Exclusion of the Government and Weak Due Diligence Regarding Legislative Texts

Author: Jihad Harb

The debates regarding the General Elections Law raise constitutional issues tied to the amendment of Law No. 10 of 2026, which modifies Law No. 1 of 2007 and its amendments. These issues pertain to political restrictions that limit or could limit political participation, concerning the prohibition of discrimination based on opinion according to Article 9 of the Basic Law, and violate the provisions of Article 19 of the Basic Law related to freedom of opinion and expression in terms of content. Formally, the law has violated Article 46 of the Basic Law by not being based on a recommendation from the Cabinet, meaning that this law has not referenced such a recommendation, indicating that the legislative elections are not under the jurisdiction of the government according to the text of this law, thus excluding the Cabinet from political affairs.

The text of Article 46 of the Basic Law identifies the first party responsible for preparing the legislative decision as the Cabinet; this Cabinet assists the President in performing his duties and exercising his powers in the manner outlined in the Basic Law, whether in ordinary or exceptional cases. Additionally, Article 70 of the Basic Law clearly states that the Cabinet has the right to propose bills, "the Cabinet has the right to present bills to the Legislative Council and issue regulations and take necessary actions for the implementation of the laws." Even in the exceptional case referred to in Article 43 of the law, which grants the President the authority to issue temporary legislation, it does not give him the right to annul the constitutional role of the Cabinet in the legislative process itself.

The amended Basic Law did not specify the party responsible for preparing the legislative decision, but merely granted the President the right to issue it. However, it is noted from the examination of legislative decisions issued after June 2007 that the responsible party for preparing these decisions is the Cabinet, as most of these laws include in their preamble the phrase (based on a recommendation from the Cabinet). Nevertheless, some laws have started to be issued by the President without being discussed in the Cabinet, either because they pertain to judicial matters or bodies that are subordinate to the presidency or general elections, while the Basic Law states that the legislative initiative belongs to the Cabinet or the members of parliament, and that the Cabinet, according to the provisions of Article 46, assists the President in performing his duties and exercising his powers in the manner outlined in this Basic Law.

The issue here is not related to the potential conflict between the two poles of the executive authority but rather to due diligence concerning the integrity of the text and its wisdom related to social and economic stability, preventing modifications from being repetitive or reversing some legislative decisions, which leads to legislative instability and conflicting legal standings arising from them. For instance, a review of the 190 legislative decisions issued during the period 2020-2024 showed that 41 legislative decisions, about 22% of them, raised problematic issues and heated debates after their issuance, creating disputes between community sectors and the Palestinian Authority. The Palestinian Authority (the government and the presidency), after intense debate and campaigns through media and social media, had to retract or cancel 10 laws or suspend their implementation and amended 18 legislative decisions, some of which were amended between two to four times over five years.

The lack of due diligence, exclusion of the government, and absence of serious consultations with political and social forces and civil society organizations create this state of weakness not only in the decision-making process but also in the image of the decision-maker before the Palestinian public.