The Supreme Court rejected the petition of the "Representatives of Society and the Environment" association, which demanded the cancellation of National Infrastructure Plan 80A, which seeks to regulate and expand the airport in Haifa. The petitioners claimed that an international airport complementary to Ben Gurion Airport should be established in Haifa, in accordance with NAMA 15, and claimed that the decision to shorten the runway is contrary to the possibility of carrying out future statutory planning that would allow the establishment of an international airport complementary to Ben Gurion Airport.
On the other hand, the judges ruled that the plan was intended for local regulation only, did not contradict the TAMA, and was made with professional judgment and full authority.
The Haifa Municipality partially joined the petition, supporting the establishment of a small international airport, which would operate only to nearby destinations in Europe, due to environmental and planning constraints, and not as a complementary airport to Ben Gurion Airport.
Interpretation
In the High Court's ruling last night (April 21.4.2025, XNUMX), it was determined (despite the rejection of the petition) that the last word has not yet been said regarding the location of the airport complementary to Ben Gurion Airport, and it is possible that the appropriate place would be Haifa:
"The state respondents declared before us, in writing and orally, that TATL 80A does not close the door on the possibility that a supplementary airport to Ben Gurion Airport will be established in Haifa. According to them, if a decision on this matter is made, an additional plan will be promoted in place of TATL 80A. This declaration by the state respondents is protected by the presumption of correctness." (The full ruling is attached below).
As a reminder, the petitioners tried to stop National Infrastructure Plan No. 80A (Tatol 80), according to which there would be no real extension of the runway in Haifa. According to Tatol 80A, the Airports Authority would extend the runway from its current length, approximately 1,100 meters net, to only approximately 1,247 meters (approximately 1,547 meters including safety margins).
Such a short route length will only allow flights to Greece.
Instead, according to the petitioners' approach, it would have been appropriate to consider approximately 2,400 m, as required by the national outline plan that deals with the expansion of airports in Israel (Tama 15). In the petitioners' approach, such a route would have brought about the dramatic change that the legislation dictated (Tama 15).
The Haifa Municipality, which appeared as a respondent in the petition, supported the petition, stating as follows:
"In the respondent's [Haifa Municipality's] position, TATL 80/A practically embodies the fracture of the vision. TATL 80/A establishes an extremely short runway length [which] will have difficulty supporting international charter flights on a significant scale."
Commentary on the Haifa Municipality's response:
In its response, the municipality expressed support for the implementation of the agreement it reached with the Ministry of Transportation in 2019. According to this agreement, the route will be extended to approximately 1,852 m net (approximately 2,100 m gross). It is understood that the municipality's alternative was not discussed in the petition itself, and the ruling did not address this alternative.
The Haifa Municipality is entitled to submit an alternative plan, but according to its response in the hearing, the chance of this is low, with the current composition of the municipality:
In the discussion that took place, the President of the Supreme Court suggested that the Haifa Municipality initiate an alternative plan:
"We will write a note and the Haifa Municipality, for example, can initiate a plan because we don't necessarily see this as the end of the story." (The protocol is also attached for readers' reference).
Since the petition was rejected, emphasizing that the Haifa Municipality can initiate a new plan to expand the field, the ball now moves to the municipality's court (which, as mentioned, also supported the petition).
Contrary to the ruling in the judgment, in fact, the petitioner did not claim that it was necessary to establish a supplementary airport to Ben Gurion Airport in Haifa. Instead, the petitioner claimed that according to previous plans (and in particular TAMA 15), it was necessary to promote a significant airport in Haifa, with runways 2,400 meters long (see sketch below).
According to the petitioner's sketch, the route can be extended into the sea, next to the Gulf Port:
Authority and legal validity
This is what Judge Stein's ruling stated: "The court is not a master planner," Stein stated, "and will not replace the discretion of the National Infrastructure Committee (NIC) with professional decisions." He emphasized that there are separate planning procedures (TAMA 15C and 15D) that examine the location of the complementary field to Ben Gurion Airport, and they are in the early stages. When a final decision is made within the framework of these procedures, it will be possible to appeal it.
The petitioner's alternative was not considered.
In practice, the petitioner's alternative was not examined by the National Infrastructure Committee in any way. Any other determination in the judgment does not reflect what was clearly presented, in the hearing and in the writings. The High Court apparently preferred to provide an alternative solution, that is, to emphasize that the Haifa Municipality reserves the right to initiate its own plan for extending the track.
At this stage, the question arises whether the Haifa Municipality will know how to take advantage of the opportunity given to it by the High Court judges.
In conclusion, it is worth reviewing the words of the President of the Supreme Court (Judge Yitzhak Amit) in his separate opinion.
(Yitzhak Amit was a judge in Haifa and has known the course of affairs for many years, in everything related to Haifa's airport and the map of interests in the region).
1. The petition before us demonstrates, in an unflattering manner, the long years that pass in our country until decisions are made and implemented, and until committee recommendations are implemented. Thus, following the recommendation of a public committee, a government decision was made in 2009 to examine and promote an international airport complementary to Ben-Gurion Airport. 16 years have passed and the planning procedures within the framework of TAMA 15C and 15D are still in the preparation stages, and as my colleague, Judge A. Stein, noted, "the last word regarding the location of the airport complementary to Ben-Gurion Airport has not yet been said."
