The Winograd Committee on Monday released a statement according to which they will launch a website on which testimony protocols from past deliberations will be made available to the public.

Prior to their online release, the protocols would have to be approved for release by a special body that will be appointed for the matter.

The statement follows a High Court of Justice decision last week to recommend that the committee, which is investigating the conduct of the second Lebanon war, consider opening its meetings to the public and to release when possible protocols of testimonies delivered.

	Advertisement

The court's decision was unanimously approved by Supreme Court President Dorit Benisch, Deputy Supreme Court President Eliezer Rivlin and Justice Ayala Procaccia, in their decision on a petition submitted by Meretz faction whip Zahava Gal-On.

Gal-On requested in her petition an open-door policy for Winograd meetings and to publish protocols of the deliberations, except in cases where the testimony could cause real harm to state security. In addition, Gal-On asked for a temporary injunction to be issued freezing the panel's deliberations and testimonials until her petition had been ruled upon.

The court rejected Gal-On's petition and opted only to direct the committee to adhere to the general rule of openness in deliberations.

The justices ruled in response to the petition that if additional testimonies were heard in the next stage of the panel's deliberations, "it is presumed that the committee will operate according to the general rule of openness in deliberations, and will examine the question of allowing testimonies to be heard - in full, or partially - in public."

The Winograd Committee has the right to exercise its own judgment as to the level of privilege given to testimonies and has yet to open any of its meeting to the public.

The committee has explained that privileged segments of testimonies cannot clearly be separated from those that can be disclosed, and that witnesses speak more freely when the press is not present.

The High Court of Justice in its decision stressed the importance of making legal discussion public, saying that "making deliberations public would strengthen the public's trust in the authorities in general and in the committee discussing the matter in particular."

"Whenever possible and when no risks for state security are involved, Winograd Committee deliberations should be opened to the public."