Rejected by the inter-ministerial humanitarian committee? Review of appeal stages, petition to Appeals Tribunal, administrative petition, and relevant timelines.
Receiving a rejection letter from the inter-ministerial humanitarian committee is a difficult moment for anyone who based their request on complex life circumstances. It is important to know that rejection is not necessarily the end of the road: the law and procedures grant the applicant several options to challenge the decision, subject to strict deadlines. In this article we briefly explain what the humanitarian committee is, what a rejection decision looks like, and what legal steps are available to those who wish to continue and act.
The inter-ministerial humanitarian committee is a committee that advises the Head of the Population and Immigration Authority in examining applications for status in Israel on humanitarian grounds, submitted under the Entry into Israel Law, 5712-1952, and its operation is governed by Procedure 5.2.0022 (Inter-Ministerial Committee Procedure). Referral to the committee is relevant for those who do not meet the criteria of the authority's regular procedures (such as family reunification procedures or spousal status), but claim that there are exceptional humanitarian circumstances in their case that justify granting status.
The committee is composed of representatives from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Social Affairs, the Israeli Police, and a representative of "Nativ," chaired by the Head of the Permits and Status Department of the Population and Immigration Authority. Section 7.2 (ז.2) of the Procedure provides that the committee convenes once every thirty days and that approximately 25 cases are discussed in each session. Its recommendation is forwarded to the Head of the Authority for the final decision.
The decision on the application — whether given at an early stage in a Population Administration office, by the humanitarian committee department manager at headquarters, or by the Head of the Authority after committee discussion — should be delivered to the applicant in writing as a reasoned decision, by registered mail. In the body of the decision, the option available to appeal it must be noted, depending on the stage at which it was given.
It is important to distinguish between two possible routes:
• Early rejection (for example, "dismissal at the threshold" by a team leader in an office, or a department manager's decision not to forward the file to the committee) — Section 5.9 (ה.9) of Procedure 5.2.0022 lists the grounds for such a dismissal, including an application based on identical arguments already rejected under a different, dedicated procedure, or a frivolous application that raises no genuine ground. In such a case you may file an internal appeal within the Population and Immigration Authority. • Final rejection after committee discussion and the Head of Authority's decision — in such a case the procedure established is petitioning the Appeals Tribunal.
Beyond factual claims about the substance of the matter, there are grounds under Israeli administrative law that can be used in examining the reasonableness of an administrative decision, including:
• Lack of Reasoning — when the decision does not include a sufficient explanation of the considerations that led to rejection. • Procedural Defects — such as failure to provide a fair opportunity to present all claims and documents, or failure to conduct sufficient factual investigation. • Unreasonableness — when the weight given by the decision-maker to considerations goes to an extreme beyond what is reasonable in the circumstances of the case. • Extraneous Considerations or Discrimination — when there is suspicion that the decision was influenced by considerations not relevant to the application.
It should be noted that claims of this type are always examined within the context of a concrete case, and the presentation here does not constitute any guarantee that they will be accepted in any given case.
Insofar as the decision was made at a stage where the procedure allows, a single internal appeal may be filed against the decision, in accordance with Section 2.2 (ב.2) of Procedure 1.6.0001 (Procedure for Receiving Applications and Appeals against Decisions of Population Authority Offices and Headquarters). The appeal is filed in writing, without delay, and no later than 21 days from the date of receipt of the decision, and only at the office where the decision was issued. An appeal filed after the expiration of 21 days will not be processed, and notice thereof will be given to the applicant. There is no fee for filing the internal appeal.
When the rejection is final — that is, after the application has been examined by the inter-ministerial humanitarian committee and decided by the Head of the Population and Immigration Authority — Section 8.7 (ח.7) of Procedure 5.2.0022 stipulates that in the margins of the decision it must be noted that there is an option to appeal to the Appeals Tribunal in Jerusalem, under Section 13(23) (13כג) of the Entry into Israel Law, 5712-1952. The Appeals Tribunal is a specialized judicial body that hears appeals against certain decisions of the Population and Immigration Authority, and operates in accordance with the procedures established for this purpose. The appeal must be filed within the deadline specified by law — and do not wait, as delay may harm the right to appeal itself.
In addition to the appeal route, and depending on the circumstances of the specific proceeding, there is also the possibility of filing an administrative petition to the District Court, sitting as a Court for Administrative Matters, under the Administrative Courts Law, 5760-2000. This is the law that empowered the District Courts to hear types of administrative decisions that previously were only heard by the High Court of Justice.
