providing one-sided coverage, but no formal legislation has been introduced to limit press freedom.
Freedom of association and assembly are protected by court rulings. Protests are frequently held. Some attempts have been made to limit civil society organizations, especially left-wing and externally funded human rights groups. Police sometimes use excessive force, especially against Arab, Palestinian, Ethiopian-descent and ultraorthodox protesters.
While labor unions have lost influence, when major civil society organizations in the economic sphere make proposals, the government tends to respond. Social welfare organizations have a strong influence on decision-making and often help implement policy. Some environmental groups have sophisticated capabilities, but the issue is not high on the state’s agenda.
Graph View
Graph View
To what extent are the media free from government influence and able to act independently?
10
9
9
There are no disincentives, by law or in practice, for the media to criticize the government and public officials.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing disincentives, by law and in practice, pose no significant obstacles to the media in criticizing the government and public officials.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing disincentives, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to the media in criticizing the government and public officials.
2
1
1
Existing disincentives, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles to the media in criticizing the government and public officials.
Freedom of the press is based on Supreme Court rulings and has no constitutional protection (Hanegbi 1995). This freedom is best demonstrated by the willingness of most media outlets to publicly and harshly oppose Israeli governments, particularly the current government’s attempts to overhaul the judiciary.
In Israel, there is a single public broadcaster, which operates one TV channel and several radio channels. In recent years, it has become very active on digital media platforms. Prior to 2015, the public broadcaster was subject to political intervention. However, since 2015, it has operated independently, although there has been constant pressure from politicians to close it down or increase their control. These threats have increased under the current government, with the minister of communication submitting a reform to increase political control over the media and threatening to close the public broadcaster.
The press and most media outlets operate generally free from political intervention, although not completely. Prime Minister Netanyahu is accused of attempting to influence media coverage in two newspapers. The newspaper Israel Hayom was established by billionaire Sheldon Adelson and distributed for free to increase support for the prime minister, which it did (Grossman et al. 2022). Additionally, Channel 14, originally founded as a heritage channel, was transformed by politicians into a news channel to support the government and criticize its opponents. In his press conferences, Prime Minister Netanyahu consistently attacks the media, accusing it of being one-sided. According to the Israeli Democratic Index, public trust in the media is only 37% (Israel Democracy Institute, 2022).
Despite the attacks on the media, no legislation limiting freedom of the press was officially introduced to the Knesset. Hence, if there is self-censorship, it is the result of the stated intentions of the politicians and not their actions.
The 2023 World Press Freedom Index gave Israel a score of 57.7, which is categorized as problematic. Israel dropped 11 places to rank 97 out of 180 countries. The report said that press freedom in Israel decreased due to the current government’s constant threats to press freedoms.
The private broadcasting channels are regulated by a public council. This council is not entirely independent, as its budget and personnel are dependent on the ministry and, therefore, the minister. The minister also nominates the chair of the council. The current council is relatively weak, fails to enforce violations and does not prevent the publication of fake news.
Private broadcasting entities are controlled by powerful corporations and face the constant threat of closure due to a lack of funding. Consequently, journalists find it difficult to criticize the corporations that own the channels, resulting in self-censorship.
The government censors publications related to security issues. According to the World Press Freedom report, Palestinian journalists reporting from Israel are harassed and attacked. Crimes against Palestinian journalists are not prosecuted sufficiently. Self-censorship is especially prominent concerning security issues, particularly in the context of the war in Gaza, where mainstream press outlets have barely reported on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza (Somfalvi et al. 2024).
Citations:
2023 World Press Freedom Index https://rsf.org/en/2023-world-press-freedom-index-journalism-threatened-fake-content-industry?data_type=general&year=2023
Israel Democracy Index 2022 https://www.idi.org.il/articles/47360
Hanegbi, Moshe. 1995. Freedom of Press in Israel. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute.
Somfalvi, Attila, David Siman-Tov, and Ofir Dayan. 2024. “The Israeli Media Mobilized for War: Interim Conclusions from the Conduct of the Israeli Media and Journalists after October 7, 2023” (Hebrew). Strategic Update, INSS. https://www.inss.org.il/he/strategic_assessment/press
Grossman, G., Margalit, Y., and Mitts, T. 2022. “How the Ultra-Rich Use Media Ownership as a Political Investment.” The Journal of Politics 719: 415. https://doi.org/10.1086/719415
In Israel, there is a single public broadcaster, which operates one TV channel and several radio channels. In recent years, it has become very active on digital media platforms. Prior to 2015, the public broadcaster was subject to political intervention. However, since 2015, it has operated independently, although there has been constant pressure from politicians to close it down or increase their control. These threats have increased under the current government, with the minister of communication submitting a reform to increase political control over the media and threatening to close the public broadcaster.
