What’s happened: Ronen Bar, the director of the Shin Bet, has filed two sworn affidavits with the Israeli Supreme Court that contain a number of dramatic accusations against the Prime Minister. 

• The two documents include an eight-page affidavit that has been made public, as well as a 31-page document including classified documents. The latter document has not been shared with the public, but has been shared with the Prime Minister.
• Among the claims in the affidavit:
  • The supposed “loss of trust” that was the Prime Minister’s reason for demanding Bar’s dismissal did not exist during the period before the outbreak of war or even for the entire first year of the war, but suddenly emerged as soon as Bar ordered the investigation of ties between leading figures in the Prime Minister’s Bureau and Qatar.
  • The Prime Minister, or those close to him, asked Bar to sign a statement that the Prime Minister could not testify in his trial for security reasons; he refused.
  • The Prime Minister requested that the Shin Bet conduct surveillance of leaders of the movement protesting the Government’s judicial reforms in 2023 pursuant to the Shin Bet’s legal authority to monitor “subversion.” Bar argued that the protest movement did not meet the legal standard for subversion and refused.
  • The Prime Minister sought assurances from Bar that in the event of a constitutional crisis, the Shin Bet would obey the Government and not a ruling from the Supreme Court. 
• Also in the affidavit, Bar dissects what he holds to be false accusations against him regarding warnings given to the Prime Minister before the October 7 massacre, specifically relating to accusations regarding his actions during the night before the attack.
• He also notes that he has been among the many voices inside the security establishment demanding a state commission of inquiry into the failures of October 7, but the Prime Minister and his associates have blocked this at every turn.
• Netanyahu called the affidavit “a false statement” and his office disputed in particular the timeline of events Bar claimed regarding the night before the October 7 invasion. 
• Elsewhere, associates of the Prime Minister sought to clarify his concerns about the security threats he might face in testifying, rejecting the suggestion of Bar’s affidavit that Netanyahu was seeking to use the Shin Bet to attain a blanket exemption from appearing at his own trial.

Context: Concurrently, the security cabinet met last night to discuss the operation in Gaza and the hostage negotiations. For now, no decision has been made on expanding the operation while negotiations are still ongoing.

• There are some in the cabinet calling for a broader, more comprehensive military operation, whilst the Prime Minister and Defence Minister currently prefer to maintain the current deployment, and give the diplomatic track some more time.  
• The cabinet also discussed the issue of Humanitarian Aid, with IDF Chief of Staff Zamir, maintaining his predecessor’s approach that it would not be the IDF’s role to distribute aid.  Whilst the professional echelon continues to closely monitor supplies, no decision was made to renew the flow of aid into Gaza. 
• With Bar in attendance, tensions between ministers and the Shin Bet Director whom the ministers unanimously voted to fire spilled out in the open repeatedly during the meeting, especially in comments by Finance Minister Smotrich. Smotrich also apparently left the room whenever it was Bar’s turn to speak.
• The Court has given Netanyahu the option of submitting a counter-affidavit by this Thursday. It is not yet clear if the Prime Minister will avail himself of this opportunity, which he could use to refute Bar’s charges but which could prove legally and politically problematic for him. If there are two affidavits with conflicting claims, the Court will have to hold a hearing and make public and binding determinations about the truth of each of the claims.  
• The Court had originally asked Bar for his affidavit by Sunday. Bar requested an extension and was granted until noon Monday. According to various media reports, there were various efforts made by associates of the Prime Minister to reach a compromise with Bar about his departure that would have involved Bar ultimately not filing an affidavit at all.
• The basic thrust of these compromise efforts, according to reports, was that Bar would have some say in the appointment of his successor. As Bar himself was planning on taking responsibility for the Shin Bet’s failures on October 7 and resigning, this compromise was seen as answering his principal publicly stated concern: not saving his own job, but rather ensuring that his successor was a professional and not someone who would just do the bidding of the Prime Minister.
• Until just before noon on Monday, it was still unclear whether a compromise had been reached or whether Bar would ultimately file his affidavit. The affidavit, and the grave accusations made against the Prime Minister in it, make it very unlikely that Bar will have a say in choosing the man or woman who will take over the Shin Bet when he does leave.
• An affidavit is effectively sworn testimony. If any of it is untrue, the person submitting it is liable to perjury charges, quite unlike the case with say a television interview or an anonymous leak.
• Netanyahu’s supporters have been eager to point out that a substantial portion of the blame for October 7 lies with Bar and therefore it is perfectly reasonable for the government to decide to end his tenure early.

Looking Ahead: Netanyahu has until tomorrow to submit his own affidavit to the Court, though it is possible that some compromise on a date for Bar’s departure will be reached beforehand. 

• The Court has barred the Government from appointing a new Shin Bet Director while it hears the case.
• Thus far, the Government has adhered to the Court’s interim ruling. If the Court ultimately rules against the Government, there will be tremendous pressure on the Government by some ministers to ignore it.

