Israel is facing a deepening constitutional crisis following a government decision to openly defy a ruling from the High Court of Justice, marking the first time in the country’s history that such a move has been explicitly declared. On Sunday, the government announced that it would not recognize any decisions made by the Council of the Second Authority, a commercial broadcasting regulatory body, while it lacks a two-thirds quorum of members. This declaration, backed by Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi and Justice Minister Yariv Levin, signals a significant escalation in tensions between the executive branch and the judiciary.
The dispute centers around the composition of the Second Authority, which is currently under scrutiny due to a proposed buyout of Channel 13 by a group of high-tech entrepreneurs, many of whom are vocal critics of the government. The council must approve such transactions, and the government has been accused of attempting to manipulate its structure to block the deal. The High Court ruled in June that the council should be allowed to function despite not having the required number of members, citing concerns that some resignations were orchestrated to halt its operations.
The government, however, rejected this ruling, arguing that it conflicts with the 1990 law governing the Second Authority. It asserted that the court’s interpretation of the law was flawed and that the ruling could not grant authority that did not already exist under existing statutes. In a joint statement, Karhi and Levin emphasized that the government would not recognize any actions taken by the council unless it met the legal threshold for quorum. This stance has drawn sharp criticism from both the opposition and the president of Israel, who warned that such defiance threatens the foundation of the country’s democratic institutions.
President Isaac Herzog condemned the government’s decision as crossing a “red line,” stating that refusal to comply with a court ruling strikes at the heart of national unity. He reiterated that such disobedience must not be tolerated under any circumstances. Similarly, opposition leaders have labeled the government an “illegal entity,” claiming that its rejection of judicial authority undermines the rule of law. Yair Lapid, leader of the Together Party, warned that the government’s actions could lead to anarchy if it continues to disregard court rulings, particularly in matters related to upcoming elections.
The controversy has also drawn comparisons to previous crises involving judicial reforms, with some analysts suggesting that the current situation echoes the turmoil surrounding the proposed overhaul of Israel’s judiciary in late 2022. Retired Supreme Court Justice Hanan Melcer likened the government’s declaration to the prelude of a coup, warning that such moves could invite external threats and internal instability. His comments reflect growing fears that the government’s defiance of judicial authority might erode public confidence in the rule of law and trigger further unrest.
Despite the government’s firm stance, some within its ranks have expressed caution. Culture and Sports Minister Miki Zohar, a member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, denied that the government intended to provoke a constitutional crisis. She insisted that Netanyahu would abide by the High Court’s decision and that the government’s resolution aimed to prevent rather than incite such a conflict. However, her assertions have done little to quell the concerns of opponents who see the move as a calculated effort to consolidate power ahead of the upcoming elections.
The implications of the government’s decision extend beyond the immediate issue of the Second Authority. Critics argue that the move sets a precedent that could embolden the government to ignore other judicial rulings in the future, potentially undermining the separation of powers and weakening checks on executive authority. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who is running against Netanyahu in the election, warned that the government’s defiance could lead to chaos if citizens are left unsure of whom to follow—whether the government, the courts, or neither.
As the situation unfolds, the focus remains on whether the government will adhere to the High Court’s rulings or continue to challenge its authority. With the upcoming elections looming, the stakes are high, and the outcome of this constitutional standoff could shape the trajectory of Israeli democracy for years to come.
6 reports
The Times of IsraelIndependentConservativeFactual 85Objective 753 days agoThe Israeli government has declared it will not follow a High Court of Justice ruling that allowed the Council of the Second Authority to operate despite lacking a required two-thirds quorum. This marks the first time in Israel's history that a government has openly refused to comply with such a judicial decision, raising concerns of a constitutional crisis. The dispute centers on a proposed buyout of Channel 13 by high-tech entrepreneurs opposed to the government, which requires approval from the council. The government argues the court's ruling conflicts with the 1990 law governing the Second Authority and claims the judiciary is overstepping its bounds. Opposition leaders condemn the move as a violation of the rule of law and warn it could undermine legal compliance across the country.
Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the government's defiance of the High Court as a necessary assertion of the rule of law, using strong language like 'tramples the law' and 'drunk with power' to criticize the judiciary. It emphasizes the government's stance as protecting legal integrity while portraying opposition
Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 75): Factuality is high as the article accurately reports the government's stance and provides context about the dispute involving the Second Authority. Objectivity is slightly lower due to the use of phrases like 'constitutional crisis' which may carry subjective weight.