With regard to time limits, the rule established in Regulation 3(b) of the Administrative Courts (Procedure) Regulations, 5761-2000, is that the petition must be filed without delay and no later than 45 days from the date of publication of the decision as required by law, or from the date of receiving notice of it, or from the date the petitioner learned of it — whichever is earliest. It is important to emphasize: filing within 45 days does not guarantee that the court will not dismiss the petition on grounds of delay if circumstances indicate unreasonable postponement in filing. Therefore, it is recommended to act as soon as possible from the date of receiving the decision, and not wait until close to the final deadline.
Judicial intervention in decisions of this kind is limited, since this is a status granted beyond the strict letter of the law; nevertheless, the decision remains subject to the rules of administrative law, and the tribunals do intervene when the reasoning or the factual basis is deficient. In Appeal (Jerusalem) 1186-20 (3 Aug 2021), the application of a mother of a minor Israeli citizen with special needs was rejected. The Appeals Tribunal held that the recommendation of the Ministry of Health representative — that the minor could also receive treatment in his country of origin — contradicted the professional opinions submitted and was not supported by any counter-opinion, and that the decision failed to address the minor's mental state. The matter was remanded to the committee for a new decision within 90 days.
The Supreme Court, too, has found that a partial factual basis justifies intervention: in LAA (Leave for Administrative Appeal) 2084/24 (14 May 2025), the appeal of a caregiver who had resided in Israel for decades was accepted, and the Appeals Tribunal's decision ordering the grant of an A/5 license was reinstated. The Court held that the Head of the Authority's decision focused on the fact that duration of stay is not, in itself, a humanitarian ground, but rested on a partial and inaccurate factual basis regarding her ties to her country of origin and the exceptional bond she had formed with the patient's family.
By contrast, in Appeal (Beer Sheva) 3063-24 (10 Aug 2025), an appeal against a threshold dismissal was denied, and the Tribunal reaffirmed that prolonged residence in Israel — certainly unlawful residence — does not by itself establish a humanitarian ground, and that ties created solely because of that residence are insufficient. And in Adm. Appeal (Jerusalem) 26268-11-23 (12 Feb 2024), the court held that even where the committee convened with an incomplete composition and its members' opinions were phrased briefly, this does not necessarily amount to a defect going to the root of the proceeding — since the decision is the Head of the Authority's, and it is the detailed reasoning in his decision that is examined.
Our office assists clients in examining the decision received from the humanitarian committee, in identifying possible defects in the process and in formulating the relevant legal arguments — whether as part of an internal appeal, an appeal to the Appeals Tribunal, or an administrative petition. The assistance includes careful examination of the committee's protocol and the reasoned decision, collection of supporting documents, and preparation of written arguments within the deadlines established by law. There is no guarantee of any result — each case is examined individually according to its facts.
Rejection by the humanitarian committee is not necessarily the end of the process, but it does place before the applicant short and strict deadlines for filing an appeal or petition. Early consultation with legal counsel immediately upon receiving the decision can be critical to preserving the right to challenge it. Our office is at your service for examination of the particular case — you can contact us via WhatsApp or the contact form on the website to arrange a consultation.
You may file a new application only if circumstances have substantially changed from the previous application. If this involves the same arguments that have already been rejected, the authority may dismiss a new application outright without forwarding it to committee review. Therefore, if there is no substantial factual change, it is usually better to proceed through the appeal or petition route within the established deadlines, rather than rely on filing a new application.
An internal appeal filed after the expiration of 21 days from the date of receiving the decision — will not be processed by the authority, and notice will be given to the applicant of this. In such a situation, you must quickly examine, depending on the stage at which the decision was made, whether there is still an option to petition the Appeals Tribunal or the Court for Administrative Matters, subject to the relevant deadlines for that proceeding.
As a rule, no. Section 1.1 (א.1) of Procedure 1.6.0001 expressly provides that the mere filing of an application or internal appeal, or scheduling an appointment to file one, does not prevent removal from Israel or placement in detention — unless otherwise established by a specific procedure, or unless a judicial decision has been issued ordering a stay of execution. It is important to examine this issue separately and urgently with a competent legal professional.
The time varies depending on the workload of the Appeals Tribunal or Court for Administrative Matters, the complexity of the case, and the need for supplementary filings. It is not possible to guarantee a fixed time frame, but you can work toward expedited handling by filing orderly and reasoned written arguments within the deadline.