The press and most media outlets operate generally free from political intervention, although not completely. Prime Minister Netanyahu is accused of attempting to influence media coverage in two newspapers. The newspaper Israel Hayom was established by billionaire Sheldon Adelson and distributed for free to increase support for the prime minister, which it did (Grossman et al. 2022). Additionally, Channel 14, originally founded as a heritage channel, was transformed by politicians into a news channel to support the government and criticize its opponents. In his press conferences, Prime Minister Netanyahu consistently attacks the media, accusing it of being one-sided. According to the Israeli Democratic Index, public trust in the media is only 37% (Israel Democracy Institute, 2022).
Despite the attacks on the media, no legislation limiting freedom of the press was officially introduced to the Knesset. Hence, if there is self-censorship, it is the result of the stated intentions of the politicians and not their actions.
The 2023 World Press Freedom Index gave Israel a score of 57.7, which is categorized as problematic. Israel dropped 11 places to rank 97 out of 180 countries. The report said that press freedom in Israel decreased due to the current government’s constant threats to press freedoms.
The private broadcasting channels are regulated by a public council. This council is not entirely independent, as its budget and personnel are dependent on the ministry and, therefore, the minister. The minister also nominates the chair of the council. The current council is relatively weak, fails to enforce violations and does not prevent the publication of fake news.
Private broadcasting entities are controlled by powerful corporations and face the constant threat of closure due to a lack of funding. Consequently, journalists find it difficult to criticize the corporations that own the channels, resulting in self-censorship.
The government censors publications related to security issues. According to the World Press Freedom report, Palestinian journalists reporting from Israel are harassed and attacked. Crimes against Palestinian journalists are not prosecuted sufficiently. Self-censorship is especially prominent concerning security issues, particularly in the context of the war in Gaza, where mainstream press outlets have barely reported on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza (Somfalvi et al. 2024).
Citations:
2023 World Press Freedom Index https://rsf.org/en/2023-world-press-freedom-index-journalism-threatened-fake-content-industry?data_type=general&year=2023
Israel Democracy Index 2022 https://www.idi.org.il/articles/47360
Hanegbi, Moshe. 1995. Freedom of Press in Israel. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute.
Somfalvi, Attila, David Siman-Tov, and Ofir Dayan. 2024. “The Israeli Media Mobilized for War: Interim Conclusions from the Conduct of the Israeli Media and Journalists after October 7, 2023” (Hebrew). Strategic Update, INSS. https://www.inss.org.il/he/strategic_assessment/press
Grossman, G., Margalit, Y., and Mitts, T. 2022. “How the Ultra-Rich Use Media Ownership as a Political Investment.” The Journal of Politics 719: 415. https://doi.org/10.1086/719415
To what extent is a plurality of opinions in the media ensured?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice, to a pluralistic media landscape that represents all existing political perspectives in society.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose no significant obstacles to the media in representing all relevant political perspectives in society.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to the media in representing all relevant political perspectives in society.
2
1
1
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles to the media in representing all relevant political perspectives in society.
The ownership of private media is transparent, as stated by the media monitoring organization the Seventh Eye. Most media owners are businessmen with little involvement in the media. Consequently, they are significantly influenced by government regulation. Although almost all private media outlets criticize the government to some extent, the amount and type of critique depends on the personal interests of the owners (The Seventh Eye).
Public radio and television in Israel are highly committed to the plurality of opinions and the representation of different segments of the population. This commitment is evident in the diverse profiles of their journalists, who come from various minority groups and sectors. Additionally, there are channels dedicated to amplifying the voices of different groups.
Israeli media broadcasts and publishes in multiple languages, including Hebrew, Arabic, English, Russian, French and Amharic. There are also specific channels for different population groups. Moreover, in several major news programs, two hosts representing different political and partisan affiliations are featured to ensure a plurality of perspectives.
