Petition (H)In a response submitted to the Supreme Court of Israel on 3 November 2004, Adalah argued that, by advocating the retention of a General Security Service (GSS) post in the Ministry of Education (MOE), the Attorney General’s Office is perpetuating a continuing illegality.
On 6 September 2004, Adalah Attorney Marwan Dalal submitted a petition to the Supreme Court on behalf of the Union of Parents of Arab Students in Israel and in Adalah's own name against the, MOE, the GSS and the Prime Minister's Office. The petition demanded that the GSS be prohibited from intervening in the appointment of teachers, principals and inspectors to the Arab Education Division of the MOE.
In its response to the petition, submitted on 20 October 2004, the Attorney General claimed on behalf of the respondents that, under the principles of administrative law, the MOE has the authority and is charged with the duty of gaining as much information as possible from the GSS to investigate the potential criminal background of applicants for teacher, principal and inspector positions in the MOE. The state also suggested that the petitioners wait for the publication of the Dovrat Report - to be issued by the Dovrat Commission on Education Reforms - as its recommendations may relate to this issue.
In its reply filed in November 2004, Adalah emphasized that the state did not deny that GSS monitoring of Arab educators and candidates for positions in the MOE occurs. Nor did the state deny that the GSS is able to directly influence staff appointments made in the Arab Education Division of the MOE through the post of deputy director, which is filled by a GSS representative who holds veto power. Further, Adalah countered the state's arguments by stressing that the petition does not address the issue of a candidate's criminal past. Adalah commented that, while it does not dispute the state’s contention that, where a candidate has been convicted of criminal activity, this should be taken into consideration, the intervention and monitoring carried out by the GSS far exceeds that required for such purposes and only concerns candidates for the Arab Education Division, and not Jewish candidates, as the petition makes clear.
Adalah also argued that it could not foresee what recommendations and conclusions the Dovrat Commission would make. Further, without a Court ruling on the issue, Adalah maintained, even if the Commission recommended the cancellation of the GSS-held post in the Arab Education Division of the MOE, a question would remain over whether or not the MOE would implement it. Adalah again requested an urgent hearing in order to prevent ongoing harm caused by the continuation of illegal GSS intervention in the appointment of Arab educators.
The deputy director of the Arab Education Division of the MOE, who is a GSS representative and not a pedagogical expert, serves on the appointments committee, which considers bids for the hiring of principals and inspectors for Arab schools, and his opinion is decisive on all important matters in the Arab education system, including in the appointment of or refusal to hire a candidate to a position. The deputy director’s opinion, however, is not recorded in the protocols of the appointments committee’s sessions. When an applicant is rejected due to the GSS representative’s objections, the ministry never informs the candidate that s/he was denied a position as a result of a GSS representative's veto. The next Supreme Court hearing on the case has been set for 8 May 2005.
H.C. 8193/04, Union of Parents of Arab Students in Israel, et. al. v. The Ministry of Education, et. al. (case pending).