True, the army is not obligated to repeat experiments until the end of time. A place where it is found, after the army has conducted a comprehensive and professional examination, that there are limitations inherent in a particular position due to its nature or nature that do not allow the integration of women in it - He may define this position as one that will be restricted to women, in accordance with the provisions Section 6D Women's Equal Rights Law and section 16A to the Security Service Law. This is a professional decision that falls within the broad discretion of the military authorities; Although it is, of course, subject to judicial review, like any administrative decision - and must be accepted subject to the rules of administrative law.
In this context, it should be noted in parentheses that in order to ensure that decisions according to which women cannot be assigned to a particular position meet the standards of administrative integrity - It is preferable that they be accepted in an orderly process, according to uniform criteria, which will be determined in advance by the military.
- To this it should be added that, like the exercise of any authority under administrative law, the conduct of the experiments must also be carried out at the appropriate speed within a reasonable timetable, in accordance with all the considerations at hand (see, Mini-Many: High Court of Justice 5931/04 Mazursky v. State of Israel, Ministry of Education, IsrSC 59(3) 769, 782 (2004)); High Court of Justice 4630/17 ADAM GUBARA TAGAL V. MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR, PARA. 16 [NEVO] (April 25, 2021). Naturally, the reasonable time for opening experiences varies according to the circumstances, including whether it is a routine day or an emergency. This is because "the proper speed does not necessarily translate, and in any event, into a rigid timetable, which is not affected by developments on the ground" (HCJ 7198/93 Mitral B Tax Appeal v. Minister of Industry and Trade, IsrSC 88(2) 844, 854 (1994)). At the same time, a decision to open an experiment may be devoid of its content if it is repeatedly postponed for extended periods in view of various constraints that are not impossible to continue to exist. Such a situation is unacceptable.
Thus, the obligation to exercise authority with the appropriate speed means that the military must act to open the experiments efficiently, vigorously, and with due diligence. This is because the use of experiences is an interim solution designed to adapt the duty of equality imposed on the army to the reality currently prevailing on the ground and to the needs of the army, taking into account, among other things, planning constraints. Therefore, although certain constraints may lead to a delay in the implementation of the experiments, it is not possible to accept arguments that rely on these and other constraints for the purpose of postponing the experiments time and time again, in a manner that effectively renders them meaningless as a step on the way to the realization of the duty of equality. This is also worth noting that the amendments to the law that defined the IDF's duty to equality were enacted about half a century ago.
- Equipped with these insights on the fundamental level, we will return to our matter - and in particular to the question of what is the proper manner of realizing the duty of equality at this time, in view of the order nisi that was given in the petitions at hand (which even the army does not dispute its duty to act in accordance with what is stated therein). As stated, even though the remedies requested in the petitions dealt with the opening of those positions immediately and permanently, the wording of the order was limited to the opening of experiments. In doing so, the order nisi aimed at intermediate goals - operative, achievable and measurable, such as those that take into account the constraints of the army, and therefore are also practically feasible in the near term.
Accordingly, I do not believe that in examining the question of whether an order nisi has been answered, the military is entitled to depend on the need to maintain a moderate and gradual process and on the various constraints underlying it, in order to alleviate or soften the demand imposed on it. The order nisi was drafted from the beginning in a narrow manner as a gradual relief in a practical format that is within reach - In recognition of the necessity of a gradual process, and the fact that full fulfillment of the duty of equality imposed on the army cannot be immediate and is not "around the corner."
- The impression obtained from accompanying the petitions in recent years is that the military strives to meet its legal obligations. Experiments in the various units are opened from time to time, and impressive successes are even discovered in them. The lessons are being learned in a serious way. After the order nisi was issued in the petitions , the Chief of Staff set in motion the process of opening the experiments in various units in accordance with what was stated therein. However, I do not believe that the actions taken provided a full response to the three heads of the order nisi given in the petitions.
As for the maneuvering armored armor, - The trial, which was initially scheduled for the end of 2024, has been postponed Twice - And it is now fixed for November 2026. This was due to various constraints which, according to the respondents' position, did not allow the resources required to be directed to carry out the experiment. It is doubtful whether this conduct meets the requirement to conduct the experiments at the appropriate speed, and in any event, what is stated at the top of the order has not been fulfilled. In this context, I agree with my colleague that an important aspect of the order nisi that can be given relates to the timing of the opening of the experiments - "Already now and without waiting for the experiments to be completed In Units 669 and Yahalam".