High Court of Justice 3227/20 Mika Kliger v. Minister of Defense

High Court of Justice 3227/20

High Court of Justice 6522/20

High Court of Justice 1356/21

Judgment

Vice President Noam Sohlberg:

1. The matter of the petitions before us, within the normative framework that applies to the recruitment of women to combat roles in general, and tothe YahyaDot so-called 'special units' in particular. The main issue relates to the question of whether the IDF has a legal obligation to maintain equality between the sexes, with regard to the opportunity to be distinguished and serve in these positions.

Background to the Petitions

2. We are dealing with veteran petitions, which have undergone incarnations and upheavals since they were filed. I will bring things as briefly as possible.  The petitioners in High Court of Justice case 3227/20 were, at the time of filing the petition, candidates for security service.  The Petitioner in High Court of Justice Case 6522/20 and the Petitioners in High Court of Justice Case 1356/21 were already serving in the IDF at the time of filing the petitions, when their participation in a pilot course and a captain's course (respectively) was terminated.  All of the petitioners requested that they be allowed to be distinguished and integrated into various combat roles, with an emphasis on special units.
3. The petitions argued, in essence, that "the policy maintained by the IDF towards women is a policy of institutional discrimination," which in its definition excludes the IDF "for reasons without a justified basis [...] [the] feet of women from various combat roles, and in particular - the roles of lead fighters." Thus, although many women are able to meet the qualifications required to serve in combat units, both physically and mentally, they are unable to even be classified - and in any case, also serve - in those units. This policy, it is argued, contradicts the provisions of Section 16A of the Defense Service Law [Consolidated Version], 5746-1986 (hereinafter: the Defense Service Law) and Section 6D of the Women's Equal Rights Law, 5711-1951 (hereinafter: the Women's Equal Rights Law), which provide for equality in the possibility of fulfilling any position in military service; and even contradicts the recommendations of the Committee for the Design of Women's Service in Tza"L, who was appointed by the head of the personnel unit, and recommended in her 2007 summary report that "women and men will have an equal opportunity to be assigned to all positions and formations and to fulfill all tasks according to valid quota criteria, while meeting mandatory standards and competency requirements."
4. The Ottoman Settlement [Old Version] 1916 It was also argued in the petitions that given that there are already clear procedures and criteria for screening for the combat roles in which the petitions are engaged, allowing women to participate in those selection processes does not impose additional costs, so that excluding them from those procedures and preventing them from participating in them amounts to extreme unreasonableness; in particular, Since no sufficient reason was presented for this, and since it was never anchored in an official policy that could establish and justify the discriminatory state of affairs. It was also claimed that parallel armies around the world have adopted a policy of full equal opportunities for women in combat roles, including in special units.  In the petitions, it was emphasized that the Petitioners are not asking for 'leniencies' or adjustments in the selection procedures, but only an equal opportunity to be assigned to those units, and to the extent that they are found suitable to do so, to integrate into them as part of their service.

12-34-56-78 Chekhov v.  State of Israel, P.D.  51 (2)

5. After the filing of the first petition - High Court of Justice 3227/20 - a number of applications were filed; most of them sought to strengthen the Petitioners' position, some of them wished to emphasize that it is possible to question the justification for accepting the Petitioners' arguments, and at the very least, this should be done only after a thorough and thorough examination of all aspects of the issue. Among the applications to join, the one submitted by Col.  (res.) H.C.  - Asher served as commander of Sayeret Matkal in the years 2016-2019 - and Lt.    (res.) A.H., who served as deputy commander of Sayeret Matkal in the years 2016-2017.  The motion presented in detail the position that "women can successfully serve as fighters in Sayeret Matkal," and that their integration as female combatants will also "yield a unique and significant contribution, both operationally and organizationally, to Sayeret Matkal in particular and to the IDF in general." This was emphasized, it was emphasized, based on the applicants' practical and operational experience, and on "in-depth familiarity with aspects of locating, sorting, training, and operational activity in Sayeret Matkal, along with familiarity with the activities of the security forces and the intelligence community."
