On August 24, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a significant interim injunction ordering the cessation of coalition fund transfers totaling approximately 409 million NIS. According to a report in TheMarker, the order prevents the transfer of approximately 286 million NIS to the Ministry of Education and an additional 123 million NIS to the Ministry of Settlement.
The decision comes following a petition submitted to the judicial body by the Hiddush organization and Member of Knesset Naama Lazimi of The Democrats party. The petitioners challenged the fund transfer, which was processed via the Knesset Finance Committee, alleging it was a political maneuver executed during the election recess. The legal proceedings arise amidst government attempts to transfer these budgets shortly before the election, with the petition focusing on the legality of such transfers under these circumstances.
The issued injunction mandates an immediate halt to payments pending a final judgment or further decision on the matter. The Supreme Court's move marks a milestone in the public and legal discourse regarding the use of coalition funds during an election period, as it effectively prevents the distribution of substantial budgets for various purposes.
Legal and public figures are monitoring the development of this case with interest, as it touches upon fundamental issues of proper administration and the powers of the government and Knesset during the sensitive period of an election campaign. The petitioners argue that the budget transfers do not align with the norms required during an election period. The injunction is intended to ensure that no irreversible actions are taken with state funds until their claims are adjudicated. The decision of the Supreme Court justices reflects a judicial policy scrutinizing controversial budgetary transfers, particularly when conducted through procedures deemed unconventional or potentially providing an unfair political advantage ahead of the polls. The petition is expected to proceed through the courts, with all parties awaiting a final ruling on whether the government’s conduct exceeded its authority during the recess.