From the Liveblog of
Wednesday, July 17, 2024
High Court justices note risks posed by comptroller’s Oct. 7 probe, but find no current alternative
Jeremy Sharon is The Times of Israel’s legal affairs and settlements reporter
High Court justices express concern that an investigation by the State Comptroller’s Office into the multi-level failings during and before Hamas’s October 7 attack will harm the IDF’s ability to concentrate on fighting the ongoing war with Hamas in Gaza, in a hearing over petitions demanding that the court order the comptroller to end his review of the catastrophe.
The petitioners argue that such a review is not in the purview of the comptroller, would harm the IDF’s operational capabilities, and could ignore political responsibility for the devastating invasion and massacres.
“We can expect a severe problem with [the ability of the IDF] to focus [on the war while being investigated], we all understand that. How do you overcome that?” asks Justice Noam Sohlberg, who heads the three-justice panel presiding over the case.
Pleading for the state comptroller, Eliya Zunz Koller responds that the courts do not automatically accept claims by security agencies that a particular process would harm state security, and points out that the Basic Law: The State Comptroller stipulates that the State Comptroller’s Office is not subject to the government.
Justice Yael Wilner insists however that “it’s not a matter of the Basic Laws, it’s a matter of the security of us all.”
The justices nevertheless express skepticism, with Sohlberg pointing out that a state commission of inquiry, which the petitioners say should instead investigate the events, has yet to be set up by the government, which insists that such a panel can only be established after the war has finished.
“If the war continues for many more months, when should the examination start?” Sohlberg asks the attorney for the Ometz Movement, one of the petitioning organizations.
Justice David Mintz asks Eliad Shraga, head of the another petitioner, the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, what happens if the government never establishes a state commission of inquiry.
Shraga sidesteps the question and insists it is crucial to establish one immediately to give cover to the state and the IDF from legal proceedings against Israel in the International Court of Justice and International Criminal Court.
He argues that the state comptroller, Matanyahu Englman, does not have a record as a jurist and does not enjoy widespread public trust that would convince the courts in The Hague that this was a serious process. “This is a severe problem,” insists Shraga.
Sohlberg asks the representative of the Attorney General’s Office, which also opposes an investigation by the state comptroller, why a state commission of inquiry would itself not distract the focus of the armed forces, but he avoids the question, noting that Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara has said such an inquiry is the best forum for investigating the October 7 failures but has not said when it should be established.