6. On August 13, 2020, the state's respondents submitted their first preliminary response. In response, it was emphasized that "the IDF sees great importance in providing an equal opportunity for all men and women who enlist in its ranks to make the most of their skills and abilities and to serve in meaningful and contributing service," and that accordingly, "the IDF's consistent policy for years has been to expand the integration of women into its ranks." This is the case in general, and especially in combat roles, in which women were integrated into a variety of "significant combat roles, including pilots, female fighters in the navy, the artillery corps, the combat reconnaissance corps, the 'Oketz' unit, the light infantry, and more." In addition, in recent years, "there has also been an examination of the integration of women as tank fighters in a border defense mission." On a broad basis, it was noted that "thousands of female fighters currently serve in the IDF," and that there is a significant upward trend, so that in 2012 the proportion of women serving in combat roles was only 3%, while today they "constitute about 17% of the total combat force in the army"; In addition, in the five years between 2015 and 2020, the absolute number of women serving in combat roles more than doubled by more than 2.5 times.
7. Regarding other combat roles, and in particular those mentioned in the petitions, it was argued that "the senior echelons of the IDF bear a heavy and important responsibility both for the IDF's compliance with its operational missions and for maintaining its operational readiness; for the health and safety of those serving in the IDF; and for the exhaustion of all the capabilities of those who serve in an equal and fair manner." Accordingly, it was noted that "examining the possibility of integrating women into combat roles in which they have not yet been integrated requires the competent authorities in the IDF to examine in depth all the relevant considerations," and therefore "the Chief of Staff [...] decided to establish a professional team, which will conduct a serious and thorough examination process, based on a broad, comprehensive and in-depth approach, regarding the possibility of integrating women into additional combat positions in the IDF.".  In the meantime, it was decided that the team would be headed by Maj.    Yoel Strick and Brig.  Gen.  Eliezer Toledano (who was later replaced by Brig.  Gen.  Dan Goldfuss, who was also replaced due to a change of positions), "and that other senior officials with relevant operational and professional expertise in a wide range of fields would take part in it."
8. On November 9, 2020, the first hearing of the petitions was held, before President E. Hayut, Justice   Mazuz and Justice Y.  Willner.  Subsequently, it was decided to "postpone the continuation of the hearing of the petitions until an update notice is received from the respondents regarding the progress of the work of the professional team."
9. On June 7, 2022, after several update notices were submitted in which the State respondents reported on the progress of the work of the professional team, the respondents announced the completion of the process. The team, which included a number of sub-teams, examined "in depth and seriously" - inter alia, through consultation with many and diverse professional bodies, data collection, and learning from foreign armies and relevant studies - all issues relating to the recruitment of women to combat roles, and formulated a detailed report presenting its findings, conclusions, and recommendations.  Subsequently, the team's findings and recommendations were presented to the Chief of Staff, who also held several follow-up discussions on the matter, including in the General Staff Forum.
10. At the end of the process, the Chief of Staff decided to accept the team's recommendation, according to which all combat roles in which women are already serving, as well as several other positions that the team found to be impediment to assigning women to - "two combat roles in the Artillery Corps; combat role in a classified formation; and the role of an operational driving instructor" - will be defined as positions open to women's service. The Chief of Staff also decided to develop experiences in combat service in the Air Force's Search and Rescue Unit (Unit 669), as well as in the Special Missions Engineering Unit (YAHALAM) - special units, for which the decision was made contrary to the position of the professional staff, which did not recommend the integration of women in these units.  It was also decided that in accordance with the recommendation of the professional team, an experiment would be launched to establish a female combat platoon, which would serve as a mobility platoon in one of the infantry brigades; and that after the completion of the examination process regarding the integration of tanks into border defense, the continued service of women in tanks will be considered as part of this mission, as well as the possibility of integrating them into the maneuvering armored corps.  All of the experiences, it was determined, "will be accompanied by orderly and in-depth processes of monitoring progress and further examination." Participation in all the experiments was conditional on meeting physiological threshold conditions, which would be determined according to a model developed by the professional team.  This model allows, it is claimed, "to assess, based on the physiological data of female soldiers at the beginning of their training for combat role...  their ability to meet the operational requirements of the position.  This is done while reducing the known risk factors for injuries and maintaining their health," and based on the perception that "since these are combat roles that women have not yet performed, it is impossible to know with certainty how they will meet the operational requirements and how performing the role will affect their health."