2. This applies not only to international aviation, but also to civil aviation within the country. Since the recommendation of the Budinger Committee in 2009, 16 years have passed, and an alternative airport for the Herzliya airport has still not been determined, and the ruling states that "the incompetence of the executive authority, which has been aware for many years that a permanent solution must be found to relocate the activities of the Herzliya airport, as is apparent from the Budinger Committee report, which was adopted by the government in a decision back in 2009, must be deplored."
Hello readers
I have reviewed the article and the ruling and below are my general comments:-
1. I managed Haifa Airport between the years 1972-1974 and as such I was appointed as an inspector and investigator (according to the Aviation Law at the time).
2. In August 1974, I opened the airport to direct flights abroad, despite the opposition of those who were heads of the Civil Aviation Administration at the time. The first flights were for journalists who flew to Cyprus to cover the war that was then taking place on the island.
3. Between 1977 and 1977, I was in the United States to study for a master's degree in public administration with a specialization in transportation and aviation. At the same time, I studied flying at the Northwestern University Aviation Club and I hold a single-engine private pilot's license. In addition, I served - as a volunteer - as an observer for the American NTSB in air accident investigations.
4. I am not a "graduate" of the Air Force and therefore "my obligations are not to this force and its "needs" but to civil aviation issues. Or as someone who served as deputy commander of the Air Force in 1971 said to one of his officers, "In a democratic country, the Air Force and the army in general, should be subject to the limitations of the citizens and not put civilians under the limitations of the army." This was Benny Peled, who later became the commander of the Air Force, and the officer was a lieutenant colonel.
T (pilot) A.H.
5. From this it can be understood that the majority of those involved in civil aviation are either retired IAF personnel, or those who had no "promotional prospects" in the IAF.
6 Over the years, I prepared, together with a well-known naval engineer from Haifa, plans to extend the route to the sea, up to a length of about 3 kilometers.
7. Over the years, I met with the mayors of Haifa – 0 of them for generations – and I was unable to convince any of them of the necessity of the field in Haifa for the city and the entire north.
8. I will mention one economic detail. It has been determined that the cost of a dunam drained at sea is about a third of the cost of a dunam on land in Haifa Bay.
9. I will not tire the readers (if there are any) with the data, I will only point out that I am open to presenting the data to any committee and/or authority that would be willing to hear an opinion from a "citizen" who is not a graduate of the Air Force.
A stupid and irresponsible decision by the Naha Municipality. We are not allowing our region, our city, and our residents to develop! Every city, even a small one, in Europe has its own international airport!
Just as they knew how to drain 800 dunams for an artificial island for the Gulf Port, they could drain an artificial island for an airport north of Atlit and connect the airport to the Atlit train station and the Atlit interchange.
They are drying out a flat area in the Atlit Bay near the Salt Island, filling it in like they do at the Gulf Port, and building a terminal and runway.
We must be united. In Haifa, why travel to study, we want a livelihood for more workers
In my opinion, it is possible to establish an airport without any restrictions on the area that will be vacated if the refineries and other polluting factories are evacuated, as they will be. There is a large, flat area in the place that no one would want to live in due to the soil pollution, and an airport can be established there without the restrictions of the Gulf Port cranes, urban area, or wind directions.
Instead of the Haifa Municipality developing Haifa and supporting a large international airport worthy of a metropolitan city in the north, they prefer to put Haifa to sleep with a big yawn.
They could have extended the airport in Haifa to the northwest a long time ago, there's a whole kilometer to the sea, at the expense of part of the port. Which would have made the airport about 2.3 km long, not perfect but at least good for flights to Eastern Europe, Italy, and a few other countries. Another decision that leads to nothing and nothing
Exactly like that...long years pass until you are accepted
Decision, international airport in the north (Haifa)
Should have stood up years ago…for some reason
Civil servants and elected officials care more about receiving their paychecks than completing projects.
The time has come for us, as residents of Haifa, to have a large airport that will serve all purposes. The residents of Greater Haifa need a large airport, and this will complete the hassle in all the cities in the north, reducing the congestion in the center. I hope that vested interests will not be an obstacle to the well-being of the residents.
Despair. A country that is marching in reverse. Excess legalization, excess bureaucracy, rulings instead of action.
Every country with a population of 10-15 million already has 2-3 international airports.
They harm tourism. They harm competition. They harm the development of the North.
The second international airport was built near Eilat, bravo. A remote city of 60 gets an international airport, but the northern region with 3 million residents doesn't. Makes sense...
Is it simply a disgrace to journalism to let a petitioner write an article and commentary on a stay of proceedings granted to his petition?
Dvir Langer is the petitioner, and doesn't even mention this fact once.
As usual, misinterpretation.
Haifa's regional airport will be built in Ramat David.
Haifa Airport is not suitable for instrument flying. 6 different committees have determined this.
Who put you there? What is important is what is good for the citizens, that there will be a normal field in Haifa Khales
Too bad I wish there was an airport 3 Amen waiting like everyone else
What prevents you from extending the route?
In the current place? The Chinese cranes?
So we should ask Trump to bomb them! Go 3 km deeper into the sea
Construction route towards Kiryat Yam Terminal
Huge with businesses for hundreds of employees from the districts. No need to say what will be under the track….
And so we won't have to come from the north to the disgusting center!!!!!!
+ 1000000!
I didn't understand anything!!