Summary
Israel’s Law for Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott, 2011, making knowingly publishing a public call for a boycott against the State of Israel — deliberately avoiding economic, cultural or academic ties only because of ties with the State, one of its institutions or an area under its control, in a way that may cause such damage — a civil wrong with damages available not dependent on the damage, and empowering the Finance Minister, with the approvals the text specifies, to limit such a publisher’s, or a person who committed to take part in a boycott’s, participation in tenders and to suspend five listed benefits and statuses (Law for Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott, 2011 (2011), PDF p.1-2).
Details
-
Definition (section 1, PDF p.1): motive (“only because of his ties”), target (the State, one of its institutions or an area under its control) and possible, not actual, economic, cultural or academic damage define the boycott covered.
-
Civil wrong (unnumbered section between sections 1 and 3, PDF p.1): publication is a wrong where content and circumstances show a reasonable probability the call will bring about a boycott and the publisher was aware of that possibility; causing a binding legal agreement to be breached by such a call is without sufficient justification under clause 62 [A] of the civil tort law [new version]; deliberate wrongdoing may attract damages not dependent on the damage, assessed on the circumstances, severity and extent.
-
Tenders (section 3, PDF p.1): the Finance Minister may by regulations limit participation in a tender that must be carried out according to legislation, with the Justice Minister’s agreement and the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee’s approval.
-
Benefits (section 4, PDF p.1-2): the Finance Minister may decide, with the Justice Minister’s approval and the further approval specified for each item, that the person shall not be considered a public institution for income-tax clause 9 (2) purposes or for Budget Foundations Law, 1985 clause 3(A) support, shall not receive sports-gambling council money, shall not be subject to the state guaranteeing law, 1958, and shall not enjoy benefits under the capital-investment encouragement law, 1959 or the industrial research-and-development encouragement law, 1984.
-
In Discriminatory Laws Database, Adalah’s entry adds the litigation and reception the primary text does not contain: HCJ 2072/12, The Coalition of Women for Peace et al. v. The Minister of Finance et al., petitioned by Adalah and ACRI in March 2012, order nisi in December 2012, and judgment on 15 April 2015 upholding the law’s constitutionality while striking down section 2(C), which had allowed compensation without proof of actual damage — the provision behind the damage-independent damages rule described in the Summary above, as the law stood in its primary text. The entry quotes Human Rights Watch, Special Rapporteur Frank La Rue, Amnesty International and the Human Rights Committee’s 2014 concluding observations on the law’s chilling effect (lines 1398-1523).
Related pages
Law for Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott, 2011 (2011), Anti-boycott legislation, BDS movement, Knesset, Discriminatory Laws Database