Israel’s Attorney General declares Prime Minister Netanyahu’s security chief appointment “illegal” in a dramatic power struggle that threatens to undermine national security during wartime.
Key Takeaways
- Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara has declared Prime Minister Netanyahu’s nomination of General David Zini as new Shin Bet chief “invalid and illegal.”
- The Supreme Court had previously ruled against the dismissal of current Shin Bet director Ronen Bar, creating a constitutional standoff.
- Netanyahu faces accusations of conflict of interest related to “Qatargate” investigation involving his office.
- Government ministers have accused the Attorney General of politically motivated interference in critical security appointments.
- The dispute highlights growing tension between Israel’s judiciary and executive branch during wartime.
Constitutional Crisis Over Security Leadership
A major constitutional showdown is unfolding in Israel as Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara has officially declared Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s nomination of Army Major General David Zini to head the Shin Bet security service “invalid and illegal.” This dramatic ruling directly challenges the Prime Minister’s authority over key security appointments and comes at a time when Israel faces multiple security threats. The conflict centers on Netanyahu’s attempt to replace current Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar despite a Supreme Court ruling that protected Bar from dismissal.
Baharav-Miara’s legal opinion explicitly states that Netanyahu’s decision “ignores the rulings” of Israel’s Supreme Court, which had previously intervened to block Bar’s removal. The Attorney General further argued that Netanyahu should recuse himself entirely from the appointment process due to potential conflicts of interest. The legal opinion suggests the unprecedented step of delegating nomination authority to another minister, effectively stripping the Prime Minister of one of his core security responsibilities during wartime.
Conflict of Interest Allegations
At the heart of this dispute is the so-called “Qatargate” investigation involving Netanyahu’s office, which directly implicates the Prime Minister in the Shin Bet succession battle. Baharav-Miara’s opinion explicitly stated: “Your decision regarding major general Zini, made in a situation of conflict of interest and contradicting the conclusions of the judgment as well as the judicial directives in force, is illegitimate and illegal.” The Attorney General further demanded Netanyahu “must refrain from any action related to the appointment of a new head of the Shin Bet.”
“The attorney general is damaging Israel’s security. We are talking about a political actor whose sole objective is to overthrow the government,” said Education Minister Yoav Kisch.
This extraordinary situation has created a stark division within the Israeli government. Coalition ministers have rallied behind Netanyahu, accusing Baharav-Miara of politically motivated interference in critical national security matters. The timing is particularly sensitive as Israel continues military operations in Gaza and faces threats from multiple fronts, making stable leadership of the domestic intelligence agency a paramount concern for national security.
Netanyahu Pushes Forward Despite Legal Obstacles
Despite the Attorney General’s ruling, Netanyahu remains determined to proceed with Zini’s appointment, calling it “a security requirement of the highest order.” The Prime Minister’s defiance signals his unwillingness to yield to judicial constraints on his executive authority, especially in matters of national security. Even though current Shin Bet chief Bar has indicated he plans to step down in June regardless of the court ruling, Netanyahu’s insistence on forcing the issue has created an unnecessary constitutional crisis.
“Your decision regarding major general Zini, made in a situation of conflict of interest and contradicting the conclusions of the judgment as well as the judicial directives in force, is illegitimate and illegal,” Attorney General Gali Baharav Miara stated in her formal ruling.
The ongoing battle has now drawn in various Israeli institutions, with non-profit organizations threatening legal challenges to Zini’s appointment and the government calling for removal of “obstacles” to expedite the process. The appointment still requires ratification by a vetting committee and cabinet approval, creating multiple potential flashpoints for further conflict between the executive and judicial branches. This power struggle exposes the fragility of Israel’s constitutional system when faced with determined executive action that challenges judicial authority.
