Lawmaker, Group Seek to Disqualify Supreme Court Justice in Military Advocate General Case

Member of Knesset Avichai Boaron and the Im Tirtzu-affiliated organization "Lavi" filed an urgent request with the Supreme Court on Wednesday seeking the disqualification of Justice Daphne Barak-Erez from a further hearing in the "Military Advocate General" (MAG) case. The request argues that Barak-Erez headed the panel that previously heard petitions concerning the leak of a video from the Sde Teiman base and subsequently made decisions on issues now at the heart of the dispute. The requesters claim this creates a genuine concern of bias, or at least a damage to the appearance of justice.

In 2024, petitions were filed demanding that the investigation into the video leak be removed from the Military Police and the Military Advocate General's corps, citing concerns that the leak originated from within the very bodies tasked with investigating it. In February 2025, the panel led by Barak-Erez dismissed these petitions, stating the alleged conflict of interest lacked a "solid factual basis" and that the oversight framework provided an "adequate response" to the concerns.

Months later, it reportedly emerged that the MAG's office had taken responsibility for approving the leak, after a female officer in the Military Advocate General's corps admitted to leaking the video under orders. The requesters emphasize they are not alleging the court acted knowingly on false pretenses, but rather that the court itself was misled. Nevertheless, they argue that due to Barak-Erez's prior involvement, it is inappropriate for her to rule on the case's current stage.

"The question is not whether the panel erred, but whether the person who headed it can be entrusted with the decision in the final branching of that same case," the request states. The requesters also point to decisions made by Barak-Erez in February 2026 regarding the transfer of investigation materials and the identity of the State Prosecutor's Office official to handle them, arguing these demonstrate a premature stance on a currently disputed issue.

Finally, Boaron and Lavi cite a previous ruling by Barak-Erez in the Galatz (Army Radio) case, where she stated an official cannot participate in proceedings if they hold a "locked and formed preconceived opinion" on the matter they must decide. They contend this principle necessitates her disqualification in the current case, arguing, "Precisely in a case that is entirely about a breach of public trust in the justice system, the decision must be given, and appear to be given, by someone not connected to the case or its developments."