Israel’s election has now officially been scheduled for Tuesday, October 27. The next three months will be filled with analysis of candidates participating in the different party lists and their respective platforms, projections from various polls, and the potential coalitions that may emerge following the elections. Less attention will be paid to the legal framework and the administrative formalities.
Israel’s election process has consistently received positive ratings from external monitors like Freedom House. Nonetheless, in this era of “election denialism” and conspiracy theories designed to undermine confidence in the integrity of election processes, it is worth understanding the critical components of the Israeli system and identifying concerns that have been raised this time around.
Israel’s election system has remained remarkably stable since independence in 1948. Elections for a 120-member parliament (Knesset) have been held at least every four years. Voters cast ballots for a party list and seats in the Knesset are allocated based on a nationwide, proportional representation system. To be eligible for representation in the Knesset, parties must surpass a prescribed threshold, now set at 3.25 percent of the vote.
Once the seats are allocated, the President (who is elected for a seven-year term by the Knesset) designates the leader of one of the parties to attempt to form a government. Ultimately, at least 61 members of the Knesset must vote to confirm a new government.
The expectation is that Israel’s elections will proceed in conformity with the law and in a manner consistent with international norms. The following is designed to explain the basis for such confidence and to pre-bunk specific concerns that have been raised. Of course, in light of reports and statements that imply a potential desire to interfere by the Netanyahu government and its allies, vigilance by relevant actors – election officials, political parties, civil society monitors, media, and voters – is still critically important.
According to Israel’s Basic Law, Knesset elections must take place no later than four years after the previous elections, which occurred on November 1, 2022. Nonetheless, given Israel’s uncertain security situation, there is concern that Prime Minister Netanyahu could seek to postpone the election beyond the prescribed deadline.
However, an Israeli Basic Law requires that 80 members of the Knesset pass a law to extend a government’s term beyond its four-year limit – well above the narrow majority Netanyahu might plausibly pull together for such an effort. Any attempt to delay the 2026 elections is therefore likely to provoke mass protests and substantive legal challenges.
Israeli elections are administered by the Central Elections Committee (CEC), which for the upcoming elections is chaired by the Deputy President of the Supreme Court, Noam Sohlberg, and includes representatives of all parties with members in the Knesset. The Committee supervises a politically neutral, professional staff, which for this election will be led by Dean Livne, who was the Committee’s legal adviser until he retired. Livne replaces Orly Adas, who served for 15 years as the Committee’s Director General and who reportedly resigned amid fears that political attacks on her would harm public faith in the election process.
For the October elections, the Committee is expected to employ upwards of 70,000 people to serve at polling and counting sites; historically, there have been few concerns raised regarding malfeasance or misfeasance by this cadre of short-term election personnel.
The 1992 Parties Law establishes the rules for registering a political party. The law prohibits parties from registering if they: reject the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state; incite racism; support the armed struggle of an enemy state or terrorist organization against the State of Israel; or serve as a front for illegal activity.
The eligibility of a party or candidate to register can be challenged before the CEC. For example, in 2022, the CEC disqualified Balad, a party identified with Israel’s Arab minority, but the Supreme Court reversed the decision. The Court, however, as recently as 2019, has allowed for the disqualification of individual candidates associated with Jewish ultra-nationalist parties, who have repeatedly used racist tropes in their speeches and writings.
Challenges to the participation of one or more of the Arab parties are anticipated before the coming elections. However, even if the CEC, which right-of-center parties control, approves the challenge, Supreme Court precedents have articulated a high threshold for party disqualification – i.e., only when there is a critical mass of clear, persuasive, and unequivocal evidence of activity over an extended period of time. Indeed, since 2003 the Court has reversed all CEC decisions to disqualify parties.