11. In another updated announcement, submitted on December 5, 2022, it was reported that intensive preparations are being made for the start of the experiments in the various units, as detailed above; that in the meantime, a new format has been formulated for holding a 'field day' (more commonly known as a 'reconnaissance day'), which "will allow for the first time the participation of female women designated for security service in a designated screening that will be held within the framework of it"; and that the experience of serving women as tank fighters in a border defense mission was successful, and as a result, the Chief of Staff decided that this profession would be permanently opened to women.
12. On December 8, 2022, the second hearing of the petitions took place, before President E. Hayut and Justices   Baron and R.  Ronen.  Following the hearing, and in view of the change in the factual basis of the petitions, it was determined, "at the request of counsel for the petitioners", that the petitioners would be given "permission to amend their petitions to the extent necessary in order to adapt them to the factual developments that have occurred since their submission, including with regard to the findings and recommendations of the professional staff, and the decisions of the Chief of Staff that were made as a result.  In this framework, the Petitioners will also be entitled to update the remedies requested by them."
13. On December 22, 2022, the amended petition was filed. It argues, inter alia, that even after all the changes that have occurred, as detailed above, "the respondents are acting exactly the opposite of the provisions of the law, and are trying to turn the exception into a rule and the rule into an exception, leaving most of the positions closed [for women -  S.] without any proper reason or reason, and without examining the roles themselves according to the professional requirements of each and every position." Thus, "if the rule is - according to the law - to open the positions to everyone, except for the exception(s) in respect of which it is found that women should not be recruited, then the duty of the respondents is to examine the position, the position, its needs, determine the criteria required for each candidate to serve in it, publish the findings of the examination - and explain why it was determined that women cannot be enlisted for a certain position categorically, because this is required by its nature and essence." However, this has not been done, and the starting point from which the IDF emerges, as reflected in its position, even after the changes that have taken place, is the opposite.
14. It was also argued, based on a position paper submitted on behalf of Prof. Naama Constantini - an expert in sports medicine, and one of the women who wishes to join this process - that the theoretical model for examining physiological fitness, which was determined in accordance with the team's recommendation as a prerequisite, is based on an "insurmountable formula", which is not acceptable in any Western army and ignores the practical experience acquired in parallel armies in this context.  The use of the model as a prerequisite allows the IDF, it is argued, to effectively block the possibility of women entering additional combat roles, under a cloak of objective restrictions that are not relevant at all.  In this context, it was further argued that the application of the physiological threshold conditions, in addition to the physical fitness requirements to which men are also obligated to meet, imposes an excessive and unjustified burden on women; Nor does she pass the test of logic, since as long as a candidate passes the fitness tests according to which men are tested, there is no clear reason to assume that her chances of succeeding in the position are less.  Moreover, the combination of the criteria creates, it is claimed, an "empty group", since these are opposing requirements, so that there can hardly be women who meet the physiological threshold requirements that have been set, especially with regard to height and weight, and can be in good enough physical shape at the same time.  Thus, instead of a 'threshold condition', this is in fact a fundamental barrier.  In addition, it was argued that "the basis of setting the threshold conditions is the argument that their purpose is to prevent harm to women's health," but a comprehensive study that examined female combatants who served in a special unit in the US Army did not find a higher probability of injury, nor did they suffer long-term health damage.  Finally, it was emphasized, once again, that "all the Petitioners are asking for is the right to be distinguished with dignity, in the same way that men are segregated, according to the same criteria and exactly the same criteria - nothing more and no less."
15. On April 17, 2023, a preliminary response was filed on behalf of the state's respondents to the amended petition. In response, it was reported that the experience in the Yahalam unit had begun, so that "in the recruitment cycle of March 2023, a team of 12 female fighters was recruited for the first time," and in November 2023, two additional teams are expected to enlist, with about 15 fighters each.  It was also reported that after the issue was presented to him, and following additional staff work conducted in the IDF, the Chief of Staff made a number of new decisions.  At the same time, it was decided to "significantly expand the experiences in the special units, both by eliminating the physiological prerequisites (using the physiological model as a decision supporting factor) and by selecting women for positions according to the same criteria as those applicable to men, and by opening up future experiences for women to serve in additional special units Starting in 2025; In addition to postponing the opening of the experiment in the mobility department in the infantry brigade until the end of 2024, and examining the issue again after the progress of the experiments in the elite units" (emphases added - v.  ).  This is "based on the perception that expanding the placement of women in combat roles [...] It should start with the special units, inter alia, due to the advantages inherent in the sorting available in these units and the characteristics of their activity, a higher potential for success, and from a view of the moral and social significance of providing women with the opportunity to serve in such service." These decisions, it is claimed, "significantly advance the equal placement of women in combat roles."
