Let me sum it up: not every rule has to be an exception, and not every exception has to become a "rule" regarding the existence of an exception.
Second, the examination and regulation of the subject, including the possibility of exceptions, should be reserved for the legislature. Two examples can be presented. One is taken from England, where a report was recently prepared concerning a proposal for reform of the search laws, with an emphasis on a search of computer material. The report includes more than 550 pages, and its preparation took about four years. In addition to the fact that in the dozens of recommendations that were presented, there is no recommendation to hold a hearing in the presence of both parties in exceptional cases, it contains many important recommendations, both with regard to the manner of filing an application for a search warrant by electronic device, and with regard to the manner in which the application is examined and the search is carried out (see paragraph 19 of my opinion in the Shimon case). A second example is the Criminal Procedure Bill (Enforcement Powers - Invention, Search and Seizure), 5774-2014, Government Bill 574, which is still on the legislature's table. In the framework of this proposal, in the preparation of which many parties were involved, it was explicitly determined that the hearing of a search warrant would be held ex parte (section 99(a)(1) of the bill). At the same time, there is one exception to this rule, insofar as it is stated in the application for search warrants, but this exception is not one of the exceptions proposed by my colleague the President: where the warrant is not directed against the person suspected of an offense, then the court may order a hearing in the presence of the person against whom the warrant is directed or who is liable to be harmed by it (ibid., section 99(a)(6)). These examples illustrate the many differences and subtleties in this matter, in which every small detail can create extensive ripples and affect many cases and systems. Thus, especially taking into account the situation in the comparative trial, and the fact that we were not presented with a similar arrangement with respect to the exceptions to the rule of ex parte hearing prior to the issuance of the search warrant, certainly not one created by the court. As I noted in the Shimon case in this regard: