Israel’s High Court Rules Netanyahu Acted Illegally in Attempt to Dismiss Shin Bet Chief

by Emmitt Barry, Worthy News Correspondent

(Worthy News) – Israel’s High Court of Justice ruled Wednesday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acted unlawfully in his effort to dismiss Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar, citing procedural violations and a conflict of interest tied to a corruption investigation involving Netanyahu’s close associates.

In a majority decision, Chief Justice Yitzhak Amit and Justice Daphne Barak-Erez found that the government bypassed required legal protocols — specifically failing to consult the Senior Appointments Advisory Committee — and denied Bar a formal hearing. The ruling noted that Netanyahu’s actions lacked a factual basis and were tainted by a conflict of interest, as the Shin Bet is involved in the “Qatargate” investigation implicating individuals in the prime minister’s inner circle.

“The government violated its own procedures and acted improperly,” the court wrote. Deputy Chief Justice Noam Sohlberg dissented, suggesting the case was moot after Bar announced his resignation effective June 15, but acknowledged “significant difficulties” in the government’s handling of the dismissal.

However, the case transcends Bar himself. It underscores a broader struggle over judicial independence in Israel, highlighting the judiciary’s efforts to place legal constraints on the executive branch amid escalating political tension. This confrontation comes during what many observers have called a “constitutional crisis,” triggered by Israel’s lack of a formal constitution and its reliance on a set of Basic Laws that can be amended by a simple parliamentary majority.

Since the 1990s, the balance of power between the branches of government has been increasingly contested. Then-Chief Justice Aharon Barak spearheaded a “constitutional revolution” by interpreting human-rights Basic Laws as superior law and empowering the High Court to strike down Knesset legislation that violated them. Supporters say this judicial activism has safeguarded civil liberties; critics contend it has concentrated too much power in the hands of unelected judges.

The current clash stems from this legal backdrop. Netanyahu’s judicial reform agenda, including the recent law passed by the Knesset reshaping the judicial selection committee, aims to limit the Court’s authority and reassert legislative dominance. Opponents warn that weakening judicial oversight threatens democratic governance. Proponents argue it restores the pre-1990s balance in a country still governed without a formal constitution.

The Shin Bet case is particularly significant because the agency—responsible for counterterrorism, intelligence, and the protection of top officials—reports directly to the Prime Minister, not the Ministry of Defense.

Political reaction was swift and divisive. National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir blasted the ruling as “horribly political,” while Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi called for the court to be “dismantled and reassembled.”

Copyright 1999-2026 Worthy News. This article was originally published on Worthy News and was reproduced with permission.