16. With regard to positions in which women have not yet been assigned, it was determined that progress will be by way of experience, since "a gradual process by way of experience enables the production and assimilation of relevant lessons"; to concentrate efforts "in terms of the necessary preparation, and the required command and systemic attention"; and accordingly to "significantly increase the chances of success of the process, over time". This way of progress is also justified, it is argued, given that "the potential number of women joining a new track that has been opened" is not large, so that the expected benefit from opening many tracks at the same time is not high.  In this context, it was also emphasized that considerations of feasibility and chances of success guided the Chief of Staff's decisions on the matter, so that the experiences in the special units, in which the chances of success, in his view, are higher, will enable the learning of lessons in favor of the experiences for integration into the infantry department and the maneuvering armored corps - experiences that were slightly postponed for this reason.  The Chief of Staff also decided that given the advantages that the physiological model, as a decision-support tool, can also yield in relation to the male population, such a model should be formulated for them as well, in order to assist in the processes of their selection and placement for service.
17. In principle, it was argued that "the IDF's professional and moral position is that the integration of women into positions in military service should be expanded, where possible, but while making responsible and informed decisions based on research, examination and well-founded data." It was further argued that the respondents "duly implement the provisions of section 16A of the Defense Service Law, and that there was no flaw in the manner in which the provisions of the law were implemented, by opening positions for the placement of women by way of first experience in a number of units, which would enable control and learning while accumulating practical experience, before making a final decision." This is especially so, taking into account the broad discretion given to the IDF regarding the manner in which the provisions of the law are implemented, and in light of the complexity of the considerations on the agenda, with an emphasis on "professional-operational and planning aspects."
18. With regard to the arguments raised by the petitioners regarding the factual basis on which the decision makers in the IDF were based, it was argued that "the process conducted by the [professional team - S.] is the most comprehensive examination process ever conducted in the IDF regarding the placement of women in combat roles, and among the comprehensive examinations conducted on the subject of the placement of women in combat roles from an international perspective," and subsequently supplementary staff work was conducted, in order to continue to improve and update the factual infrastructure as a result of the gradual accumulated experience.  With regard to the Petitioners' arguments regarding the physiological model, the State's respondents argued, in essence, that the model was formulated in a professional and practical manner; that its purpose is to protect the health of the female combatants and to reduce the probability of injuries; In any case, the decision to turn it from a threshold condition to a decision supporting figure, and to formulate a similar model for men as well, undermines the arguments raised in this context.
19. On June 13, 2023, the Petitioners submitted a response to the preliminary response, in which they essentially reiterated the claims they had raised at previous stages of the petition; and argued that the IDF's decision to gradually promote the integration of women into combat roles, by conducting experiments in various types of units, is extremely unreasonable, and even constitutes discrimination against women. It was also argued that the Chief of Staff's decision to promote the integration of women into combat roles, while giving priority to experience in special units, raises considerable difficulties, since the number of potential women who can serve in these units is smaller; Moreover, the degree of success in them does not necessarily indicate the chances of success in integrating into infantry and armored frameworks.
20. On June 27, 2023, the third hearing of the petitions was held, before President Hayut and Justices Baron andRonen. After the hearing, an order nisi was issued, "instructing the respondents, in light of the provisions of section 16A of the Defense Service Law [Consolidated Version], 5746-1986 and section 6D of the Women's Equal Rights Law, 5711-1951, to come and give a reason:
21. Why shouldn't women be integrated, as part of an experiment, in a mobility or mortar platoon in one of the maneuvering infantry brigades, right now and without waiting for the completion of the experiments in units 669 and Yahalam?
22. Why should women not be allowed to enlist in the maneuvering armored formation, in light of the success of the examination process regarding the placement of women as armored fighters in a border defense mission, and alternatively, why should women not be integrated, as part of an experience, into the maneuvering armored formation, already and without waiting for the completion of the experiences in units 669 and Yahalam?