What’s happened: A midlevel Shin Bet agent has been held for eight days, the first four without access to a lawyer, on suspicion of stealing classified documents from the agency and sharing them with a politician and two reporters.

• According to prosecutors he took classified documents and shared them without authorisation.
• The leaker met with Amichai Chikli, Minister of Diapora Affairs, and shared with him stolen documents revealing a Shin Bet investigation into alleged far-right (Kahanist) infiltration in the Israel Police and Israel Prison Service. Details of the investigation were revealed by prominent Israeli journalist Amit Segal in March, leading the Shin Bet to investigate the leak.
• Notably, Segal’s report included a photo of an original document, indicating not just that someone spoke to a journalist about an internal matter without authorisation but rather that classified material was stolen from the premises.
• At the time, the Shin Bet responded to Segal’s report by saying “The Kach and Kahane Chai organisations were declared illegal in 1994 and have been classified as terror organisations since 2016. Their activities continued afterwards and the [Shin Bet] has worked to unearth them and to thwart them in keeping with its duties under the law. The more information that comes in, the [Shin Bet] also deals with suspicions that these elements have infiltrated state organisations, particularly law enforcement.”
• During yesterday’s court session at the Lod District Court, police representatives said, “This case is not about a leak; leak doesn’t accurately describe the allegations. This is a case in which a longtime Shin Bet employee has betrayed the trust put in him by the virtue of his position, removed classified documents and provided them to unauthorised individuals…He took the trust placed in him by the public, extracted secret materials from the Shin Bet computers and passed them on to various parties. By the acts attributed to him and which were bolstered by the investigation, the suspect has proved in fact that he lacks restraint.”
• Earlier this week, two Likud MKs, Gotliv and Boaron, ignored a court-imposed gag order on the case, with Gotliv accusing Shin Bet Director Bar of “settlings scores.”
• The Shin Bet investigation into potential Kahanist infiltration apparently only reached a very preliminary fact-finding stage, and has not led to any criminal charges. Another story that had its origin in allegedly stolen documents leaked by the same suspect was published in the free daily Israel Hayom and was widely interpreted as being critical of the Shin Bet’s Director in a manner consistent with the claims made against him by supporters of the prime minister.

Context: News of the investigation and arrest provoked heated reactions and added to the internal tensions surrounding the inquiries into October 7^th, the end of the ceasefire, and the negotiations for the release of the remaining Israeli hostages held in Gaza.

• The revelation provoked an angry reaction from the right, especially from those in the milieu of Itamar Ben-Gvir, who came to prominence in Israel in Kahanist circles, but who oversees both the Police and the Prison Service as a Minister in a democratically elected government. For the right, this story is viewed as a criminalisation of democratic politics and an abuse of the Shin Bet (many have taken to referring to it in Hebrew as the “secret police”) to stymie an elected government’s policies.
• The leaker has an active social media presence and is a consistent supporter of Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli right, often criticising the protest movement arrayed against the prime minister and the current government.
• It is widely assumed that the purpose of the leaks was to damage the reputation of Ronen Bar, the current Director of the Shin Bet and, in recent months, target of Netanyahu’s ire. In far-right media circles, the conspiracy theory that Bar knew about the impending Hamas massacre but deliberately did not wake the prime minister up on the morning of October 7^th — something that, according to the conspiracy theory’s adherents would have prevented it — has been increasingly gaining currency.
• This latest scandal compounds already fraught relations between the government and the Shin Bet. Earlier this week a  security cabinet meeting was cancelled after Finance Minister Smotrich refused to participate if the Shin Bet chief Bar was in attendance. 
• In a further example of a breakdown in relations, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Katz were in the Gaza Strip yesterday with military commanders, but in a break from the norm, there was no representative of the Shin Bet in attendance. 
• This affair joins other ongoing investigations involving the leaking of classified documents which also deepen the political fissure in Israel. In one case, associates of the prime minister are suspected of leaking intelligence to the German newspaper Bild in an attempt to influence Israeli public opinion on the hostage issue. In another, figures also in the Prime Minister’s orbit are suspected of receiving money to do PR work for Qatar.

Looking ahead: The suspect in the new leak affair is due court later today to hear if his remand will be extended.

• For now, the prime minister has chosen to respect the Supreme Court’s ruling that he not replace the director of the Shin Bet. 
• According to the court ruling last week, the government and Bar have until April 20th to reach a compromise over when his tenure will end.

What happened:  After 11 hours, the Supreme Court President Yitzhak Amit brought yesterday’s hearing to an end by placing a temporary injunction against the immediate removal of the head of the Shin Bet and urging the sides to compromise.

