In recent months, Adam Teva V\u2019Din has been forced to turn twice to the High Court of Justice over a disturbing pattern of inaction by Environmental Protection Minister Idit Silman. Both cases involve the Minister\u2019s refusal to carry out basic legal duties that are essential to the functioning of Israel\u2019s environmental governance system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One petition demands enforcement of a binding decision to allocate NIS 11 million from the national Maintenance of Cleanliness Fund to environmental organizations \u2013 funds that have been frozen for more than seven months. The second petition, filed jointly with the Jewish National Fund (KKL), the Society for the Protection of Nature, and Life & Environment, seeks to compel the Minister to appoint public environmental representatives to district and national planning committees \u2013appointments that have been delayed for over two years. Amit Bracha:<\/strong> Both petitions arise from the same problem: the Minister\u2019s refusal to perform clear legal obligations. In the first case, she has blocked the implementation of a lawful decision by the directorate of the Cleanliness Fund to allocate NIS 11 million to environmental NGOs for research, education, and public engagement. This fund has existed for decades, financed by environmental levies and taxes on Israelis, and managed independently of the Ministry\u2019s internal budget. Yet the Minister has withheld the calls for applications, citing \u201cbudgetary constraints\u201d that have no relevance to this separate fund. Q2.<\/strong> What harm results from these kinds of inaction?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Amit Bracha:<\/strong> Environmental governance depends on functioning institutions \u2013 and on trust. When a Minister blocks funding or delays appointments, it cripples the system\u2019s ability to do its job. Environmental NGOs lose essential support for research, education, and community programs that strengthen both public awareness and the Ministry\u2019s own work. Meanwhile, the absence of public representatives means planning committees operate without environmental oversight or civic participation. Q3. Are these actions \u2013 or omissions \u2013 actually unlawful?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Amit Bracha:<\/strong> Yes. Both are clear breaches of statutory and administrative duty. The decision of the Cleanliness Fund directorate is binding. A Minister cannot arbitrarily block its implementation once approved. Likewise, the Representation Law obligates the Environment Minister to appoint public environmental representatives to planning bodies. These are not optional decisions; they are core elements of Israel\u2019s environmental governance structure<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Amit Bracha:<\/strong> In both petitions, we are asking the Court to compel the Minister to fulfill her duties \u2013 to release the approved grants and to make the required appointments. It is unfortunate that we must again rely on the Court to ensure the Environment Ministry complies with the law. But as long as ministerial neglect prevents environmental governance from functioning, we have no alternative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Amit Bracha: Israel\u2019s environmental management depends on integrity, professionalism, and respect for the rule of law. When a Minister treats these duties as optional, it sends a dangerous message \u2013 that politics comes before the environment, and before the public interest. <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Adam Teva V\u2019Din\u2019s Executive Director Amit Bracha explains how two High Court petitions expose a pattern of ministerial neglect undermining Israel\u2019s environmental governance.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":4180,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false},"categories":[62],"tags":[73,86,123],"class_list":["post-6560","news_and_updates","type-news_and_updates","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","tag-environmental-justice","tag-litigation","tag-watchdog"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
We asked Amit Bracha, Executive Director of Adam Teva V\u2019Din, to explain why these two cases matter \u2013 and what they reveal about how Israel\u2019s environmental system is being undermined from within<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nQ1.Why did Adam Teva V\u2019Din decide to petition the High Court \u2013 twice \u2013 against the Environment Minister?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
In the second case, she has simply failed to act on mandatory appointments of public environmental representatives to Israel\u2019s planning institutions \u2013 a requirement under the Law of Representation that ensures civil society has a voice in planning decisions. For more than two years, these appointments have remained vacant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These are not symbolic failures; they erode the foundations of transparency, accountability, and environmental justice<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nQ4. What is Adam Teva V\u2019Din asking the High Court to do?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Q5. What broader lesson should the public take from these cases?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
We should not need to petition the High Court to make a Minister of Environmental Protection protect the environment. Yet that is precisely what we are being forced to do. Our goal is not confrontation, but accountability \u2013 to ensure that Israel\u2019s environmental institutions serve the public, not political convenience.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n