Private broadcasters also employ journalists from different groups. An examination of these journalists reveals that there are left- and right-wing journalists working for every channel.
However, private media programs present less plurality due to profit considerations. Although formal regulations require a specific amount of time to be dedicated to various groups and populations, this is rarely enforced in practice.
Over recent years, the media in general has been accused of being one-sided or leaning to the left. However, there is no empirical evidence of such bias. Research has found that perceived biases are a function of the political perceptions of the observer and have little to do with any actual bias (Yair & Sulitzeanu-Kenan 2018).
Citations:
The Seventh Eye, “Israel media ownership.” https://www.the7eye.org.il/198518
Yair, Omer, and Raanan Sulitzeanu-Kenan. 2018. “When Do We Care about Political Neutrality? The Hypocritical Nature of Reaction to Political Bias.” PLoS ONE 13 (5): e0196674.
Public radio and television in Israel are highly committed to the plurality of opinions and the representation of different segments of the population. This commitment is evident in the diverse profiles of their journalists, who come from various minority groups and sectors. Additionally, there are channels dedicated to amplifying the voices of different groups.
Israeli media broadcasts and publishes in multiple languages, including Hebrew, Arabic, English, Russian, French and Amharic. There are also specific channels for different population groups. Moreover, in several major news programs, two hosts representing different political and partisan affiliations are featured to ensure a plurality of perspectives.
Private broadcasters also employ journalists from different groups. An examination of these journalists reveals that there are left- and right-wing journalists working for every channel.
However, private media programs present less plurality due to profit considerations. Although formal regulations require a specific amount of time to be dedicated to various groups and populations, this is rarely enforced in practice.
Over recent years, the media in general has been accused of being one-sided or leaning to the left. However, there is no empirical evidence of such bias. Research has found that perceived biases are a function of the political perceptions of the observer and have little to do with any actual bias (Yair & Sulitzeanu-Kenan 2018).
Citations:
The Seventh Eye, “Israel media ownership.” https://www.the7eye.org.il/198518
Yair, Omer, and Raanan Sulitzeanu-Kenan. 2018. “When Do We Care about Political Neutrality? The Hypocritical Nature of Reaction to Political Bias.” PLoS ONE 13 (5): e0196674.
Graph View
To what extent are citizens able to freely form or join independent political and civic groups, openly raise and discuss political issues, and assemble without restrictions?
10
9
9
There are no barriers, by law or in practice to creating an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
8
7
6
7
6
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose very few or no significant obstacles to creating an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
5
4
3
4
3
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose some significant obstacles to the creation of an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
2
1
1
Existing barriers, by law and in practice, pose various significant obstacles to the creation of an engaged society and civil society organizations that are free to operate.
Freedom of association is not a constitutionally protected right. Instead, it is protected via a Supreme Court ruling. In Israel, there are relatively few legal barriers to forming associations. A group of people can register as an association with the Association Registrar. Similarly, freedom of assembly is not legally institutionalized but rather guaranteed through a Supreme Court ruling. In practice, there are also relatively few limitations on protests.
During the recent protests against overhauling the judiciary, the minister of national security (formerly minister of police and internal security) and the prime minister made several attempts to limit the demonstrations. However, these attempts were thwarted by the attorney general. During the ongoing war with Hamas, there have also been attempts to limit demonstrations calling for a cease-fire, but these restrictions were overruled by the Supreme Court.
In general, as the extensive protest against overhauling the judicial overhaul demonstrates, freedom of assembly in Israel is a protected right and is maintained even under the current populist government.
In recent years, there have been constant attempts to limit the operation of various civil society organizations by restricting their fundraising capabilities or attempting to make some associations illegal. These efforts primarily target left-wing and human rights organizations that rely on external funding, for example, from the European Union. These attempts remain ongoing, with little success. Although some left-wing organizations have been banned from entering schools, this remains an exception.
Nonetheless, during Israel’s war with Hamas and the protests against overhauling the judiciary, the police have used excessive force to stop demonstrations, including violent and in some cases seemingly political arrests. This was also part of the minister’s policy, which encouraged the police to use force and threatened to dismiss the police officer in charge of the Tel Aviv District, who said he would not authorize violence during the protests. The use of excessive force by the police can more frequently be seen in cases involving Arab or Palestinian protesters, as well as when protesters belong to Jewish minority groups such as those of Ethiopian descent or ultraorthodox groups.