• The court instructed that no moves be taken aimed at ending Ronen Bar’s tenure such as announcing a replacement or an acting director. However, the court stated there is no problem with the cabinet interviewing potential candidates for the job. 
• The court gave Bar and Prime Minister Netanyahu until after the Passover festival to submit affidavits in support of their factual arguments.
• In his closing remarks which discussed compromise, Justice Amit noted “sparks of willingness” from the cabinet secretary (representing the government) and the attorney general.  Amit said, “We are giving them until after Passover to reach a creative solution to the extent possible. We encourage as much dialogue as possible.”
• Justice Daphne Barak-Erez concurred, saying, “We are not obliging and not taking a position. We are allowing you to submit something jointly.”
• The third judge Justice Noam Sohlberg (considered a conservative) said, “You all know how to be creative and quick when need be, and how to bear the overriding interest in mind.”
• The start of the hearing was interrupted by some spectators – including a bereaved father whose son was killed fighting in Gaza – heckling the judges and arguing that they had no authority. The bereaved father was removed from the courtroom.
• The firebrand Likud MK Tally Gotliv was also removed for repeatedly interrupting the proceedings. Her outburst led the presiding judge to temporarily suspend the hearing and asked court security guards to remove all spectators “to allow all sides to make their arguments without fear.”
• Following the ruling, the Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement saying it was “puzzled” by the decision. Adding, “It is inconceivable that the cabinet should be barred from removing a failed Shin Bet director from office only because an investigation has been begun that does not pertain to even a single minister.”  
• The chances for compromise are considered slim. In one suggestion, Justice Barak-Erez suggested waiting to fire Bar until the investigations into the Qatargate and the leak of classified documents to the German Bild tabloid have been completed, adding that “Once those investigations have been completed, there will no longer be a conflict of interest,” she said. 
• Attorney Amir, representing the government, rejected this, “That is a dangerous message. Every Shin Bet director will know that if he wants to keep his job forever, all he has to do is open an investigation.” Justice Amit called that a conspiracy theory “that ascribes ulterior motives to the entire world.” 
• When faced with the judges’ ruling urging further dialogue, the lawyer representing the government compared the situation to divorce hearing, “forcing a husband and wife to stay together.” 

Context: The government’s attempts to dismiss the head of the Shin Bet represents the latest clash between the government that argues it is exercising its authority and the legal establishment that sees its role as defending the gatekeepers.

• Recognising the danger of a potential constitutional crisis – in which the government rejects a court order – the judges urged the sides to compromise.
• The government’s perspective is that they represent the elected leaders and are within their authority to dismiss a civil servant (even a senior figure) if they no longer have confidence in them. The firing of Bar comes after all the other senior security officials (including the IDF Chief of Staff, head of southern command, head of military intelligence and others) who were in charge on October 7th have all left office.             
• The Attorney General Baharav-Miara (herself facing a similar challenge – the government is looking to remove her) wrote to the court saying that, “The decision to terminate the tenure of the Shin Bet director is fundamentally flawed, tainted by a personal conflict of interest of the prime minister because of the criminal investigation into his associates.”
  • It was Bar who initiated the investigation into the Qatargate scandal with the prime minister’s inner team.
  • Having taken responsibility for the Shin Bet failure on October 7th, Bar has publicly called for a formal state commission of inquiry into the massacre, a move rejected by the government. The Shin Bet’s internal inquiry also flagged failures of the government’s policy in the years preceding the Hamas attack.
  • It was revealed earlier this week that Netanyahu allegedly requested that Bar intervene in the prime minister’s corruption trial and have it postponed due to security challenges facing the country, and the personal security threat he might face. As a result, the Shin Bet recommended holding the trial in an underground facility in the Tel Aviv courtroom.
• Bar, who did not attend the hearing yesterday also wrote a letter to the court that was appended to the attorney general’s letter. Bar wrote, “The implications of advancing proceedings to end my tenure, which are being done hastily during a sensitive period, while criminal investigations are underway regarding the prime minister’s associates, without a proper proceeding and an itemisation of the allegations, and without giving me a fair chance to respond to the allegations, effectively delivers a clear message to the entire chain-of-command in the General Security Service (Shin Bet) and to the future directors of the Shin Bet that if the political echelon comes to dislike them, their termination will be immediately on the table.”
• Bar also addressed the Qatargate investigation in his letter, writing: “It is my job to ensure that the clear public interest that stems from the severity of the allegations, which is to reach the truth in this sensitive, complex and important issue, is enacted.”
• In response the Prime Minister’s Office issued a statement, “The lack of confidence in the Shin Bet director that was created for the prime minister and all the members of the cabinet – without exception – did not stem from a question of personal loyalty but, rather, stemmed from a lack of confidence in his performance after his decisive role in the October 7 debacle in which he chose not to inform the political echelon, and from a string of incidents that undermined the professional confidence in him afterwards.” 

Looking ahead: The temporary injunction prohibits the cabinet from taking any action that ends Bar’s service (that they had sought to end tomorrow), but allows the prime minister to interview candidates to succeed him.