23. Why should there not be experiments to integrate women into elite and special units that conduct selection procedures, in addition to and in parallel with the experiments in units 669 and Yahalam, with the exception of units in which it has already been decided that due to the nature and nature of the position, women cannot be integrated into them?"
24. In the affidavit of response, which was filed on September 21, 2023, with a letter from the Chief of Staff attached, the state's respondents reported that following the order nisi that was granted, an additional examination was conducted, following which the Chief of Staff, "after much deliberation," made a number of additional decisions. In the meantime, it was noted that it was decided to open an experiment to establish a team of female fighters in the field of infantry mobility, as part of "a dedicated track that will be opened in a mobility unit that operates under one of the IDF's maneuvering brigades, which is subordinate to a special division." It was also decided that at the end of 2024, experience training female fighters for combat roles in the maneuvering armor will begin; This is "part of the continuity and commitment of the IDF to the processes that have been carried out in the past, and while giving weight to the order nisi given in the petition," and despite the fact that "based on the existing data, the Chief of Staff does not see in the near future a real feasibility of serving female combatants in the armored [the] maneuver." It was also decided that an experiment for women's service would be opened in another special unit, Sayeret Matkal, "subject to the identification of a sufficient number of female candidates required for this."
25. Based on these decisions, together with the previous decisions made in this context, as detailed above, it was argued that these are "very significant and groundbreaking steps with regard to the placement of women in additional combat roles, which are capable of providing the most appropriate response to the order nisi given in the amended petition." Therefore, once an appropriate response was given to the three heads of the order nisi, and taking into account the position of the state's respondents in principle, as also detailed in the preliminary response to the amended petition, it was argued that the petition should be rejected or deleted, at this stage.
26. Following what was stated in the response affidavit, on September 21, 2023, a decision was issued (President Hayut and Justices Baron andRonen) according to which: "Given the series of new steps for the integration of women in combat roles in the IDF, which were noted in the response affidavit, the petitioners will announce by September 28, 2023, whether they stand by their petitions."
27. The petitioners, in response, announced that they were standing by their petition. In the reference submitted to the reply affidavit, the petitioners rejected the arguments of the state's respondents outright, and argued that in practice, not even one of the heads of the order was given a response nisi.
28. Shortly afterwards, on October 7, 2023 - that bitter and hasty day - the war broke out. As a result, and in view of the fact that the relevant parties required to handle the petitions on behalf of the respondents dealt with matters relating to the state of emergency, the hearing of the objection to the order nisi was postponed several times.
29. On July 15, 2024, an updated notice was filed on behalf of the state's respondents. The statement noted that "despite the concentration of effort on the needs of the war and the great burden placed on all military elements, with an emphasis on the combat system, including the units that are trained for combat, due to the war," the Chief of Staff decided, after an up-to-date examination, that "all the experiments that were decided upon prior to the outbreak of the war will continue or open as planned." This is with the exception of the experience in training for the maneuvering armor, which the Chief of Staff decided would be postponed and opened in November 2025 "due to constraints stemming from the war" - including the incompetence of tanks, a lack of ammunition, and a shortage of training staff.  At the same time, it was decided that the experiment, in all its stages, would be conducted in one of the maneuvering armored brigades, instead of being carried out in the Border Protection Corps, as previously planned.  The statement also reported that "the Chief of Staff recently ordered a dedicated debriefing and study on women's fighting in the Iron Sword War, in addition to the debriefings conducted in the IDF in the context of combat," but the debriefing process has not yet been completed.  After its completion, the relevant IDF officials will examine whether it has implications for the integration of women in additional combat roles.
30. As for the experience in the Yahalam unit, the announcement noted that 10 of the 14 female fighters who were accepted have completed the training track, and are already taking part in the unit's operational activity, with two of them even going to an officers' course. In addition, 17 female soldiers are in the training track as part of the second cycle of the trial.  As for the experience in Unit 669, it was noted that after 141 female candidates for security service reported for the reconnaissance day in November 2023, at the end of the selection process, which includes formulation, 2 candidates for security service who began training in the unit were found.  It was also noted that in March 2024, 567 female candidates for security service appeared for a reconnaissance day, of which 17 passed successfully, and are in various stages of screening procedures for units 669 and Sayeret Matkal.
