- Government rejects court order on broadcast regulator, drawing sharp criticism from opposition leaders, legal experts and President Isaac Herzog over the rule of law.
JERUSALEM: Israel’s cabinet on Sunday unanimously voted to reject a Supreme Court ruling concerning the country’s broadcast regulator, marking an unprecedented confrontation between the executive and the judiciary and intensifying fears of a constitutional crisis.
The decision represents the first known instance of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government openly refusing to comply with a Supreme Court ruling. It comes amid long-running tensions between the government and Israel’s judicial system, following controversial judicial reform proposals introduced after Netanyahu’s coalition returned to power in 2022.
Those reforms, aimed at curbing the authority of the Supreme Court, sparked months of mass protests and widespread international criticism before being largely suspended following Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack on Israel. However, several elements of the reform agenda have since resurfaced.
At the center of the latest dispute is the Second Authority for Television and Radio, Israel’s broadcast regulator. Under Israeli law, the authority’s council must have a minimum number of members to exercise its powers. The government argues that because the council no longer meets that legal quorum, it lacks the authority to approve appointments or make regulatory decisions.
On June 17, however, the Supreme Court ruled that the council should continue operating despite the shortage of members to ensure the continuity of its statutory responsibilities.
Rejecting the ruling, the cabinet declared that the court had exceeded its legal authority and vowed to use “all legal means” available to overturn the decision. It further stated that any ruling that contradicts existing law would not be recognized and that decisions made under such circumstances would be considered “null and void.”
Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi and Justice Minister Yariv Levin, who jointly proposed the resolution, said the government would not recognize any actions taken by the regulator until the council meets the legally required membership threshold.
Karhi argued that judges cannot replace the role of parliament and insisted that any future decisions taken by the media regulator under the court’s directive would have no legal validity. Levin maintained that once parliament enacts legislation, the judiciary is obligated to uphold it.
The move triggered swift condemnation from opposition leaders, who accused the government of undermining Israel’s democratic institutions.
Opposition leader Yair Lapid described the cabinet’s decision as “the most serious constitutional crisis in Israel’s history,” warning that the government was eroding the foundations of Israeli democracy.
Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett also criticized the decision, cautioning that ignoring court rulings would lead to “anarchy” and threaten national stability.
Gadi Eisenkot, a leading opposition figure and potential challenger to Netanyahu in the next election, accused the government of attacking Israeli democracy and deepening political divisions.
President Isaac Herzog also expressed concern, stressing that refusal to comply with Supreme Court decisions crossed a fundamental constitutional line.
“I have already made it clear, and I will repeat it again and again—disobedience to a court ruling is a red line that must not be crossed under any circumstances,” Herzog said.
Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs sought to ease concerns, insisting the government was not encouraging disobedience but was instead expressing strong legal disagreement with the ruling. He said the cabinet intended to challenge the decision through lawful procedures rather than ignore the judiciary.
The dispute could have significant implications for Israel’s media landscape. It may delay or complicate regulatory approval for the proposed sale of Channel 13—one of Israel’s leading commercial television networks and a frequent critic of Netanyahu—to a consortium of high-tech entrepreneurs.
It could also influence the regulatory status of the pro-government Channel 14, which currently benefits from being classified as a “small channel,” granting it certain exemptions and regulatory advantages.
The latest confrontation has renewed concerns among legal experts that Israel could be heading toward an institutional standoff between the government and the judiciary. While no date has yet been set for the country’s next general election, polls indicate Israelis are likely to head to the ballot box in September or October.
BY: The Times Union