• The cabinet and the attorney general are now due to inform the court by April 20th on an agreed date to end Bar’s tenure.  
• Netanyahu is thought to be considering the option, suggested by Justice Minister Levin, of immediately boycotting Bar.

What’s happened: An Israeli judge has lifted a longstanding gag order preventing reporting on the ongoing “Qatargate” scandal, citing a lack of enforcement resulting in its redundancy.

• It can now be reported that Qatar is alleged to have paid two associates of Prime Minister Netanyahu – Jonathan Urich and Eli Feldstein – to promote pro-Qatari stories in the Israeli media.
• Gulf-based Israeli businessman, Gil Birger, can now also be named as a suspect for allegedly funnelling Qatari cash to Feldstein via an American lobbyist (Jay Footlik).
• Birger was interviewed in connection with the case by the Israeli Police on Monday, and admitted to transferring funds to Footlik in a recording played by Kan News.
• Yesterday, police held a ‘confrontation’ between Urich and Feldstein, after they gave conflicting versions as to the circumstances of the payments Footlik made to Feldstein.
• Responding to all these developments, PM Netanyahu yesterday released a video in which he asserted that Qatar was not listed as an enemy state, and is a “complex country” which “many praise”. He also described Urich as a “dedicated employee”, stating that he never had any access to classified intelligence material.
• “Do you know who really praised Qatar?” Netanyahu asked rhetorically. “Yair Lapid, Benny Gantz, Ronen Bar.  The GSS director was invited by Qataris to a special seat at the World Cup. Qatar is a complicated country, but it is not an enemy country. They are doing this in order to topple a right-wing government.”
• The editor of the Jerusalem Post’s, Zvika Klein, has also been interviewed under caution in connection with the case, allegedly on suspicion of being in contact with a foreign agent, and has been placed under house arrest.
• Klein visited Qatar for three days in 2024 as a guest of the government, a trip which was subsequently reported on in the Jerusalem Post. Responding to the reports, Klein has asserted that his visit to Qatar was at the government’s direct invitation, his only contact with Feldstein had been on his return, and only in a PR capacity.
• This morning, several other journalists were asked to come to Lahav 433 headquarters to give statements to the police.
• The Israeli Police’s Lahav 433 unit which specialises in combating particularly serious crimes is also reported to have expressed concerns to the court over a conflict of interests. Urich’s lawyer, Amit Hadad, is also representing the Prime Minister in his own criminal cases.
• The Israeli Bar Association’s ethics committee has since written to Hadad requesting an explanation as to how representing the Prime Minister, Urich, and another suspect currently residing abroad (the Serbian-based Yisrael Einhorn) without causing a conflict of interests.
• The Israeli Police are also seeking to interview Einhorn, but as a witness rather than a suspect at this time. Einhorn is a former Netanyahu aide living and working in Serbia as an advisor to President Aleksandar Vučić. The police suspect that in the course of 2024, when Einhorn served as an adviser to Minister Yisrael Katz, he was allegedly privy to classified information and may have been involved in the leaking of the “Hamas document” that was leaked by the prime minister’s aides in the classified documents affair to the Bild. Einhorn also reportedly helped in the efforts to deliver munitions to Israel early in the war.
• According to Channel 12 News, Qatar has denied being aware that Feldstein worked with the Prime Minister’s Office, instead primarily viewing him as a right-wing and religious communications professional more able to reach a demographic Doha had thus far struggled to engage with.

Context: While Netanyahu not a suspect, his reaction has been to defend his associates while attacking those seeking to prosecute them as a political witch hunt.

• Based on the facts that are now known in the affair, Qatari funds were paid to Netanyahu’s closest advisers in exchange for a campaign that allegedly was designed to advance Qatar’s interests – often contrary to the State of Israel’s declared interests.
• Some of the pro-Qatari messages allegedly spread in the Israeli media were intended to position Doha as an effective ceasefire and hostage release negotiation mediator while undermining Egypt.
• In previous military operations between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, Egypt was considered the main mediator to bring about a ceasefire. Ruled by General Sisi and heavily opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Egyptian government had traditionally been preferred by Israel.
• Sisi’s government also has sometimes tense relations with Qatar. In 2017, Egypt joined with other Gulf countries in suspending diplomatic ties with Qatar and introducing a blockade, moves that were reversed in 2021.
• There has been some concern in placing Klein under house arrest seemingly connected to his meetings in Qatar, which would generally come under the regular workings of a journalist.  The Union of Journalists issued a statement decrying Klein’s arrest, which it said might damage the confidentiality of sources and have a chilling effect on other journalists.

Looking ahead: On 8th April, the Israeli High Court will hold a hearing where it will decided whether or not Ronen Bar can be removed as Shin Bet’s Director.

