9
Attorney General’s decision not to press charges against the Chief of Police
concerning the latter’s use of his position for receiving private benefits.
9
These cases demonstrate the range and variation of petitions submitted to - and
heard by - the Court, and exemplify the changes in its attitude towards questions of
standing, justiciability and judicial review (Hofnung 1996a). While in 1980 only 802
petitions were filed, in 1990 the number stood at 1,308. By 1996 the number of
petitions has tripled, reaching the total sum of 2,735;
10
this figure has more than
doubled again by 2002.
11
Notwithstanding the Court’s own abandonment of its passive virtues (Bickel
1961), this magnitude is also the result of the Court’s relative accessibility: first,
entrance fees were remarkably low (until July 2002, HCJ filing fees amounted to
$100.)
12
Secondly, formal legal representation is not required;
13
even if an actio
popularis is dismissed, the Court frequently imposes no costs on the loosing
plaintiffs.
14
Additionally, when sitting as the HCJ, special procedural rules apply,
resulting in a more relaxed and simplified legal process altogether (Dotan 1999b).
9
H. C. 7074/93 Swissa v Attorney General, 48(3) PD 749.
10
Central Bureau of Statistics, Statistical Abstract of Israel 1998, Number 49, table 21.6, available at
<http.www.cbs.gov.il/shnaton/st21-06ab_e.shtml>.
11
According to data released by the Ministry of Justice, in 2002 11,444 new files were opened at the
Supreme Court, 50% (about 5,700) of them High Court of Justice cases. Globes, February 16, 2003.
12
On July 2002, the fee was raised to NIS 1500 (about $320) in an attempt to reduce the number of
petitions. Ha’aretz, July 24, 2002.
13
This by no means should be read as claiming it is inexpensive to apply the Court. The costs of a
petition are far greater than the entrance fees. However, at least with respect to the Court’s
accessibility, the minimal fees do facilitate, if not encourage, petitions.
14
Time and again the Court has declared: “In light of the public nature of this petition, we find it
unnecessary to impose costs”. See, for example, H.C. 4446/96 Movement for Quality Government v.
Government of Israel 50(3) PD 705. The Court, although dismissing the case on its merit, also did not
impose costs on the public petitioner in H.C. 3434/96 Hofnung v. Speaker of Knesset 50(3) PD 57.
Convention