The Reappointment of Ben-Gvir as Minister of National Security is ‘Extremely Unreasonable’

The reappointment of Itamar Ben-Gvir as Minister of National Security, despite legal objections and a documented pattern of improper political interference in police operations, constitutes an "extremely unreasonable" decision that threatens the independence, professionalism, and democratic integrity of Israel’s law enforcement system.

Photo by Yonatan Sindel/Flash90

A few days ago, the Otzma Yehudit party rejoined the government, after its members had resigned two months ago in opposition to the ceasefire-hostage release agreement. The Otzma Yehudit ministers have now returned to their previous positions, and Itamar Ben-Gvir has, therefore, been restored to office as Minister of National Security. His appointment was ratified by the government, in opposition to the legal advice of the Attorney General.

According to Israeli law, the minister of national security’s role is to administratively oversee the police force and set its general policy. The minister, however, may not direct the police operationally nor meddle in its day-to-day actions. While the government and the Knesset both voted in favor of returning Ben Gvir to his post, the actions he took to politicize and directly command the police during his previous stint in office raises real concern now that he is being reappointed. These steps could very well be defined as “extremely unreasonable” and therefore could be invalidated by the Supreme Court.

Ben-Gvir’s entire turbulent period as Minister of National Security was characterized by his heavy-handed involvement in the operations of the police and by politicization of the police’s activities. For example, on several occasions the Minister attended the police forward command post during protests against the government, and directly instructed the police not to allow the blocking of major roads and to forcibly open all the blockades set up by the “anarchists” and “privileged people from Kaplan.” Ben-Gvir spoke directly with senior officers about the suspension or return to service of police officers due to their conduct during operational activities, and he intervened in real time in investigations that were being conducted into allegations of excessive use of force by police officers and Border Police officers, including against Palestinians and Arab citizens of Israel. He even approached police units in the field and opposed police actions to provide security for the aid convoys to Gaza – convoys that were dispatched as part of the Israeli government’s official policy as decided by Prime Minister Netanyahu’s Security Cabinet.

This improper influence on police activity, under the guise of general policy, was even stronger when it came to police appointments. For example, the Minister and former Police Commissioner decided to dismiss the then-commander of the Tel Aviv district, Deputy Commissioner Ami Eshed, which was announced during a protest being held in Tel Aviv, after Ben-Gvir had just hours earlier expressed criticism of actions taken under Eshed’s command. This case raised real fears about indirect operational intervention by Ben-Gvir in police activities. As written by Supreme Court Justice Yitzhak Amit, regarding a request submitted to the High Court of Justice to prevent the dismissal of Deputy Commissioner Eshed, the Court had duly noted the Attorney General's response. This response stated clearly that the appointment of senior officers in the Israel Police and their removal cannot be used to convey “messages with a ‘chilling effect’ to the chain of command.”

Other similar cases illustrate the use of appointments by Ben-Gvir and those around him for the purpose of improperly influencing the police, such as the deeply flawed promotion of Superintendent Meir Suissa, despite his previous indictment for throwing stun grenades at anti-government demonstrators.

The Attorney General wrote to the Prime Minister in November last year—when required to address the issue as part of her response to petitions calling for the Minister’s removal from his position—that the combination of the Minister's direct and substantial influence over the professional future of police officers and his alleged improper interference in the police’s operational activity “harms the possibility of ensuring that the police force is guided in its actions by loyalty to the public, rather than to the political leadership.”

The Supreme Court also recently addressed Ben-Gvir’s conduct as Minister of National Security, in the context of the important ruling published in January regarding Amendment No. 37 to the Police Ordinance—known informally as the “Ben-Gvir Amendment,” passed in 2022 as part of the coalition agreement in which Ben-Gvir was appointed as minister. In his ruling, Justice Sohlberg wrote that in at least some of Ben-Gvir’s actions since being appointed to his position, “the Minister has exceeded his authority, since those actions cannot be viewed as policy decisions, not even close.” Thus, for example, “the publication of operational instructions relating to the conduct expected of the police in specific incidents (whether or not these instructions were formulated in general terms)—for example, regarding the blocking of certain routes, the manner in which force is used in a particular case, or a certain investigation that has been opened—does not constitute general policy” such as the Minister is entitled to set down.

Acting President Justice Amit (as he was at the time) wrote that “we have no other police… The police officer in the field is the source of support for every citizen in times of trouble and distress,” and that Israel’s police officers “work devotedly day and night to protect public safety, at their own risk.”

It is precisely for this reason that it is essential to strengthen the police, particularly as an independent force, in order to ensure that all citizens of Israel feel that the police are present and protecting them in a professional, egalitarian, and apolitical manner. Therefore, the reappointment of Itamar Ben-Gvir to the position of the minister in charge of the police is highly problematic. In light of past events, there is a real concern that police activity will be diverted to issues decided according to extraneous and political considerations. The professionalism, non-partisanship, and equality that are essential for law enforcement will continue to be harmed.

It should be remembered that the Attorney General wrote to the Prime Minister in January of this year, that, should he consider reappointing Ben-Gvir as a member of the government in the future, this would require an examination of the relevant factual basis “under the general terms of administrative law," and noting that this would constitute a new appointment. Indeed, at the government meeting held this week on the appointment of Ben-Gvir, she made clear that he could not be appointed as minister of national security (as opposed to any other ministerial position) until such time as the legal petitions against him have been examined. But, as it has often done, the government decided to disregard the legal opinion of the Attorney General and unanimously approved Ben-Gvir’s appointment.

Awarding prominent public positions to officials tainted by significant moral questions undermines the ethical foundations of Israel’s governing institutions and weakens public trust in the systems of government. This has been the line taken by the Supreme Court in all its rulings over the years. Reappointing Itamar Ben-Gvir as the minister in charge of the police contradicts these fundamental principles. An independent, neutral, and apolitical police service is important for all of us and essential for democratic rule. Now more than ever.