High Court Demands Netanyahu Explain Delay on Oct. 7 State Probe
The High Court of Justice took a significant step on Wednesday, directing the government to explain why it has avoided launching a full state commission of inquiry into the failures surrounding the Hamas atrocities of October 7, 2023. In its order, the court demanded a clear justification for the refusal to convene a formal commission that could “examine in an independent, professional, and impartial manner” what led to and followed the devastating assault.
Unlike standard petitions, a preliminary order flips the legal burden onto the government itself, signaling that the justices regard the complaints filed by several liberal watchdog organizations as weighty and credible. The ruling forces the government to defend its stance rather than leaving petitioners to prove their case.
The judges gave the government until January 4 to file its response. That deadline now puts pressure on officials who, earlier this week, attempted to preempt criticism by announcing plans for a government-approved investigative body. A ministerial panel has already been established to outline which aspects of the October 7 disaster such a body would be allowed to examine.
Although the coalition has described its planned inquiry as “independent,” its scope and boundaries will be set entirely by a small circle of cabinet members, headed by Justice Minister Yariv Levin. Their authority includes determining what will be reviewed and what will remain outside the commission’s mandate.
With the exception of Finance Ministry minister Ze’ev Elkin, every member of this panel occupied their government positions on the day thousands of Hamas terrorists burst across the border, murdering roughly 1,200 Israelis and kidnapping 251 others—an assault that launched the war against Hamas in Gaza. By the end of December, the committee is expected to present its recommendation on the structure and mission of the proposed commission.
For months, the coalition has fought to avoid a fully independent state commission of inquiry—an arrangement in which the Supreme Court president selects the investigators. Families of those killed and abducted on October 7, as well as many of Netanyahu’s political opponents, have repeatedly demanded no less, insisting that only a state commission holds the necessary authority to expose critical policy and intelligence failures.
Surveys consistently show that most Israelis favor such a robust investigative framework. Still, Netanyahu has rejected it, largely because a state commission would be appointed by the judiciary—an institution his government has spent years attempting to weaken through sweeping judicial overhaul legislation.
The overhaul, announced by Levin in January 2023, sparked nationwide protests that lasted until the Hamas invasion abruptly shifted the nation’s focus. Members of the anti-overhaul movement in the reserves warned at the time that they might refuse to continue reporting for duty if the laws passed, a threat that Netanyahu allies have since used to shift blame for the October 7 collapse onto government critics.
Before the war, top security officials—and then-defense minister Yoav Gallant—cautioned Netanyahu that the overhaul was endangering national stability by tearing at Israel’s social and institutional cohesion. Security chiefs had also opposed Netanyahu’s long-running policy of allowing Qatar to transfer millions of dollars to Hamas each month, money the prime minister argued was designated for civil servant salaries, even as his own close associates faced investigations tied to Qatar.
{Matzav.com}
