The affiliation of a police officer or prison guard to the special judicial framework of the Labor Court, in matters that he may perceive as rooted in the labor relationship between him and his commanders, is liable to undermine important foundations in the delicate and special organizational structure of the service.
There is no intention to be released from the application of the Labor Court Law, except with respect to certain claims related to the special nature of the service. Other powers of the Labor Court, such as its powers regarding withholding wages and annual leave, and its powers as an appellate court against decisions under the Civil Service (Pensions) Law, and under the Discharged Soldiers (Return to Work) Law, 5719-1949, as well as in claims under the Wage Protection Law, 5718-1958, and more, shall not be detracted from them."
- Until 2010, the substantive jurisdiction to hear matters listed in section 93A of the Ordinance was granted to the Supreme Court sitting as the High Court of Justice. In 2000, the Courts for Administrative Affairs Law, 5760-2000, was enacted, under which the Court for Administrative Affairs was authorized to hear an administrative petition on matters regulated in the First Addendum (section 5(1)). In 2010, the first addendum was amended, and the Court for Administrative Affairs was authorized to hear administrative petitions regarding decisions on matters listed in section 93A of the Police Ordinance. Thus it is stated in Item 37(1) of the First Addendum:
"37. Policemen and guards –
(1) A decision regarding the appointment in section 93A of the Police Ordinance [New Version], 5731-1971, excluding any decision relating to the appointment of the Inspector General of the Police."
For the sake of completeness, we note that according to the case law, the Court for Administrative Affairs is not authorized to grant monetary relief when hearing an administrative petition – as opposed to an administrative action – (see section 8 of the Courts for Administrative Affairs Law , which determines the authority of the Court for Administrative Affairs to hear an administrative petition, and also see Ram 8689/16 Municipality of Ramat Hasharon v. Kfar Hayarok, Shuni Appeal Levi Eshkol [published in Nevo] (September 26, 2017). and the references there; Civil Appeal Authority 7987/10 State of Israel - Ministry of Education v. Chazon Yeshaya Institutions Association [published in Nevo] (April 28, 2011); Civil Appeal Authority 6950/05 Ashdod Municipality v. Shimon Sarfati in Tax Appeal [published in Nevo] (September 19, 2005); Civil Appeal Authority 3879/05 Hadera Municipality v. Hagag America Israel in Tax Appeal [published in Nevo] (July 12, 2005)).