31. On July 24, 2024, we held, in the current composition, a fourth hearing on the petition, after which the state's respondents were asked to submit an additional notice of update. In the update notice, which was submitted on January 2, 2025, it was noted that on October 8, 2024, another patrol day was held, to which 117 female candidates for security service reported; Of these, 41 completed the day and continued to the screening procedures in the various units.  It was also noted that on November 17, 2024, a formation was held for Sayeret Matkal, in which 11 candidates for security service participated, but none of them completed a result that would allow them to be accepted for training in Sayeret Matkal or in Unit 669; Accordingly, "they are expected to be called for a week of interviews with other combat units such as Yahalam, Oketz and others."
32. The announcement also noted that the two female soldiers who began the training track in Unit 669 dropped out on the way; that in December 2024, the first cycle of the Sayeret Matkal experiment was opened, with the participation of one female soldier who passed all the stages of screening; that in March 2025, the third cycle of the trial will begin in the Yahalam unit, which is expected to include 24 female soldiers; Because two graduates of the first training cycle are already assigned to officer positions in the unit; And that in March, three more female fighters are expected to leave for the officers' course. It was also noted that on November 26, 2024, 30 female soldiers began the training track in the field of infantry mobility.  Given the aforesaid, and further to their position as presented in the previous updated notice, it was argued that at this stage, the petitions should be rejected or deleted.
33. On January 16, 2025, a response to the notice was submitted on behalf of the Petitioners. In response, it was claimed that on the last day of the patrols, which took place a few days before the response was submitted, 180 women showed up, 12 of whom finished with a result that allows them to continue to form the General Staff.  These figures, which are in addition to the data that emerge from the days of the previous patrols, testify, it is claimed, that there are certainly women with the appropriate physical abilities to serve in combat units in general, and in special units in particular, which necessitates sorting them out on the basis of their abilities alone, similar to men, without placing preliminary barriers.  In this context, it was further noted that the aforementioned data should be treated only as preliminary, since "these results are based on a female workforce who, unlike male fighters , did not really know until recently that they could be selected or accepted to these positions, and accordingly - did not train for this in the years preceding the beginning of the pilot"; Therefore, it was argued that "the potential of the female workforce is expected to continue to grow - to the extent that it is indeed possible for them."
34. At the same time, it was argued that the state of affairs is far from satisfactory, so that, for example, the variety of units into which a female soldier who dropped out of training in Unit 669 or from a pilot course can be assigned is much smaller than that open to a soldier in the same situation. The Petitioners further complained about the continuation of the model of experience, which, according to them, delays the integration of women into combat roles, and allows the IDF to "buy time"; Moreover, given that women have proven themselves "in combat results and in real time" - it is no longer necessary.  It was also argued that, in practice, the state's respondents did not provide a satisfactory response to the order nisi and the comments made by the court during the last hearing.
35. On July 13, 2025, another update notice was submitted, in which it was reported that against the background of findings that arose from the first six months of the experience for training female fighters in the field of infantry mobility, the Chief of Staff decided on May 29, 2025, to stop the experiment. Thus, although "in the professional fields, the achievements of the female soldiers who participated [...] In experiences similar to those of male soldiers in similar training", in the fields of physical and combat fitness, "female soldiers did not meet the thresholds of competence required in order to receive the required qualification at the end of the first stage of training [...].  Even after additional actions were carried out at the beginning of the next stage of training [...] in order to increase their combat fitness, the female soldiers were unable to meet the fitness threshold required to be reached, already at the basic training stage." Therefore, "the training staff and professionals have reached the conclusion that they will not be able to meet the standard required for their certification at the level of fitness required at the end of the training of an infantry fighter." Another reason given for the decision, along with the failure to meet the requirements of physical fitness, was that many of the female soldiers who were still participating in the training suffered from medical problems that arose during the training, which, according to the medical professionals, were expected to worsen and cause damage as long as the training continued.
36. In addition, it was noted that the Chief of Staff had instructed the opening of an additional experiment in 2026 for combat in the infantry professions, "after the lessons learned from the current experience have been learned, including the need for sorting, preliminary preparation, and adjustment of aspects of combat fitness." The Chief of Staff also ordered the establishment of mobility departments in units other than the maneuvering infantry brigades. The announcement also reported that the female soldiers who participated in the training had been reassigned to various combat units.  Finally, with regard to the arguments raised by counsel for the Petitioners in response to the request to file the notice of update, it was argued that considerable resources were invested, and that "great command attention was devoted" to creating the conditions and the appropriate envelope for the training track, although this ultimately did not succeed.
