IIThe case at hand, even though the court hoped for a solution to the dispute in question by agreement when it followed the path of accompanying the petitions, and despite the fact that the respondents had come a long way - The current situation, in which the respondents are not yet fully compliant with their obligations and the petitioners insist on their petitions, does not allow for a ruling beyond the letter of the law.
- Third, from the declarative-educational perspective, the acceptance of the petitions is not limited only to the operative aspect of it, but it also carries a public-declaratory purpose. It is directed at the petitioners - who will be relieved that their voices are heard; it serves as a sign for candidates coming to serve in the security service - who are assured that they will be measured only by their qualifications; and it is visible to the public as a whole - who will know that the principle of equality does not skip the ranks of the army and its positions as well, and that the statutory duties that apply to the army are properly enforced. It is also aimed at the driver of the Merkava tank, the battle navigator, the battalion headquarters and the air defense fighter - whose actions deserve to be appreciated. Since this issue is part of a change whose roots are not only in law and the military, but also in social and cultural perceptions, the declarative aspect is of paramount importance.
- On the operative level, my conclusion is therefore that the order nisi given to an absolute order should be made.
As stated, the order nisi granted in the petitions marks a "first step" - When the road to proper execution of the experiences that are the subject of the order is long - and obligates them to continue to be fulfilled in a manner that is consistent with their purpose. In light of this, I also accept that there is room to distinguish between the heads of the order nisi. In relation to two of the three heads of the order - An initial response was provided to what was stated in them in the form of the opening of experiments in infantry mobility and in the General Staff Commando Unit. As noted, these actions should be regarded as a "first swallow," and the military is obligated in this regard to continue to do so in accordance with the criteria detailed above. In any case, with regard to these two heads, I am satisfied - And not without hesitation - Because the IDF is currently fulfilling its duties. Things are different as far as the head is concerned, which is concerned with opening the experiment with the maneuvering armor - As stated, there is no dispute that the army does not meet its obligations.