by Sarah Ben-Nun
Levin challenges High Court over its intervention in the Sde Teiman investigation, urging it to approve retired Judge Ben-Hamo's appointment and arguing the AG's initial involvement is compromised.
 |
Justice Minister Yariv Levin on Sunday morning called on the High Court of Justice to cancel the interim order it issued on Thursday evening freezing the temporary appointment of retired judge Josefh Ben-Hamo as the accompanying figure to the Sde Teiman video-leak investigation.
Levin argued that when the court approved the prosecution’s request for an interim order on Thursday, it could not have been ruling on the appointment itself, because that issue was not the original subject of the petition.
The consequences from the court hearing, rather, were that Levin’s previous appointment was invalid, but that the authority to appoint was in his hands.
Shortly after Levin formally activated Ben-Hamo’s temporary appointment on Thursday evening, the NGO Mishmar HaDemocratia HaIsraelit (“Israeli Democracy Guard”) petitioned the High Court to halt the appointment.
Supreme Court President Isaac Amit accepted the request, citing the need to “maintain the status quo.” On Friday, the prosecution asked the court to hold another hearing on the matter.
In that request, the prosecution asked the justices to reconsider the question of Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara’s conflict of interest, as well as that of senior officials in the prosecution, and to reexamine the court’s decision granting a politician authority to intervene in an ongoing criminal investigation.
 |
| Israeli attorney general Gali Baharav Miara attends a Constitution, Law and Justice Committee leads a committee meeting in the Israeli Parliament in Jerusalem, on April 27, 2025. (credit: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90) |
Sde Teiman probe: Levin battles Court over judge criteria
On Sunday, Levin characterized the investigation as improper and deficient because of Baharav-Miara’s initial involvement, arguing that it is now proceeding without adequate oversight.What gives petitioners, and the Attorney-General’s Office, room to challenge Levin’s appointment is that Ben-Hamo does not fully meet the criteria laid out by the court.
The investigation focuses on the leak of a video showing IDF reservists abusing a Palestinian detainee at the Sde Teiman detention facility in July 2024, and on the subsequent obstruction of justice.
The video was leaked in August 2024, and earlier this month, former Military Advocate General Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi admitted to authorizing it and resigned, while the investigation continues.
Ordinarily, the prosecution would lead such an inquiry. In this case, however, Attorney-General Baharav-Miara, State Attorney Amit Aisman, and other senior officials were involved in the initial probe, during which Tomer-Yerushalmi’s involvement went unnoticed. Baharav-Miara later recused herself and proposed that Aisman take over.
At last week’s court hearing, the prosecution maintained that Aisman was a legitimate figure to lead the investigation. At the same time, Levin’s representatives argued that the entire process had been compromised and required an external figure.
Levin’s original candidate was retired judge and Judicial Complaints Investigator Asher Kula.
The prosecution, as well as the petitioners, strongly opposed the choice, arguing that it amounted to a thinly veiled attempt to exert political control over the investigation, particularly in a political climate in which the judiciary has been under attack.
The court itself found Kula’s appointment invalid due to restrictions tied to his position as Judicial Complaints Investigator. Petitioners also claimed that the speed of his nomination was suspicious.
The court ruled that while the authority in such an unusual situation does indeed lie with Levin, Kula’s candidacy was invalid.
Levin then appointed Ben-Hamo, later arguing that the court had “set impossible standards for the criteria, it is impossible to abide by them.”
The criteria require a candidate with extensive criminal law experience who is a current state employee and who is sufficiently removed from the Attorney-General’s Office and the prosecution.
The court further stipulated that the individual be a retired Supreme Court justice, a district court judge, or an employee of one of Israel’s economic regulatory bodies.
Sarah Ben-Nun
Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-874862
No comments:
Post a Comment