• Netanyahu has stated that Bar’s tenure as agency Director should end by 10th April. After a U-turn within 24 hours in the appointment of Eli Sharvit, Netanyahu has now said he will appoint deputy head of the agency as the temporary head of the agency.
• Only known by one of his initials (S), he will act as Shin Bet Director until Bar’s replacement is found and takes up the post.
• The police asked the court to extend the remands of Jonathan Urich and Eli Feldstein by an additional seven days.

U-turn: Less than 24 hours after the announcement, the prime minister has rescinded the appointment of Rear Admiral Eli Sharvit as a potential successor for Shin Bet Director, Ronen Bar.

• Although no specific reasons were given, it is being suggested that members of the governing coalition objected to his appointment on account of Sharvit’s participation in the demonstrations against the judicial reforms.
• In addition, he had written an op-ed critical of President Trump’s environmental policies. This led to criticism of the appointment in the US by Senator Lindsey Graham of the Republican Party, who referred to it as “beyond problematic.”
• Netanyahu met with Sharvit last night and told him that he intends to consider other candidates for the job.
• Sharvit apparently responded by saying, “what is best for the country and its security is above all else.”
• Leader of the Opposition Lapid attacked the prime minister, accusing him of damaging Israel’s national security. Lapid said that the appointment of a Shin Bet director ought to be sacrosanct, adding that the public no longer had any confidence in the October 7th government.

Qatargate: Yesterday, the Israeli Police summoned Prime Minister Netanyahu for questioning about his aides’ alleged financial ties to Qatar.

• Police questioned  the prime minister shortly after two leading suspects, Jonathan Urich and Eli Feldstein were arrested.
• Both Urich and Feldstein are known to be close to the Prime Minister, having served as his media adviser and spokesman for military affairs, respectively.
• The summons were issued while the prime minister was testifying at his own criminal trial, causing him to leave early to be interviewed by specialist investigators.
• In parallel, the investigation into the two men is being jointly conducted by the Israeli Police’s specialist Lahav 433 unit, and Shin Bet. It is currently subject to a court-ordered gag which has prevented the majority of details surrounding it from being published.
• The investigation into the two men started following revelations that while still working at the PMO, Feldstein was acting on Qatari instructions via an international firm to brief journalists on pro-Doha stories.
• Separately, Feldstein had also been charged with harming national security by leaking classified materials to international journalists so as to undermine hostage release and ceasefire negotiations.
• Netanyahu’s office responded angrily to the arrests of Urich and Feldstein, accusing police of holding them “as hostages” in a politically motivated move designed to prevent the firing of Shin Bet head Ronen Bar.

Context: Though not a suspect, the Qatargate affair is deeply uncomfortable for Prime Minister Netanyahu. He is presenting it as further evidence of what he perceives as unelected state officials working again the elected leadership and the nefarious influence of the ‘deep state’.       

• Qatar is known to play a duplicitous role in the region. On the one hand it is hosting and facilitating the negotiations over the hostages, whilst at the same time it is the main backer of Hamas and extremist Muslim Brotherhood ideology.         
• The allegations that Qatar has been attempting to whitewash its image in Israel, by indirectly funding someone within the prime minister’s team, has caused shockwaves inside Israel.      
• The day’s developments prompted further widespread public protests, following many large scale demonstrations held in recent weeks, related to numerous government decisions including: the resumption of the war in Gaza and the impact on both Gazans and surviving hostages; the government’s ongoing “judicial reforms”; the firing of Shin Bet head Ronen Bar; and Qatargate.
• Yediot Ahronot’s Nadav Eyal this morning offered a scathing assessment of yesterday’s events. “More than anything,” he wrote, “yesterday laid bare the way the State of Israel is being run… Last night, at the end of a hysterical and awful day in our history, Netanyahu described the two men who were arrested as ‘hostages.’ He couldn’t come up with a better metaphor while dozens of Israelis are being tortured in the tunnels of Gaza. Truth be told, it was apt. Between his efforts to mount a defence in court in the morning against the serious criminal charges he faces, and submitting to a police interview in the afternoon to discuss Qatar’s infiltration of his office, the prime minister certainly had no time left to deal with the hostages in Gaza. Apparently, he didn’t have time even to take a few hours to Google his intended GSS director. Survival is his day job. He only moonlights as prime minister.”
• There was also anger over Netanyahu’s choice of words from across the opposition spectrum. Leader of the National Unity Party Gantz issued a statement saying, “Mr. Prime Minister. While you cleared your schedule for questioning, 59 female and male hostages are counting the seconds. Our hostages, who were kidnapped on your watch, aren’t the people who worked with Qatar in a time of war and were detained for one day for questioning, but the people who have been rotting away in the enemy’s tunnels for 542 days already. Mr. Prime Minister, you are simply out of touch.”
• While the Prime Minister’s Office had announced that Sharvit would be appointed to replace Bar, in any case his appointment still needed approval by a vetting committee as well as the wider cabinet.
• Although the prime minister intends and has attempted to dismiss Bar, he is currently being kept in his post by a high court injunction. However, the injunction does not prevent the prime minister from interviewing potential replacements.

