The article argues that the High Court of Justice's recent moves on the State Comptroller reflect a broader struggle over who controls Israeli institutions. It points to the court's recommendation that the Knesset vote again on the comptroller's election, along with its signal that it may invalidate the original vote, and to an earlier ruling that blocked the comptroller from publishing reports on October 7, despite prior precedent allowing his work to continue alongside a state commission of inquiry.
According to the piece, the State Comptroller's Office was once a relatively obscure institution, until former Supreme Court justice Miriam Ben-Porat and later media-friendly comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss turned it into a far more prominent force in public life. The author ties that development to what he describes as the old Mapai-aligned establishment, which after losing elections increasingly relied on appointed institutions such as the High Court, the Bank of Israel governor, and the civil service, while promoting a culture of “professionalism” that, in his view, advanced its own agenda.
The article says the right later learned to use the one major difference in the comptroller's selection process, unlike judges, the comptroller is elected by the Knesset in a secret ballot. It says this allowed the right to install allies, first Matanyahu Englman and now Michael Ravilo, and to resist appointing judges when it preferred its own candidates, citing its opposition to Justice Yosef Elron's nomination.
The author contends that the court now intervenes selectively, restricting the comptroller's authority over October 7 and intervening in the election process without clear evidence of political instructions in the ballot booths, despite the Knesset legal adviser having approved the procedure. He presents the dispute as a question of power and institutional control in an era when the old hegemony is shrinking but still trying to shape outcomes through the court.