37. In the decision of August 7, 2025, the respondents were asked to update on the opening of the training experience for the maneuver's armor. This follows the update notices of July 15, 2024 and January 2, 2025, in which it was stated that the opening of the trial had been postponed to November 2025.  On November 30, 2025, the update notice was submitted.  It was reported that "after the positions of the professional bodies were presented to the Chief of Staff, and after seriously considering the matter, the Chief of Staff determined that it was not possible to hold the trial on the scheduled date, which was stated in the previous announcements [...], and instructed a further postponement of the opening of the trial for the recruitment cycle in November 2026.".  This decision was based first and foremost, it was noted, on the consequences of the war on the maneuvering armored formation.  In this context, a confidential notice was also submitted, about which, naturally, we cannot elaborate.  At the same time, it was noted that in view of the challenges of the war and the command attention given to its management, "the Armored Corps is not prepared and cannot prepare in the near future for the investment of command and systemic inputs, and for the allocation of the resources required for the launch of the experiment on its scheduled date." Moreover, given that the results of the training are unknown, the experiment is conducted "in addition to and parallel" with the regular training processes that take place in the Armored Corps, which requires dedicated manpower, as well as additional resources and infrastructure; in the current circumstances, there is "objective difficulty" in fulfilling these requirements.
38. Another reason given for the postponement of the experiment is the need to exhaust the process of drawing lessons from the experience in infantry mobility. In particular, it was noted in this context that in the framework of the lessons that have already been learned from that experience, "the professionals insisted that opening the experiment without conducting preliminary screening and preparation processes, which would improve the basic physical fitness of the female soldiers who enlist for the experiment, is liable to lead to the injury of the female soldiers and the failure of the experiment at an early stage." Therefore, "the postponement of the experiment will enable the formulation of preliminary preparatory procedures intended for the relevant security service, and can contribute to the success of the"
39. In addition to the aforementioned rule, the statement emphasized that as part of the discussion on the opening of the trial, "the Chief of Staff insisted that the IDF is committed to equal opportunities for women who enlist in its ranks, which is expressed, inter alia, in the integration of female fighters in all units and formations, with the exception of positions that were not opened for women to serve due to their nature and essence [...] This is not only out of a deep and full commitment to the provisions of the law, but also as an expression of a real operational need for quality manpower in all units and positions, and out of a moral and professional commitment to the optimal utilization of all human capital in the IDF, including by exhausting the skills of all women who enlist in the ranks of the army, and providing equal opportunities for all female recruits" (emphases added: v. ).  The respondents also updated, with regard to their experience in the General Staff Commando Unit, that the soldier who enlisted in December 2024 is still on the training track; and that in August 2026, another female soldier is expected to enlist, who passed the selection process for the unit.
40. In response to the notice, which was filed on December 7, 2025, counsel for the Petitioners argued, in essence, that the decision to postpone the experience was unreasonable; that in view of the fact that women fought in armored vehicles in the framework of the war, there was no need for experience at all; and that the reasons relating to the lack of command attention, resources, and the like, are not convincing, given that training in maneuvering armored personnel carriers for men is conducted frequently, with all the required resources allocated to them. In another reference submitted separately, on December 9, 2025, it was also argued that in light of the experiences that have already been carried out in Sayeret Matkal, Unit 669 and Yahalam, there is no longer any justification for continuing the model of experimentation, and that all the selection procedures for special units should be opened to women immediately.  This, taking into account the actual success of some of them; And given that the screening and screening procedures work properly, so that women who are not professionally suitable are indeed excluded from the training tracks, and the competence of the units is not impaired in the slightest.  In another notice submitted by the petitioners' counsel, on January 4, 2026, it was claimed regarding the experience in the Yahalam unit, that "under the opening of the unit's core functions - bomb disposal, a separate system was established for women only, a system of designated roles - which does not exist at all for men and is not part of the core professions of the Yahalam." It was also claimed that the IDF had decided to give female fighters who completed the Yahalam course a different lubrication, which creates "symbolic and functional differentiation" and violates the principle of equality.

If so, after more than 5 and a half years, which included quite a few transformations and transformations, as detailed above - The time is ripe to conclude the discussion.