Former Netanyahu Ally Compares Israeli Broadcasting Law to Criminal Case 5000

Nir Hefetz, a former close associate of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu turned state witness in the 'Thousand Cases,' criticized the broadcasting reform law promoted by Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi. In an interview on June 30, 2026, Hefetz likened the current legislative process to Case 5000, alleging that the law reflects the same patterns Netanyahu was accused of in criminal proceedings, but now done openly in the Knesset.

Karhi confirmed reports about a secret political deal with Shas party leader Aryeh Deri, linking the broadcasting reform to a kosher certification reform supported by the ultra-Orthodox party. Karhi openly stated his support for political deals, saying, "I am very much in favor of political deals, I am a politician." The reform aims to reduce regulation but paradoxically increases legislative involvement in the media market, favoring pro-government channels like Channel 14 and i24NEWS, which critics say creates unfair competitive advantages.

The law has faced opposition within the coalition, especially from ultra-Orthodox parties concerned about unresolved issues such as Sabbath desecration and content restrictions in a government app meant to replace "Idan Plus." MK Avi Maoz (Noam) announced his resignation from the communications committee and opposition to the law in its current form, citing coalition and opposition unity in expanding Sabbath desecration through the legislation.

The reform is currently under discussion in a special Knesset committee, with plans to pass significant sections in the current session before the upcoming elections. Karhi emphasized that Netanyahu tasked him with this mission. The 2020 agreement signed by Netanyahu and approved by the Supreme Court restricts his involvement in legal matters related to his trial for bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, including media regulation.

Hefetz expressed hope that the situation would be corrected by October, warning of negative consequences if not. The debate highlights ongoing tensions over media regulation, political bargaining, and religious sensitivities in Israel's legislative process.