During the recent protests against overhauling the judiciary, the minister of national security (formerly minister of police and internal security) and the prime minister made several attempts to limit the demonstrations. However, these attempts were thwarted by the attorney general. During the ongoing war with Hamas, there have also been attempts to limit demonstrations calling for a cease-fire, but these restrictions were overruled by the Supreme Court.
In general, as the extensive protest against overhauling the judicial overhaul demonstrates, freedom of assembly in Israel is a protected right and is maintained even under the current populist government.
In recent years, there have been constant attempts to limit the operation of various civil society organizations by restricting their fundraising capabilities or attempting to make some associations illegal. These efforts primarily target left-wing and human rights organizations that rely on external funding, for example, from the European Union. These attempts remain ongoing, with little success. Although some left-wing organizations have been banned from entering schools, this remains an exception.
Nonetheless, during Israel’s war with Hamas and the protests against overhauling the judiciary, the police have used excessive force to stop demonstrations, including violent and in some cases seemingly political arrests. This was also part of the minister’s policy, which encouraged the police to use force and threatened to dismiss the police officer in charge of the Tel Aviv District, who said he would not authorize violence during the protests. The use of excessive force by the police can more frequently be seen in cases involving Arab or Palestinian protesters, as well as when protesters belong to Jewish minority groups such as those of Ethiopian descent or ultraorthodox groups.
To what extent do civil society organizations (CSOs) have the capacity to actively participate in the co-creation of relevant policies?
10
9
9
All the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
5
4
3
4
3
Few of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
2
1
1
None of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
Civil society organizations representing a diverse spectrum of economic opinions are very active in the public sphere. Comparative OECD data from 2017 indicates that 25% of Israeli employees are members of labor unions (OECD, 2017). The unions are consulted on and negotiate wage agreements across different sectors. For public service employees, membership in a labor union is mandatory. Membership fees are not tax deductible. Large organizations have the financial and informational strength to formulate policies, and many have registered lobbyists in the Knesset.
In many cases, different organizations form coalitions and work together on various issues.
When major organizations put forward policy proposals, the government responds to them. This is evident in many pieces of legislation initiated by civil society organizations. These organizations also receive media attention and can voice their demands publicly. Although they influence policy design, the power of labor unions, as a key actor in policy design, has been decreasing since 1985. The primary institutions involved in formulating macroeconomic policy are the Ministry of Finance and Israel’s central bank. Thus, although the organizations still have some veto power, their power is weaker than before and dependent on the specific political circumstances (Bondy and Maggor 2023). Moreover, public support for major labor unions is decreasing because they are perceived as representing more powerful and organized interests.
Citations:
OECD. 2017. “Main Indicators and Characteristics of Collective Bargaining: Israel.” https://www.oecd.org/employment/collective-bargaining-database-israel.pdf
Bondy, A. S., and E. Maggor. 2023. “Balancing the Scales: Labour Incorporation and the Politics of Growth Model Transformation.” New Political Economy 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2023.2217770
In many cases, different organizations form coalitions and work together on various issues.
When major organizations put forward policy proposals, the government responds to them. This is evident in many pieces of legislation initiated by civil society organizations. These organizations also receive media attention and can voice their demands publicly. Although they influence policy design, the power of labor unions, as a key actor in policy design, has been decreasing since 1985. The primary institutions involved in formulating macroeconomic policy are the Ministry of Finance and Israel’s central bank. Thus, although the organizations still have some veto power, their power is weaker than before and dependent on the specific political circumstances (Bondy and Maggor 2023). Moreover, public support for major labor unions is decreasing because they are perceived as representing more powerful and organized interests.
Citations:
OECD. 2017. “Main Indicators and Characteristics of Collective Bargaining: Israel.” https://www.oecd.org/employment/collective-bargaining-database-israel.pdf
Bondy, A. S., and E. Maggor. 2023. “Balancing the Scales: Labour Incorporation and the Politics of Growth Model Transformation.” New Political Economy 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2023.2217770
To what extent do civil society organizations (CSOs) have the capacity to actively participate in the co-creation of relevant policies?