All Israeli citizens over the age of 18 are eligible to vote. With a few exceptions, the vote must be cast in person at an assigned polling site. Given the large number of Israeli citizens living abroad (estimated at between 500,000 and a million), various initiatives are underway to encourage them to visit Israel around election day so they can cast a vote. While Netanyahu’s Likud party has attempted to portray this as a form of “electoral bribery” (assisted travel for those assumed to vote for a specific party), the returnees will have the opportunity to cast a secret ballot (hence their vote for a particular party cannot be assured). Still, the Transportation Minister – a close ally of Netanyahu’s – is reportedly looking to attempt to reduce the number of flights available for Israelis returning to vote.
Like many countries, Israeli politics today are highly polarized. The Netanyahu government’s proposed judicial reform, anger over the failures that enabled the October 7 attacks, the hostage crisis, and the issue of drafting ultra-religious young men have all deepened the fault lines in Israeli society. And while elections in theory allow democracies to resolve such tensions peacefully, they also can provoke acts of violence and intimidation, particularly when the outcome of the process is seen by many as a zero-sum game.
The CEC represents a first line of defense by prescribing norms of acceptable behavior and penalizing those responsible for violating them. By law, the Shin Bet, which is responsible for Israel’s internal security, is subordinate to the CEC on all election-related matters. While the appointment of David Zini, seen as a close ally of Netanyahu, as the agency’s head has raised concerns that the Shin Bet may act independently of the CEC, Zini has publicly committed to respect the CEC’s authority.
More problematic may be the actions of the police, which is under the authority of Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir and whose actions and directives during the past four years have compromised its professionalism and independence.
President Herzog has sought to get out ahead of this issue by cautioning all relevant actors to remember that “elections are not a civil war. We will get through these elections together, as one people. Respect, influence, and vote.”
The pervasiveness of social media, instant communications, and artificial intelligence (AI) has exacerbated the potential damage that mis- and disinformation can cause during elections. These efforts can take multiple forms. Voters, for example, may be misinformed as to their assigned polling site or discouraged from voting by threats of violence and other negative consequences. Voters can also be misled by party campaigns that seek to defame or misrepresent the views of their opponents.
The CEC has some tools to minimize the impact of such malicious initiatives. First and foremost, it must take steps to project itself as the most trusted source of information related to the election process and then provide voters with relevant information. Second, it can seek to prevent political parties from misleading the public. A CEC regulation adopted on July 26, for example, requires that all materials generated through artificial intelligence be labeled as such. The media and civil society also have a role to play here by presenting accurate information regarding both the process and the positions of the different parties competing in the elections.
As a general norm of diplomatic behavior, foreign governments should not seek to influence the outcome of another country’s election. However, in recent years, allegations of foreign interference have become commonplace. In the Israeli context, both malicious actors – Iran, Russia, China – and allies – the United States, European Union members, Abraham Accords partners – have distinct incentives to influence Israel’s upcoming elections.
A foreign government may seek to influence an election by providing financial or technical assistance to one or more parties. While Israel – like many countries – has explicit laws prohibiting such practices, external assistance is often provided in a non-transparent or covert manner. Once again, such efforts should be discouraged as incompatible with normative behavior between sovereign nations, and the media should seek to expose the provision of covert assistance; however, their occurrence does not ipso facto delegitimize an election outcome, so long as the ballots are cast by eligible voters with the requisite secrecy provided and are counted accurately.
Another scenario of foreign interference involves manipulation of the vote count in a manner that changes the outcome of the election. Such claims are often alleged, but seldom if ever established by evidence. The CEC should publicly and in non-technical language describe the safeguards it deploys to protect the system for tabulating ballots to reassure the Israeli public. Such transparency serves as the most effective response to allegations of manipulation by those who receive fewer votes than they anticipated.
Even as there is considerable interest by the international community in the upcoming Israeli elections, there is no formal role for international actors. That said, the international media will undoubtedly pay considerable attention to electoral developments in Israel; their presence, and that of various ad hoc nongovernmental observer groups, will enhance confidence in Israel and abroad that the elections are being conducted transparently and in a manner consistent with Israeli law and international norms.