Summary
Israel’s Law for Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott, 2011, in an unofficial English translation: a “boycott against the State of Israel” is deliberately avoiding economic, cultural or academic ties with another person or another factor only because of his ties with the State of Israel, one of its institutions or an area under its control, in such a way that may cause economic, cultural or academic damage; knowingly publishing a public call for such a boycott is a civil wrong under the civil tort law [new version] where there is 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 that law, and a court finding a wrong deliberately carried out may impose damages not dependent on the damage, taking into account the circumstances, severity and extent; the Finance Minister, with the Justice Minister’s agreement and the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee’s approval, may by regulations limit participation in tenders required by legislation by a person who knowingly published such a call or committed to take part in a boycott, and, with the Justice Minister’s approval and further ministerial approvals by item, may strip such a person of public-institution status for income-tax and Budget Foundations Law support purposes, sports-gambling council money, state-guarantee coverage, and benefits under the capital-investment and industrial research-and-development encouragement laws (Law for Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott, 2011 (2011), PDF p.1-2).
What the file is
The English text of the Law in one 2-page file, 655 words in the text copy, headed “Unofficial English Translation”, with the title in single quotation marks: section 1, the unnumbered civil-wrong section, section 3 and section 4A(1) on PDF p.1, and section 4A(2)-(5), section 4B and section 5 on PDF p.2. No signatories, enactment date, passage footnote, publication data or Hebrew text appears in the file, so no enactment day or month is given beyond the year 2011 in the title. The text copy was checked against the original at PDF p.1-2; the original reads the same, including the unnumbered civil-wrong section and the slips recorded in Section by section and Open questions. No table or figure appears in the file.
Section by section
- Section 1, Definition (PDF p.1). “a boycott against the State of Israel” — deliberately avoiding economic, cultural or academic ties with another person or another factor only because of his ties with the State of Israel, one of its institutions or an area under its control, in such a way that may cause economic, cultural or academic damage.
- Boycott – a civil wrong (PDF p.1). This section is printed with no section number, between section 1 and section 3, in the original as in the text copy. A. Knowingly publishing a public call for a boycott against the State of Israel will be considered a civil wrong to which the civil tort law [new version] applies, if according to the content and circumstances of the publication there is reasonable probability that the call will bring about a boycott and he who published the call was aware of this possibility. B. In regards to clause 62 [A] of the civil tort law [new version], he who causes a binding legal agreement to be breached by calling for a boycott against the State of Israel will not be viewed as someone who operated with sufficient justification. C. If the court will find that an wrong according to this law was deliberately carried out — “an wrong” as printed — it will be authorized to compel the person who did the wrongdoing to pay damages that are not dependent on the damage (in this clause – damages, for example); in calculating the sum of the damages for example, the court will take into consideration, among other things, the circumstances under which the wrong was carried out, its severity and its extent.
- Section 3, Regulations pertaining to limitation on participation in tenders (PDF p.1). The Finance Minister is authorized, with the agreement of the Justice Minister and the approval of the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, to set the regulations of this matter [special cases where it will be limited] — the bracketed words printed in square brackets as in the text — and to limit the participation of he who knowingly published a public call for a boycott against the State of Israel, or who committed to take part in a boycott, in a tender that must to be carried out according to legislation — “must to be carried out” as printed.
- Section 4, Regulations pertaining to the suspension of benefits (PDF p.1-2). A. The Finance Minister, with the approval of the Justice Minister, may decide in the case of someone who knowingly published a public call for a boycott against the State of Israel or committed to take part in a boycott [in special cases] that — 1. he will not be considered a public institution as to clause 9 (2) of the income tax ordinance; 2. he will not be eligible for receiving money from the council of sports gambling according to clause 9 of the law regulating sports gambling, 1967; 3. he will not be considered a public institution as far as receiving support according to clause 3(A) of the budget foundations law, 1985; 4. he will not be subject to the orders of the guaranteeing law on behalf of the state, 1958; 5. he will not be eligible to enjoy benefits given according to the law to encourage capital investment, 1959, and according to the law to encourage research and development in industry, 1984. B. Putting into practice the authority according to small clause (A)(2) will be carried out with the approval of the Sports Minister; according to small clause (A)(3), with the approval of the minister the government had decided is responsible for the budget, as stated in paragraph (2) of the definition of “responsible for the budget clause” within the budget foundations law, 1985; according to small clause (5) — printed “(5)” with no “(A)” before it, as printed — with the approval of the Minister of Industry, Trade and Labor.