10
9
9
All the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
5
4
3
4
3
Few of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
2
1
1
None of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
A large proportion of social welfare policy is implemented by civil society organizations (Shiffer 2018). As a result, civil society organizations greatly influence policy formulation because policymakers and the public perceive them as having knowledge and expertise in their respective fields. At the same time, their dependence on public budgets limits their inclination to criticize the government and advocate for alternative policies.
Some donations to civil society organizations are tax deductible. In addition, civil society organizations participate in a policy design roundtable coordinated by the Prime Minister’s Office, and committee Knesset hearings where they present policy proposals and reports. Moreover, major organizations are also members of various interministerial committees.
Lastly, reports concerning at-risk youth and poverty published by central organizations receive broad media coverage. At the same time, it should be noted that government-contracted social service providers face fierce competition, which might hinder their ability to effectively cooperate with each other.
Almost all major activities of social welfare organizations are promoted through coalitions of several organizations working together to meet a common goal. Each organization brings its own resources in terms of public support, expertise, media access, political connections, and more.
The organizations have no veto power over government decisions. However, they do have significant public legitimacy. Therefore, when they place an issue on the agenda that receives public and media interest, the government is more likely to respond.
Citations:
Shiffer, V. 2018. “The Impact of Privatization on the Non-profit Sector and on Civil Society in Israel.” In A. Paz-Fuchs, R. Mandelkern, and I. Galnoor, eds., The Privatization of Israel: The Withdrawal of State Responsibility, 341–364. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58261-4_14
Some donations to civil society organizations are tax deductible. In addition, civil society organizations participate in a policy design roundtable coordinated by the Prime Minister’s Office, and committee Knesset hearings where they present policy proposals and reports. Moreover, major organizations are also members of various interministerial committees.
Lastly, reports concerning at-risk youth and poverty published by central organizations receive broad media coverage. At the same time, it should be noted that government-contracted social service providers face fierce competition, which might hinder their ability to effectively cooperate with each other.
Almost all major activities of social welfare organizations are promoted through coalitions of several organizations working together to meet a common goal. Each organization brings its own resources in terms of public support, expertise, media access, political connections, and more.
The organizations have no veto power over government decisions. However, they do have significant public legitimacy. Therefore, when they place an issue on the agenda that receives public and media interest, the government is more likely to respond.
Citations:
Shiffer, V. 2018. “The Impact of Privatization on the Non-profit Sector and on Civil Society in Israel.” In A. Paz-Fuchs, R. Mandelkern, and I. Galnoor, eds., The Privatization of Israel: The Withdrawal of State Responsibility, 341–364. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-58261-4_14
To what extent do civil society organizations (CSOs) have the capacity to actively participate in the co-creation of relevant policies?
10
9
9
All the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
5
4
3
4
3
Few of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
2
1
1
None of the major CSOs active in the field have the capacity to shape public policies.
Israel’s major environmental organizations are very active in the policy sphere. Most environmental initiatives, such as the Bottle Deposit Law and Clear Air Law, were initiated by civil society organizations. Since environmental issues are not high on the government’s political agenda, these organizations are the main policy entrepreneurs in the field. They also have research departments and expertise, which enables them to formulate policy proposals. In addition, they are seen as non-partisan, which ensures broad public support for their activities.
However, because environmental issues are not high on the political agenda, civil society organizations often fail to promote their goals and the public participates relatively little in their activities.
Environmental organizations include several large groups and a few smaller ones. In most cases, these organizations collaborate on and form coalitions around environmental issues. There is also a relatively clear division of labor among the organizations based on each one’s resources. Some organizations focus more on lobbying, while others focus on public education and grassroots activities. Additionally, an Israeli think tank supports environmental activities, trains activists, and provides tools and knowledge to enhance environmental efforts. This think tank collaborates with local authorities and participates in policymaking.
Citations:
Heshel Organization https://heschel.org.il/
However, because environmental issues are not high on the political agenda, civil society organizations often fail to promote their goals and the public participates relatively little in their activities.
Environmental organizations include several large groups and a few smaller ones. In most cases, these organizations collaborate on and form coalitions around environmental issues. There is also a relatively clear division of labor among the organizations based on each one’s resources. Some organizations focus more on lobbying, while others focus on public education and grassroots activities. Additionally, an Israeli think tank supports environmental activities, trains activists, and provides tools and knowledge to enhance environmental efforts. This think tank collaborates with local authorities and participates in policymaking.
Citations:
Heshel Organization https://heschel.org.il/