Author Claims Israeli 'Deep State' Hinders Government Policy
Translated & summarized from Mida by baba
An author appointed to Israel's Second Authority Council claims a "deep state" of senior civil servants, legal counsel, and the High Court of Justice is obstructing the elected government's policies. The author details how petitions and court orders halted the new council, revived the old one, and delayed new appointments. He argues these actions, driven by a belief in their own superiority, hinder elected officials and calls for mutual trust to resolve the situation.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- An author alleges an Israeli "deep state" is obstructing the elected government's policies.
- The High Court of Justice halted a newly appointed council and revived a previous one.
- Senior civil servants and the legal counsel are accused of hindering government appointments.
- The author believes these actors act with good intentions but a sense of superiority.
- He calls for mutual trust to overcome the perceived obstruction.
An Israeli author and candidate for the Second Authority Council alleges that a "deep state" within Israel is actively obstructing the elected government's policies. The author, who was appointed to the council by Communications Minister Shlomo Karai in March, describes a series of events that he believes demonstrate this obstruction. Following the appointment of the new council, five petitions were filed against it, leading the High Court of Justice (Bagatz) to issue an interim order preventing the council from convening. Subsequently, the court revived the previous council, whose term had expired, and removed quorum requirements due to resignations, allowing it to make significant decisions. The author criticizes the senior civil service at the Second Authority for allegedly showing a lack of cooperation and the "guardians of democracy" for petitioning against the new appointments. He further points to the legal counsel's refusal to defend the government's appointments, citing election timing as a pretext, despite the appointments having been approved months earlier. The author suggests that while he lacks proof of a conspiracy, the actions of senior civil servants, the legal counsel, and the court align with the behavior of a "deep state." He posits that these individuals, acting with good intentions and a sense of superiority, see themselves as gatekeepers, while elected officials are viewed as having ulterior motives or being public fund looters. The author concludes by advocating for mutual trust to resolve this perceived issue.