Looking ahead: The police are expected to ask the Rishon Lezion Magistrates Court to extend by nine days the remands of Jonathan Urich and Eli Feldstein.

• Next week  the High Court is scheduled to hear petitions against Bar’s removal as the head of Shin Bet. Meanwhile, the search for his successor will now resume.

What’s happened: The Knesset has passed a Likud-sponsored law which changes the composition of the Judicial Selection Committee that appoints judges. 

• The law was passed with a majority of 67-1 after it was boycotted by the opposition.
• Despite the opposition filing over 70,000 objections during the committee stage in an effort to filibuster the debate, the bill still passed its third and final reading and became law.
• The new law changes the make-up of the selection committee. It removes the two members of the Israel Bar Association and replaces them with two academics to be chosen by politicians, one by the governing coalition and one by the parliamentary opposition. 
• Similarly, the previously held veto enjoyed by the three coalition representatives and three Supreme Court justices on the committee has been removed. Justices will be appointed to circuits with the consent of five members of the committee, one of whom must be a judge, one a coalition representative, and one an opposition representative. Appointments to the Supreme Court will require only the consent of the coalition and opposition.
• The law’s passing was met with major protests outside the Knesset in Jerusalem, and in the streets of Tel Aviv.
• Last night, tens of thousands of people attended a demonstration at Habima Square in Tel Aviv to protest against the government. The demonstration was led by former security establishment officials, including retired Israel Police commissioner Roni Alsheich, who addressed the public that does not often attend demonstrations. Alsheich said: “I call on the national-religious public, many of whom have congratulated me by whispering in my ear and sending me text messages: stop whispering, and come to the square and shout.” 
• The protests were overwhelmingly peaceful, though six people were arrested for disturbing the peace after getting into altercations with police.
• Leader of the National Unity Party Benny Gantz, asserted that Israel’s direction of travel had become “dangerous”, warning , “Democracies die slowly via the disease known as ‘tyranny of the majority.’ The disease spreads slowly until the dark screen falls over the society. That’s how an administration becomes a regime, and the prime minister becomes a dictator. That is the dangerous direction we are moving in.” 
• Justice Minister Levin responded by justifying the new law, arguing that it was necessary as the Israeli judiciary (specifically the High Court of Justice) had “effectively abolished the Knesset.”
• Levin also suggested that the Supreme Court now viewed itself as having “placed itself above the government” which the new law resolved by “putting an end to the friend-brings-friend system used in appointments, ending the conflict of interest that stemmed from the membership of the Bar Association representatives on the committee, and at the same time providing a full response to the concerns raised by opponents of the reform, in particular the government and coalition’s takeover of the judicial selection procedures.”

Context: The bill was jointly proposed by the Justice and Foreign Ministers (Levin and Saar), and positioned as a compromise to the opposition over previous contentious attempts by the government to control all judicial appointments.

• Foreign Minister Saar, who only recently returned to the Likud, attacked the opposition, saying, “When President Yitzhak Herzog proposed a compromise during the previous round of legislation, the opposition agreed with many of the clauses that are similar to our plan. What are you making so much noise and exploding about today?”
• The old committee consisted of nine members, four politicians (the justice minister, another minister, and two backbenchers – one from the government, one from the opposition), three judges and two members of the Israeli Bar Association. Nominees required the support of seven out of nine.
• The new make-up removes the Bar Association representatives and replaces them with two legal academics, one chosen by the government, the other the opposition, thereby increasing the political control of the committee away from legal professionals. The new committee will only require the consent of five members.              
• There is concern than in the Israeli system, unlike other democracies, the judiciary serves as almost the only check and balance on the government. Israel has as unicameral legislature, no written constitution, a president with only ceremonial authority and no federal authority.  
• Others have noted that the law passed yesterday is a diluted version of Justice Minister  Levin’s original reforms, and in any event won’t be implemented until the next Knesset is elected.   
• Minister Levin himself noted yesterday, “The proposal before you is not the proposal, I presented two years ago. Despite the fact that the opposition did not respond to any of my appeals to hold talks, I felt the right thing to do was to change the proposal. The final wording puts an end to the ‘friend brings a friend’ method of nominations and gives a complete answer to the concerns that were raised by the opposition to the reform.” 
• Commenting on the reforms, Israeli NGO the Movement for Quality Government has branded them as a “dangerous politicisation of the judicial system”.
• The bill was passed at a time when the Israeli government was widely accused of undermining the legal checks and balances designed to hold it accountable — most notably by attempting to dismiss Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar after the agency began investigating alleged links between the Prime Minister’s Office and Qatar, and by seeking to remove the Attorney General following repeated clashes with the government.

Looking ahead: Opposition parties and the Movement for Quality Government have immediately filed a number of petitions against the law. 

