Likud has filed its response to petitions challenging the process that elected State Comptroller Michael Ravilo, arguing the opposition is acting in bad faith and asking the High Court of Justice to throw the case out. Through attorney Ilan Bombach, the party said the petitions would never have been filed if the vote had ended differently, calling them the product of a political loss rather than a genuine legal grievance.
The dispute centers on claims that secrecy behind the ballot was violated during the Knesset vote. Likud says both sides had previously agreed on a three-part voting arrangement, but the opposition reneged once the outcome did not match its expectations. Bombach accused the opposition of creating a political “insurance policy” by turning to the court after the fact.
“Who could have imagined the amounts of hypocrisy that can spill from mouths praising the fundamental value of secrecy?” Bombach wrote in the filing. He said the opposition had a “win-win” setup, either accepting a favorable result as final or repudiating the agreement if it lost, which he described as “cynicism in its purest form.”
Beyond this specific case, Likud warned that accepting the petitions could set a dangerous precedent for Israel’s democratic system. Bombach asked whether similar secrecy claims could later be used to challenge national election results, and said the court should not open such a door. Likud is urging the court to reject the petitions outright and enforce the agreement reached in the Knesset, saying a contrary ruling would conflict with the court’s long-standing restraint on intervening in internal parliamentary procedures.
