Don't Turn the MAG Affair Into a Political Weapon
All participants in Israel’s public discourse would do well to use this astonishing affair to repair the legal system, not to score points against ideological rivals.
Photo by Oren Ben Hakoon/POOL
The alleged actions of the Military Advocate General (MAG), Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, as they have been reported so far, are astonishing. We are confronted with an unbelievable and dangerous chain of events, set in motion by a senior official in Israel's law enforcement system. According to the reports, it includes the deliberate leaking of a damaging video of IDF soldiers — a video suspected of having been edited (it has not yet been determined by whom) — which was exploited by Israel’s worst enemies to spread lies about the country. This affair also allegedly involves obstruction of justice and misleading the court, concealment of evidence, and, most gravely, the abuse of a senior legal position that has corrupted the justice system from within.
Tomer-Yerushalmi did not misuse her power out of greed or to advance personal interests. Had that been the case, it could have been dismissed as yet another incident of governmental corruption. But her wrongdoing is far more severe. Instead of fighting serious criminal suspects through legal means, she allegedly abused her legal authority to bring the matter to the court of public opinion, using improper tools against those she perceived as a threat to the Military Advocate General’s Corps and to the rule of law. In doing so, she herself blurred the fine but critical line that separates defending democracy and the rule of law from the improper intervention of jurists in public discourse and Israel’s internal social conflicts.
What makes the actions of the Military Advocate General and her officers so serious is not only the alleged criminal conduct by such senior legal figures, but their use of criminal mechanisms to interfere in and manipulate public discourse. Supporters of the “deep state” theory, who believe that bureaucrats and jurists control our lives and engineer our consciousness, could not have asked for a stronger confirmation than the gift Tomer-Yerushalmi has given them. If the allegations against her are proven, this would amount to nothing less than a mega-attack on Israeli democracy, the shockwaves of which will be felt for a long time to come.
At this moment, defenders of democracy and the rule of law must not close ranks to protect the indefensible. Israel's liberal camp must resist the urge to attempt to downplay the severity of the Military Advocate General’s actions, or to divert the discussion through whataboutism toward blaming the coalition and its supporters. The rotten apples that threaten Israeli democracy must be removed and denounced, even when they come from within the justice system itself. This is a paramount interest for anyone who values the rule of law. Defenders of democracy should be the first to demand full accountability for Tomer-Yerushalmi’s conduct.
It appears, moreover, that the corruption exposed is not limited to the Military Advocate General herself, but also includes other parts of the Military Advocate General’s Corps. One can only hope for a thorough and transparent investigation that will lead to a much needed renewal of the MAG Corps, which has a vital role in Israel’s law enforcement system and in preserving the IDF’s moral ethos, most of whose members act with professionalism and integrity.
The Attorney General, too, will have to provide honest answers to difficult questions: whether she turned a blind eye to what should have raised red flags, and whether she did enough to uncover the truth. The Attorney General would do well to take the initiative herself and show the public that she is not afraid of a comprehensive and effective investigation of the affair. Just as it is rightly argued that a criminal defendant cannot intervene in the dismissal of the Attorney General responsible for prosecuting him, so too should the Attorney General refrain from overseeing an investigation that will, among other things, examine her office’s role in this grave affair.
Alongside the firm condemnation of the actions of the Military Advocate General and her associates, it is also necessary to warn against those seeking to take advantage of this affair for improper purposes. For example, some are now pushing forcefully for the Military Advocate General’s alleged misconduct to lead to the acquittal of suspects accused of abuse at the Sde Teiman detention facility. To them, it must be said plainly: the rot revealed in the Military Advocate General’s office does not automatically clear the suspects of abuse, nor does it justify the grave act committed by those who crossed the red line by storming an IDF base in protest of the arrests. Guilt in this case is not a zero-sum game: the potential guilt of the Military Advocate General does not equate to the innocence of the suspects in the abuse case. Both matters must be thoroughly investigated, and all those found guilty must be held fully accountable.
Equally troubling are the supporters of the judicial overhaul, who make no secret of their intent to exploit the Military Advocate General affair to advance their attempted overhaul against the judiciary. Tomer-Yerushalmi has done a valuable service for Yariv Levin and Simcha Rothman in their efforts to weaken and take control of the judiciary. A crucial distinction must be made here between exposing personal failures within the legal system and claims of structural problems relating to excessive institutional power. The Military Advocate General affair clearly belongs to the former category, not the latter.
The Military Advocate General affair demonstrates how devastating it is when figures within the legal system abuse their authority, thereby contributing with their own hands to the erosion of democracy and the rule of law. The answer cannot be a retaliatory destruction of law enforcement institutions. Weakening the judiciary and empowering politicians will not solve the problem of abuse of power; it will merely shift it from the legal sphere to the political one, where it could become far worse.
All participants in Israel’s public discourse would do well to use this grave affair to repair the legal system, not to score points against ideological rivals. The main lesson to be drawn from the Military Advocate General affair is the importance of insulating the justice system from the political arena and from public controversy — an independence that must be safeguarded both by politicians and, no less importantly, by the jurists themselves.
This article was published in the Jerusalem Post