The Times of IsraelIndependentProgressiveFactual 85Objective 703 days ago AG: Government pledge to disobey High Court undermines core principles of rule of lawThe Israeli government has declared its intent to disregard a recent High Court of Justice ruling regarding the operations of the Council of the Second Authority, a regulatory body overseeing commercial broadcasting. This move, which marks the first time the government has openly refused to comply with such a court decision, has sparked significant backlash from President Isaac Herzog, Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, and opposition leaders. They argue that the government's stance undermines the rule of law and threatens democratic institutions. The dispute centers on whether the council, which lacks a quorum, can operate and whether it should approve a proposed buyout of Channel 13 by high-tech entrepreneurs opposed to the government. Critics accuse Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi and Justice Minister Yariv Levin of attempting to exert political control over the council to block the buyout, allegations supported by a previous interim court order. The government's defiance risks creating a constitutional crisis if it continues to reject court rulings.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the government's refusal to comply with the High Court as an attack on the rule of law and democracy, aligning with left-wing critiques of executive overreach. It highlights the government's perceived attempts to undermine judicial independence and suppress dissent, using language
Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 70): Factuality is high as it aligns with other sources and presents the government's actions and reactions accurately. Objectivity is somewhat lower due to the inclusion of statements from the attorney general and political figures, which can introduce bias.
HaaretzIndependent🔒ConservativeyesterdayThe article reports on a deepening constitutional crisis in Israel, as the Justice Minister has called on the Knesset to disregard a ruling by the Supreme Court regarding a vote on the appointment of a state watchdog. The minister's stance suggests a growing conflict between legislative and judicial branches over the authority to appoint certain oversight bodies. This situation highlights tensions within Israel's governmental structure and raises questions about the balance of power among different branches of government.
Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the Justice Minister's call to defy the High Court as a legitimate challenge to judicial overreach, aligning with conservative perspectives that emphasize legislative sovereignty. The emphasis on defying the court implies a critique of judicial activism, which is often associated右
The Jerusalem PostIndependentProgressive2 days agoOpposition leader Yair Lapid accused the Israeli government of deliberately defying a High Court ruling on the composition of the Second Authority Council as part of a strategy to manipulate the upcoming elections. Lapid claimed the government aims to undermine judicial oversight, potentially allowing it to delay or rig the elections by claiming security threats or declaring itself the winner without legal recourse. He warned that rejecting the court's authority could lead to a constitutional crisis and enable the government to disregard democratic processes. Other opposition figures, including Yair Golan of the Democrats party, echoed these concerns, warning against the rise of a new right-wing party linked to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the government's refusal to comply with the High Court ruling as an intentional effort to manipulate elections, using strong language like 'steal,' 'rig,' and 'poison machine.' It emphasizes the threat posed by the government's actions to democratic institutions and highlights the
HaaretzIndependent🔒Conservative2 days ago Constitutional Crisis? Why Israel's Government Just Openly Defied the High CourtThe article discusses a potential constitutional crisis in Israel as the government openly defies a ruling by the Supreme Court. The court had previously ruled that certain security measures were unlawful, but the government has continued to implement them despite this decision. This defiance raises concerns about the separation of powers and the rule of law within the Israeli legal system. The situation highlights tensions between the executive branch and the judiciary, with implications for democratic governance and judicial independence.
Bias read (Conservative): The article frames the government's actions as necessary for national security, implying that the judiciary's ruling is overly cautious or politically motivated. It emphasizes the government's defiance as a legitimate exercise of power rather than a violation of the rule of law, which aligns with a右
The Times of IsraelIndependentCenter3 days ago Minister insists PM will obey High Court ruling, isn’t seeking constitutional crisisCulture and Sports Minister Miki Zohar denied claims that the Israeli government's recent resolution constitutes a declaration of intent to defy a High Court of Justice ruling. He asserted that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intends to comply with the court's decision and avoid a constitutional crisis. The government rejected the High Court's June ruling allowing the Council of the Second Authority, which regulates commercial broadcasting, to resume operations despite lacking a two-thirds quorum. The government argued that the court's decision violated the 1990 law governing the Council and emphasized that the rule of law requires all authorities—including the court—to adhere to legal provisions. Opposition figures, including former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, warned that defying the court could lead to chaos and undermine national unity.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the government's position—arguing that the High Court's ruling conflicts with existing legislation—and the opposition's concerns about potential constitutional crises. It includes direct quotes from government officials and opposition leaders, providing balanced coverage of
★
Keep the news honest.
ObjectiveNews is reader-funded and ad-free — we show you the bias instead of hiding it. Support independent journalism for €5/month.
Become a Supporter
IL
![[Video] Branko Grims: I'm doing exactly what I promised my constituents!](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=slovenskenovice.delo.si%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F20260702%2F3671246.width-660.format-webp.webp&w=3840&q=75&output=webp&we)
