Administrative Appeals Against Population and Immigration Authority Decisions
An overview of the paths available to challenge decisions of the Israeli Population and Immigration Authority — the Appeals Tribunal, the Administrative Court, and the High Court of Justice.
Written by Attorney Idan Moldavski — law office in Tel Aviv. ·
Decisions That Can Be Challenged
The Population and Immigration Authority issues thousands of decisions each year regarding the status of foreign nationals in Israel — refusals to extend residence permits, denials of asylum requests, revocations of existing status, and departure orders. These decisions are not final: Israeli law provides judicial review paths, provided they are pursued in time and in the correct legal manner.
Three Stages: Internal Appeal, the Appeals Tribunal, and Administrative Appeal
The first stage is an internal appeal within the Authority. Section ב.2.ב of Procedure 1.6.0001 (Procedure for Receiving Requests and Appeals Against Decisions of the Authority's Bureaus and Headquarters, 8th edition, 2022) provides that the appeal must be filed in writing, without delay and no later than 21 days from receipt of the decision, at the bureau that issued the decision. As a rule, only one internal appeal may be filed; it is reviewed by an official more senior than the one who issued the decision, and no fee is charged for it. The decision on the appeal must be reasoned in writing and must state the forum to which the matter may be taken further.
The second stage is an appeal to the Appeals Tribunal for immigration matters, under section 13כד of the Entry into Israel Law, 5712-1952, within 30 days from the date the decision was lawfully published or became known to the appellant. The Tribunal's subject-matter jurisdiction derives from the Second Schedule to the Law (section 13כג(א)): decisions on visas and residence permits, asylum, family reunification, and humanitarian status fall within its jurisdiction. Decisions not listed in the Schedule — including decisions under the Law of Return, 5710-1950, and applications to the Humanitarian Committee under section 7 of the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order), 5782-2022 — are challenged by an administrative petition to the District Court sitting as the Court for Administrative Affairs, not by an appeal.
The third stage is an administrative appeal (עמ"נ) against the Tribunal's judgment, to the District Court sitting as the Court for Administrative Affairs, within 45 days. An interim decision of the Tribunal — for example, denial of a request for an interim order staying removal — can likewise be challenged before the District Court sitting as the Court for Administrative Affairs. From there, the route to the Supreme Court is by leave only — an application for leave to appeal (בר"ם) against a judgment on an administrative appeal, as opposed to an administrative appeal (עע"מ) against a decision on an administrative petition (עת"ם). In constitutional matters, or where no effective remedy exists in another forum, recourse to the HCJ remains open.
Main Grounds for Review
The court examines each disputed decision through the classic grounds of judicial review — lack of authority, disproportionality, extraneous considerations, unlawful discrimination, procedural defects, and failure to reason the decision. The duty to give reasons is a foundational principle of Israeli administrative law: a decision that is unreasoned, or whose reasoning is shallow and fails to engage with substantive arguments raised before the authority, is administratively flawed and can be challenged.
Deadlines and Prompt Action
Deadlines in administrative law are very short — 21, 30, and 45 days respectively — and an extension is not to be taken for granted: regulation 6 of the Entry into Israel Regulations (Procedure and Administration in the Appeals Tribunal), 5774-2014, conditions an extension of time to file an appeal on a written application supported by an affidavit and on the existence of "special reasons." Late action may therefore block the path to challenging the decision. In urgent cases, an interim order may be sought to stay enforcement of the decision pending resolution of the proceeding on the merits — a particularly important tool where the decision involves removal or termination of status.
What the Case Law Shows
The question of jurisdiction is decided before the merits are reached. In Appeal (Be'er Sheva) 2506-25 (15 Jul 2025), concerning a refusal to extend a tourist visa, the Tribunal clarified that the appellants' claims to entitlement under the Law of Return were outside its subject-matter jurisdiction, since the Law of Return is not listed in the Second Schedule to the Entry into Israel Law. Similarly, in Appeal (Be'er Sheva) 4079-25 (5 Jan 2026), an appeal over the failure to respond was struck out once it emerged that the application had been referred to the Humanitarian Committee under section 7 of the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order) — a matter outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. The lesson: applying to the wrong forum does not save time, it wastes it.
Even where jurisdiction is clear, the scope of intervention is narrow. In Adm. Appeal (Jerusalem) 35764-05-25 (11 Aug 2025), an appeal against the dismissal of an appeal concerning an asylum request was rejected, and the court reiterated the rule that intervention in decisions of the Appeals Tribunal will be exercised only to a limited degree, given its special status and expertise, and only where a substantive flaw going to the root of the decision has been found. The implication: the weight falls on the appeal itself, and that is where the full factual and evidentiary foundation must be laid.
Nor is the route to the Supreme Court routinely open. In Leave to Appeal 69229-03-25 (30 Mar 2025) it was held that leave for a "third round" of appeal originating in a decision of the Appeals Tribunal will be granted sparingly, and only where a question of principle arises that goes beyond the parties' individual matter, or where special circumstances exist.
Legal Notice
This article is general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Each case is examined on its own merits.
Read more about this practice area — Administrative Law