• It remain to be determined if the justice minister intends to pursue other components of his judicial reform programme that he announced in January 2023.
• In any event, the law passed yesterday will only come into effect after the next general election.
• Elections are due to be held by October 2026, but Israeli governments rarely serve a full term.

What’s happened: The Knesset approved the 2025 budget by a solid 66 to 52 majority, one week before the legal deadline that would have triggered new elections.

• The budget includes across-the-board cuts in every Ministry, affecting education, health, welfare, and transport, as well as broad tax hikes on the working public.
• Unsurprisingly given the security situation, it includes a dramatic rise in defence allocations. Finance Minister Smotrich called it “everything we need to win on the front and on the home front.”
• More controversially, the budget includes over 5 billion shekels (over 1 billion pounds) in what the Israeli media terms “coalition funds.” These amount to large transfers and benefits, mostly to the ultra-Orthodox and settler publics. These include benefits for networks of private religious schools that refuse to teach core curriculum.
• Leader of the Opposition Lapid described this as “stealing the money and future of Israel’s middle class, the productive public that works, pays taxes and enlists in the army.”

Context: Failure to pass a budget by March 31 would have triggered an automatic dissolution of parliament followed by general elections. With polls protecting a disastrous result for the current governing coalition, in power since the election of November 2022, the Likud-led government could not take any risks ahead of the upcoming vote.

• The current coalition has a 68-52 majority in the Knesset. This figure includes four MKs recently added to the coalition by the merger of Gideon Saar’s party with the Likud. Saar and the other three parliamentarians entered parliament as part of Benny Gantz’s opposition list, but split from Gantz about one year into the current parliament, and joined the Likud about a year after that.
• The far-right Jewish Power party led by Itamar Ben-Gvir rejoined the governing coalition with the collapse of the ceasefire in Gaza earlier this month.
• The ultra-Orthodox parties, without whom no conceivable majority exists for Netanyahu, had long threatened to bring down the budget vote unless legislation cementing a sweeping draft exemption for their public was first passed. Such legislation faces enormous constitutional hurdles, and it remains the single most divisive issue in the right wing and religious coalition. Ultimately, both ultra-Orthodox parties supported the budget and its generous provisions for their sectoral interests without getting, for now, any progress on their biggest legislative priority.
• Despite public opinion being decidedly against him and at odds with his government’s position on three burning issues — hostages, draft exemptions, and a commission of inquiry — Netanyahu now has a larger parliamentary majority than before October 7. He has successfully navigated the most significant threat that might have toppled his government in the current period, and will likely now turn his attention to the twin efforts to oust the Attorney General and the director of the Shin Bet.
• Anti-government protests continued in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and elsewhere, largely over three separate issues. Protestors in Tel Aviv demanded a return to the ceasefire and a renewed effort to liberate hostages. In Jerusalem, demonstrates blocked the entrance to the Knesset in protest of the budget. Hostage families protested inside the Knesset. Over the weekend, large demonstrations were held against the firing of the Director of the Shin Bet and the Attorney General, with a general strike threatened if and when the Government violates a Supreme Court ruling on the matter, expected sometime in April.
• Hours after the budget’s approval, the credit agency Moody’s put out a negative forecast for the Israeli economy, in light of both the domestic political situation and the ongoing war. 
• Demonstrations also erupted in northern Gaza against Hamas rule and against the war that Hamas is fighting with Israel. Some protestors openly called for an immediate release of Israeli hostages as a way of ending the war which restarted when a two-month ceasefire collapsed just over one week ago. There were reports that protests had spread from the most northern parts of the Strip closest to Israel to other locations including the Hamas stronghold of Jabalia inside Gaza City, where a 2019 protest against governing authorities was violently suppressed by Hamas forces. 
• A rare public clash between Minister of Defence Katz and the new IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir whose appointment he oversaw appears to have been resolved. Katz had publicly criticised an internal IDF investigation of an officer implicated in leaking classified documents, to which Zamir responded by saying that he didn’t take orders through the media and made clear proper legal procedures inside the army wouldn’t be affected by political pressures from outside.

Looking ahead: Today the Knesset will debate a bill which would alter the makeup of the Judicial Appointments Committee. All such legislation was frozen in the immediate aftermath of October 7. This would take away influence of the Bar Association and give more power to MKs.

• Talks continue in Egypt on a new ceasefire and hostage release with competing reports and conflicting rumours as to their progress. Most of the media coverage in both Arab and Israeli outlets focuses on an Egyptian proposal that, if approved by both sides, would lead to the immediate release of five living hostages (including an Israeli soldier who has dual US and Israeli citizenship). 

What’s happened: The cabinet convened yesterday to discuss and hold a vote of no confidence in the attorney general. This is the first step towards removing her from office.

