State backs petition demanding comptroller back off October 7 investigation
Adopting IDF’s position, state tells High Court ombudsman’s ‘unprecedented’ investigation into failings would harm army’s focus on the war
Jeremy Sharon is The Times of Israel’s legal affairs and settlements reporter
The State Attorney’s Office on Thursday adopted the position of the Movement for Quality Government in Israel (MQG) in its petition against State Comptroller Matanyahu Englman and his effort to investigate the multi-level failures that enabled the devastating Hamas attack on Israel on October 7.
In its response to the petition, the state agreed with the organization’s assertion that Englman’s investigation would be harmful to security services’ ability to focus on the war.
The state also requested that the High Court order Englman to halt his investigation until judges decide whether or not to issue an interim decision on the petition.
Englman hit back at the state’s position, and that of the Israel Defense Forces, in his own submission to the court on Thursday, saying it would damage the effectiveness of his review
MQG filed its petition in February, asking the court to order the comptroller to freeze his investigation until after the war, arguing it would harm the war effort by distracting IDF commanders from managing the fighting, and interfere with a potential future state commission of inquiry into the military, intelligence and policy failings that led to the Hamas attack.
“The requested interim order [for Englman’s investigation to be halted] should be accepted, as holding an investigation at this time… will lead to substantive harm to the operational capability of security services and harm the fighting,” the State Attorney’s Office wrote in the state’s response to the petition.
Englman announced at the end of December that he would be conducting an investigation into October 7, stating that his office would look into all aspects of the “multi-system failures,” including examining those with “personal responsibility” for the “failures on all levels – policy, military and civilian.”
But IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi asked him to delay the investigation, stating in a letter in January that it would “divert the attention of the commanders from the fighting, will damage the operational investigation ability, and will not allow drawing the necessary lessons to achieve the goals of the war.”
Halevi also pointed out that the comptroller’s investigation into a war while the war itself was ongoing was unprecedented, a point MQG noted in its petition.
MQG also argued that there was a “heavy suspicion” that Englman’s decision to open an investigation was the result of “inappropriate considerations,” and expressed concern in January that he had requested classified documents from the IDF and the security agencies, but not from political and decision-making agencies and officials — seemingly alleging that he may be seeking to point the finger at the security chief while sheltering politicians.
Englman hit back at the state’s position and that of the army in his response to the High Court, describing their stance as “unreasonable in the extreme” and “likely to result in the complete absence of any kind of review into the IDF” for a long period.
“Conducting a review with a significant delay means clear harm to access to evidence, which could… damage the review and its effectiveness, due to the passage of time, difficulty in locating documents, personnel changes and waning memory,” the State Comptroller’s Office said.
“A gradual and proportionate review, as planned, would not only not harm the war effort, let alone state security, but would help prevent severe future consequences,” it argued, “and prevent [further] failures that have cost the State of Israel a heavy price. Such a review will allow for the rapid correction, as far as is possible, of the deficiencies that arise in the review, and a rapid improvement in the functioning of the relevant bodies under examination, including the IDF.”
