AJ
⚡️ Netanyahu refuses to dismiss Itamar Ben-Gvir after High Court ruling
🔹 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the High Court of Justice on Wednesday that there were no legal or administrative grounds to dismiss National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir.
🔹 Netanyahu rejected Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara’s renewed argument that continued interference in police affairs had made his removal necessary.
🔹 The filing makes clear that Netanyahu will not remove Ben-Gvir voluntarily, leaving the court to determine whether it should compel him to do so or continue relying on narrower restrictions intended to protect the police’s professional independence.
🔹 After reviewing the attorney-general’s latest submission and receiving a detailed response from Ben-Gvir, Netanyahu’s position remained unchanged, his attorneys wrote.
🔹 Ben-Gvir’s appointment was lawful, they said, and none of the incidents raised by the A-G or the petitioners established grounds for his “administrative or judicial removal,” so the government asked the court to reject all four petitions, seeking to force Netanyahu to dismiss him.
🔹 The prime minister’s attorneys accused Baharav-Miara of informing the government for the first time via a court filing that negotiations over detailed restrictions on Ben-Gvir’s conduct had been exhausted, arguing that she should have raised that position directly with the government before asking the court to intervene.
Disputes followed an effort ordered by the High Court in April to draw a clearer line between Ben-Gvir’s authority to set general police policy and prohibited involvement in individual investigations, appointments, protests, and operational decisions.
The court gave binding force to an agreed framework of principles, ordered the sides to draft more detailed procedures, and imposed immediate restrictions concerning investigations, police use of force and sensitive appointments, and the arrangement was adopted after a nine-justice panel spent nearly 10 hours hearing the petitions but stopped short of ordering Ben-Gvir’s dismissal.
A-G says Ben-Gvir intervenes in operational matters, abuses authority position
🔹 Baharav-Miara told the court in July that the additional safeguards had failed, saying Ben-Gvir had continued to comment on ongoing investigations, intervene in operational matters, and use his authority in ways that threatened the professional and apolitical character of the police.
🔹 The A-G’s office said four meetings held between April 26 and May 6 failed to resolve fundamental disputes over contacts between Ben-Gvir and police officers; his involvement in promotions; and his participation in police activity while operations were underway; despite the prohibition of using political influence in investigations and protests.
🔹 Netanyahu rejected the conclusion that those disagreements indicated that Ben-Gvir opposed police independence.
🔹 The minister’s response expressly accepted that the police must operate according to law, equality of all before the law, [entitled, without any discrimination, to equal protection of the law] without political considerations, the government’s filing said.
🔹 A failure to agree on every provision of the proposed procedures did not amount to grounds for disqualifying or removing a serving minister, it argued.
🔹 Netanyahu also rejected the A-G’s attempt to treat the incidents as a cumulative pattern. His attorneys accused her of inflating isolated events and attempting to turn individual “grains” into a broader “cluster” despite what they described as a weak and incomplete evidentiary basis.
🔹 Some of the conduct cited by Baharav-Miara involved actions that were within the minister’s competences, the filing argued; while other incidents concerned public statements supporting police officers rather than attempts to undermine police independence.
🔹 The government further argued that individual administrative decisions by Ben-Gvir could be challenged separately in court and that the current petitions were not the proper forum for reviewing every appointment, statement, or decision attributed to him.
Jerusalem court rules Ben-Gvir’s refusal to approve police supt. promotion unlawful
🔹 One such decision has already produced a direct judicial finding against the minister. In February, the Jerusalem District Court ordered Ben-Gvir to approve the promotion of Police Supt. Rinat Saban, ruling that his refusal was unlawful, influenced by irrelevant considerations and harmful to police independence.
🔹 Baharav-Miara and the petitioners have cited the ruling as evidence that Ben-Gvir crossed the line between policy-setting and improper political intervention.
🔹 The A-G’s latest submission also cited Ben-Gvir’s public defense of police Commander Avishai Moalem during an investigation by the Justice Ministry’s Police Investigation Department, his response to police use of stun grenades at an anti-draft demonstration, his participation in a call concerning police protection for a private business network, and delays in sensitive appointments.
🔹 Those incidents demonstrated that measures short of dismissal had not succeeded, Baharav-Miara argued. Netanyahu’s refusal to act had instead encouraged the minister to continue, she said.
🔹 Netanyahu’s filing also urged the court to exercise particular restraint during the election period. It noted that the Knesset entered its election recess on July 18 ahead of the October 27 election and argued that the government’s decisions would soon be subject to public judgment.
🔹 His attorneys cited a 2006 High Court ruling that warned of the political sensitivity of judicial intervention in a prime minister’s decision to dismiss a minister shortly before an election.
🔹 Even if the court disapproved of a minister’s conduct, the filing argued, that did not necessarily make the prime minister’s decision unlawful.
🔹 The government also maintained that Ben-Gvir meets the formal constitutional requirements for serving as a minister and that the doctrine previously used to require the removal of ministers facing serious criminal charges does not apply in his case.
🔹 During the April hearing, several justices expressed concern about the allegations against Ben-Gvir but also questioned whether the court had the authority and practical tools to impose the unprecedented remedy sought. Justices raised difficulties surrounding the disputed factual record and explored enforcement mechanisms that would stop short of dismissal.
Ben-Gvir welcomed Netanyahu’s filing on Wednesday and again attacked the A-G.
🔹 “I congratulate the prime minister on his clear response to the criminal attorney-general,” he said. “Deep-state officials have no authority whatsoever to remove ministers from office. After the elections, we will remove the deep-state officials.”