• The cabinet meeting was chaired by Justice Minister Levin, as the prime minister recused himself, due to his ongoing trial and a conflict of interests.
• Making the case against Baharav-Miara, Levin said, “The attorney general has almost systematically refused to appear before the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee. She ignores ministers’ requests and doesn’t respond to me. She blatantly ignores letters from me, the justice minister, to say nothing of what happens with other ministers. The attorney general operates in complete contradiction to her role, in a way that cannot be described as anything other than political while citing legal impediments in a long list of things. The attorney general is using her technical power to prevent government legislation and has become a sort of veto.” 
• Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara did not attend the meeting but sent a letter outlining her position, “This proposal is not trying to further the cause of confidence, but rather loyalty to the political leadership. It is not about governance, but rather unchecked governmental power as part of a wider programme to weaken the judiciary and to deter all the professional levels. The government wants to be above the law and to act without checks and balances.”
• The ministers voted unanimously in favour of the no-confidence motion. 
• In parallel, thousands demonstrated outside, protesting the government’s decisions to fire both the head of the Shin Bet Ronen Bar, and now Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara. Though unelected, both positions are considered gatekeepers of democratic norms.   
• Among the speakers at the demonstration outside the government meeting included retired Supreme Court Justice Ayala Procaccia. She told the crowd, “We are in the midst of a deep rift that threatens to bring down the entire democratic institution. For the first time, the unwritten agreement that all governments have respected is being violated. Breaking the independence of central institutions and breaking down oversight institutions will cause the face of this country to go from one extreme to the other. Israel will no longer be a free, democratic country but rather a different type of regime that we cannot recognise.” 

Context: The process of firing the head of the Shin Bet and the attorney general will both be discussed by special committees. The decisions could then be appealed in the Supreme Court. 

• Both committees will focus on procedural issues and the apparent conflicts of interests.
• On procedure, the role of director of the Shin Bet will be reviewed by a special advisory committee for senior appointments.
• The office of attorney general is covered by a different special advisory committee comprising a mix of legal scholars, civil servants, and politicians. However two appointments have expired and have not been replaced. One is required to be a former attorney general, the other required to be a former Minister of Justice. Every single living former attorney general, including several appointed by Netanyahu, strongly opposes the firing of Baharav-Miara. 
• On the other side, recent former ministers of justice are known to support her firing. As well as being former justice ministers, both Speaker of the Knesset Amir Ohana and Foreign Minister Gideon Saar are part of the current administration. 
• In Saar’s case, he voted with the cabinet last night, despite being the minister that recommended Baharav-Miara’s appointment in the Bennet led government.  
• To further complicate matters, the person occupying the law professor seat on the committee is Tali Einhorn, a very conservative scholar known to be quite enthusiastic about firing Baharav-Miara, but she too might have to step aside for an obvious conflict of interest, her son, Srulik Einhorn, (an adviser to the prime minister) is one of the three leading suspects in the unfolding “Qatargate” scandal, as well as in the illegal leaks of classified material to the German Bild newspaper last year. He is currently in Serbia, and has refrained from returning to Israel for months in order to avoid police questioning. 
• In any event, the advisory committee’s recommendation are non-binding. However,  given all the procedural difficulties, the Supreme Court might very rule that ignoring both or either violates the now famous “reasonableness clause.” It almost certainly wouldn’t accept a process where the committees have not even been convened.  
• The larger conflict of interest surrounds the prime minister, as the attorney general is prosecuting his corruption trial. He absented himself from the cabinet discussion on her dismissal, but it’s not clear that the Court will be impressed that this is enough. 
• In the case of the Shin Bet director, he cannot absent himself. The Shin Bet is an agency inside the Prime Minister’s Office, and he is the one who requested the director’s dismissal. Here is a different conflict of interest, as it was the Shin Bet that launched an investigation into Qatari influence in the Prime Minister’s Bureau. Ronen Bar himself has all but outright accused Netanyahu of seeking to fire him and replace him with a more pliant director in order to quash this investigation, and this is a version of events that much of the Israeli media has broadly accepted. If the Court accepts it too, it’s hard to imagine a scenario in which it approves the government’s decision to fire Bar. 
• Netanyahu and his closest backers see the events in the exact opposite way: they argue that the entire investigation of Qatari influence was concocted as a way to block Bar’s dismissal. This was the central accusation Netanyahu made in a video he posted Saturday night with “bombshell revelations” about the timing of the investigation. 
• When so much of the investigation classified and under a gag order, it’s not easy to piece together the precise sequence. However, several Israel media reports have suggested that the dates don’t add up in a way that is compatible with Netanyahu’s argument. The Prime Minister’s Bureau was asked to respond to the first Qatargate report in the media one day before it first even suggested dismissing Bar. 

Looking ahead: The Court will consider Bar’s case on April 8^th. 

• The government has given several ambiguous indications that it will ignore a Court ruling it does not like (only one minister, Moshe Arbel of Shas, has explicitly ruled this out). Such a situation would plunge the country into a constitutional crisis and, most likely, a crippling general strike.