Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara reportedly ordered police to investigate conflicting accounts regarding the recent Knesset vote for state comptroller, following allegations of procedural irregularities. The dispute centers on testimonies from within the ruling Likud party and a member of Knesset, Sharren Haskel, concerning whether lawmakers were instructed to record their votes for Attorney Michael Rabello, the preferred candidate of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. According to Haskel, who belongs to the New Hope party, now merged with Likud, lawmakers were directed to film themselves casting their ballots for Rabello after he failed to secure enough support in the initial round of voting. Haskel’s testimony contradicts prior affidavits submitted by Likud officials, including Executive Director David Sharan and other coalition members, who denied such instructions. The High Court had previously frozen Rabello’s appointment due to concerns over potential violations of the voting process, prompting a new vote. During the second round, some coalition members allegedly recorded their votes, leading to Rabello’s eventual victory. However, opposition lawmakers accused coalition members of being coerced into recording their votes, raising further doubts about the legitimacy of the outcome. Baharav-Miara is directing police to determine which account is accurate and to consider criminal charges against any individual found to be misleading. This follows a request by Likud, via Rabello, to dismiss Haskel’s affidavit, citing a lack of clarity on who allegedly gave the directive. Senior cabinet ministers, including Justice Minister Yariv Levin, have urged the Knesset and government to disregard the High Court’s ruling, which could lead to a constitutional crisis if ignored. The State Comptroller’s Office would then face uncertainty over which authority to follow, the Knesset or the courts. The Movement for Quality Government in Israel expressed concern over the situation, stating that if the High Court was misled by false information, it would constitute a serious breach of the rule of law and public trust. Rabello, who initially won the first round of voting, lost to former Supreme Court Justice Yosef Elron by a narrow margin. His subsequent victory in the second round, following accusations of coercion, has intensified scrutiny over the integrity of the electoral process. Haskel’s remarks emerged as part of her broader efforts to separate from New Hope, which was led by Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar. Haskel, a former Likud member, joined the New Hope party in 2025 but has resisted aligning with its merger with Likud. She argues that the incomplete merger was intentional, designed to prevent her from forming a standalone faction and retaining state funding tied to her Knesset seat. Her departure highlights internal tensions within the political landscape, particularly around issues of party loyalty and financial incentives. Meanwhile, the High Court has extended its freeze on a controversial law aimed at preventing the arrest of Haredi draft dodgers for seven months. The law, passed by the Knesset, has drawn criticism for its perceived discriminatory impact, as it allows certain groups to avoid legal consequences while others face standard enforcement. The court’s decision comes after a hearing where justices largely aligned with arguments that the law violates principles of equality and proper legislative procedure. During the hearing, representatives of the Knesset and the attorney general emphasized the law’s unconstitutionality, citing procedural flaws and discriminatory intent. Ultra-Orthodox advocates, however, claimed the court rarely supports their interests, despite assertions that religious texts prohibit military service. Justice David Mintz, a conservative Orthodox jurist, questioned these claims, challenging the validity of such interpretations. The law, which affects approximately 72,000 Haredi men aged 18 to 24, has sparked protests and raised concerns about national security, as the IDF faces urgent recruitment needs. Legal experts argue that even temporary discriminatory laws undermine the principle of equal treatment under the law. The court’s continued freeze reflects growing skepticism toward the law’s constitutionality, setting the stage for a pivotal ruling that could reshape the balance of power between the legislature and judiciary.
3 reports
AG said to order police probe of conflicting claims in state comptroller vote scandalThe Attorney General of Israel, Gali Baharav-Miara, has reportedly ordered police to investigate conflicting claims regarding the recent Knesset vote for state comptroller. MK Sharren Haskel from the New Hope party, now part of the ruling Likud alliance, claimed that lawmakers were instructed to film themselves voting for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's preferred candidate, Michael Rabello, despite the requirement for secret ballots. This contradicts previous statements from Likud officials who denied such instructions. The High Court previously halted Rabello's appointment due to concerns about procedural violations and ordered a new vote. Likud has responded by challenging Haskel's testimony in court, arguing she did not specify who gave the alleged orders. Meanwhile, senior government figures have suggested ignoring the High Court's ruling, potentially leading to a constitutional crisis if the Knesset and government cannot agree on which authority to follow.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both sides of the dispute without overtly favoring one over the other. It includes statements from multiple parties involved, including the Attorney General, MK Sharren Haskel, Likud officials, and the Movement for Quality Government in Israel. There is no evident bias in the ph
Why factuality (88): The article accurately describes the Attorney General's directive to investigate conflicting claims regarding the state comptroller vote. It cites testimonies from different parties and reports on the High Court's actions, which align with the cross-source consensus. The information is sourced from
Why objectivity (82): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting the conflicting testimonies from both the New Hope party and Likud officials. It avoids taking sides and focuses on reporting the facts and the ongoing investigation, maintaining a balanced perspective throughout.
MK Sharren Haskel summoned by Lahav 433 in connection with comptroller election scandalMK Sharren Haskel has been summoned by Lahav 433 to testify about the election of the Israeli state comptroller, which was recently declared invalid by the High Court of Justice. Haskel previously claimed in a sworn affidavit that members of the New Hope-United Right faction were instructed to record their votes for Michael Rabello, the elected comptroller, and show the footage to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This allegation contradicts the stance taken by the Likud party during legal proceedings related to Rabello’s election. Haskel submitted the affidavit nearly two weeks after the High Court ruled that the election process violated ballot secrecy, requiring a new vote. The affidavit was part of Haskel’s separate legal effort to establish herself as a one-member faction independent of Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar’s New Hope-United Right group.
Bias read (Progressive): The article presents allegations against a member of the New Hope-United Right faction, which aligns with opposition parties to the current government led by Prime Minister Netanyahu. The framing emphasizes potential misconduct involving the ruling party and highlights actions that could undermine a
Why factuality (75): The article reports on MK Sharren Haskel being summoned by Lahav 433 related to the comptroller election scandal. It includes details from Haskel's sworn affidavit alleging that New Hope-United Right members filmed votes for Rabello and showed them to Netanyahu. The article also mentions the High Co
Why objectivity (80): The article presents the allegations made by Haskel in a neutral manner, providing context and quotes from her spokesperson. While there is some emphasis on the controversy surrounding the election, the tone remains objective and does not overtly favor any political side.
MK Sharren Haskel testifies at Lahav 433 in connection with comptroller election scandalMK Sharren Haskel, chair of the Israel First party, testified before Lahav 433 regarding the election of the state comptroller, which was recently declared invalid by the High Court of Justice. Haskel previously claimed in a sworn affidavit that members of the New Hope-United Right faction were required to record their votes for Michael Rabello and show the footage to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This contradicts the position taken by the Likud during legal proceedings related to Rabello’s election. The High Court ruled that the filming of ballots violated electoral secrecy, prompting the Knesset to hold a new vote. Haskel submitted the affidavit to argue that New Hope had become subservient to Likud after Naftali Bennett’s return to the party.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both Haskel's claims and the opposing stance from the Likud, offering a balanced view of the situation without overtly favoring one side. It reports on the legal and political implications of the invalidated election without using biased language or selective sourcing.
★
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
