Israel's Knesset Legal Advisor to Tell High Court Repeat Vote Needed for State Comptroller
The Knesset's legal advisor, Adv. Shagit Afik, believes a repeat vote is necessary to elect the next State Comptroller, a stance aligned with a High Court of Justice ruling from two and a half months ago. The court has mandated the Knesset to declare its position by next Tuesday, with Afik expected to submit her detailed legal opinion shortly. The initial vote on June 3rd saw 60 lawmakers back retired Supreme Court Justice Yosef Elron, while 57 supported Adv. Michael Ravilo, who represents Benjamin and Sara Netanyahu. However, the required majority of 61 votes was not met, prompting then-Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to call for a second round.
During the first vote, which was supposed to be secret, Likud members photographed their ballots showing support for Ravilo, violating Afik's directive. This led to an uproar and the suspension of the vote. Following consultations, a repeat vote was held where Ravilo secured 61 votes against Elron's 57. Despite this outcome, Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana has refused to convene the Knesset for a final vote, stating "no" to the High Court, a position echoed by some Likud ministers and lawmakers.
The failure to hold the repeat vote stems partly from coalition concerns about losing their majority due to the ousting of incumbent lawmakers. The opposition, not fully enthusiastic about Elron's candidacy, is not pressing for the vote, hoping for a new process with new candidates after the upcoming elections. The High Court is not expected to hear the case for several weeks, making a comptroller's election before the vote unlikely.
Meanwhile, since the resignation of State Comptroller Matanyahu Engelman in early July, 23 complaints from employees seeking whistleblower protection have been filed with the State Comptroller's Office. These complaints have been summarily rejected, as the absence of a serving comptroller legally prevents the office from providing relief to employees alleging retaliation for exposing corruption.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.