- Section 5, Implementation (PDF p.2). The Minister of Justice is appointed to implement this law.
Key passages
- “deliberately avoiding economic, cultural or academic ties with another person or another factor only because of his ties with the State of Israel, one of its institutions or an area under its control” (section 1, PDF p.1)
- “Knowingly publishing a public call for a boycott against the State of Israel will be considered a civil wrong” (civil-wrong section, clause A, PDF p.1)
- “pay damages that are not dependent on the damage” (civil-wrong section, clause C, PDF p.1)
- “or who committed to take part in a boycott” (section 3, PDF p.1)
Evidence the work relies on
A statute, not an evidentiary work. Its internal authorities are the civil tort law [new version], including its clause 62 [A], clause 9 (2) of the income tax ordinance, clause 9 of the law regulating sports gambling, 1967, clause 3(A) of the budget foundations law, 1985, the guaranteeing law on behalf of the state, 1958, the law to encourage capital investment, 1959, and the law to encourage research and development in industry, 1984. None of those provisions’ texts is reproduced in the file.
Analysis
Read on its own terms, this Law targets the call and the commitment, not only the act of boycotting: the civil wrong is publishing a public call, on a reasonable-probability-plus-awareness test, and the tender and benefits sanctions in sections 3 and 4 reach a person who “committed to take part in a boycott” as well as a publisher. Its definition of the boycott it protects against is tied to motive and target — avoiding ties “only because of his ties” with the State, one of its institutions or an area under its control — and to possible, not actual, economic, cultural or academic damage; the call itself must carry a reasonable probability of bringing a boycott about. The sanctions are of three kinds, all stated in the text: tort damages, including damages not dependent on proof of damage where the wrong was deliberate; exclusion by regulation from tenders required by legislation; and ministerial stripping of five listed benefits and statuses, each item with its own approval. The file gives no instance of a claim, regulation or decision under the Law, no figures and no statement of purpose beyond its title, and it does not mention settlements by name — its territorial reach is carried by the defined phrase “an area under its control”.
People, organizations, places and events
Law for Prevention of Damage to the State of Israel through Boycott, 2011, Knesset, Israel
Concepts
Anti-boycott legislation, BDS movement, Academic boycott, Cultural boycott
How it relates to other sources
This is the primary text of an Israeli anti-boycott statute, where the anti-boycott laws otherwise in the wiki are United States measures: Challenging Anti-Boycott Legislation in the US and The Palestine Exception to Free Speech: A Movement Under Attack in the US treat US state and federal laws penalizing boycotts of Israel, the development the brief calls Copycat legislation when it spreads to other targets, recorded on Anti-boycott legislation. This file is an Israeli law of 2011, predating the US wave the brief dates from 2014, and it operates by civil wrong, tender exclusion and benefits suspension rather than by contractor certification; the two bodies of law are held side by side on Anti-boycott legislation, and nothing in this file states a connection between them. The boycott the Law defines covers calls for boycott of “an area under its control” as well as of the State itself, which on the text reaches calls aimed at the occupied territories and settlements without naming them. Its section 4A(3) works through clause 3(A) of the Budget Foundations Law, 1985, the same statute amended by Budget Foundations Law (Amendment No. 40), 5771-2011 in this batch. No other ingested source in the wiki gives this Law’s sections.
Open questions
- The civil-wrong section is printed with no section number, between sections 1 and 3, in the original as in the text copy; it is identified by position only, and whether the official text numbers it section 2 is outside this file.
- The file prints “an wrong” in clause C of the civil-wrong section and “must to be carried out” in section 3, both as printed in the original and byte-checked in the text copy; section 4B prints “small clause (5)” with no “(A)” before it. All are recorded as printed.
- Sections 3 and 4 both print bracketed qualifications — “[special cases where it will be limited]” and “[in special cases]” — in square brackets as in the text; whether the brackets are the translator’s insertion is not stated in the file.
- The file gives no enactment day or month and no signatories, so the Law cannot be dated within 2011, or ordered against the other 2011 laws in this batch, from this file alone.
Coverage
PDF p.1-2 of 2, read in full.