Rejecting government argument, AG says court has right to intervene on Oct. 7 state inquiry

By Ariela Karmel

You will receive email alerts from this author. Manage alert preferences on your profile page

You will no longer receive email alerts from this author. Manage alert preferences on your profile page

19 January 2026, 5:18 pm

1 Edit

Ariela Karmel is a political correspondent at The Times of Israel. She previously reported for Calcalist and Haaretz. She holds an MA in Middle Eastern and African History from Tel Aviv University and a BA in Political Science from the University of British Columbia.

Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara at a Constitution, Law and Justice Committee meeting at the Knesset in Jerusalem, September 30, 2025. (Oren Ben Hakoon/ Flash90)

Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara says the High Court of Justice must hold a hearing on petitions regarding Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government’s refusal to establish a state commission of inquiry into failures surrounding the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack, rejecting the government’s argument yesterday that the court has no authority to order it to establish such a probe.

In her filing to the High Court today, the attorney general argues that the government’s failure to establish a state commission of inquiry is “causing serious harm to the possibility of uncovering the truth about the events of October 7.”

Baharav-Miara says that “a state commission of inquiry must be established without further delay,” noting that the passing of time exacts “a real evidentiary price: it erodes memories, blurs the sequence of events, and makes it difficult to locate witnesses and documents.”

The High Court issued a conditional order against the government on November 19, 2025, asking it to explain why it was not establishing a state commission.

The government, in its response, asserted that the 1969 Law for Commissions of Inquiry explicitly gives the government, and no other body, including the court, the authority to establish such inquiries, and cited a 2021 decision by the court to back its argument.

In her filing, Baharav-Miara rejects this argument and asserts that while the government “has broad discretionary power” to establish a commission, precedent holds that the court is “authorized to conduct judicial review” and “intervene” in “rare and exceptional cases.”

She says that the “unique and unprecedented circumstances of October 7… mean that this authority has turned from a discretionary power into a mandatory duty.”

“The failure to establish a state commission for more than two years since the outbreak of the war contradicts the government’s duty to the public and severely harms the possibility of reaching the truth,” she continues.

She adds that there is “grave concern” that the government’s actions “aim to circumvent the investigation due to the immediate political needs of the sitting government.”