Israeli Government Rejects Decisions of Second Authority Council Amid Legal and Political Clash

The Israeli government has escalated its confrontation with the Supreme Court by refusing to recognize decisions made by the Second Authority Council for Television and Radio in its current composition. This regulatory body, established in 1990 to oversee commercial broadcasting and ensure public interest alongside commercial goals, has become a focal point of a constitutional crisis. The government’s refusal follows a Supreme Court order allowing the council to continue functioning despite its membership falling below the legal minimum of ten members, after a wave of resignations reduced its size.

The Second Authority Council, originally composed of 15 members appointed by the government on the recommendation of the Communications Minister, regulates advertising limits, content complaints, local content quotas, and ownership transfers of media channels. Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi is pushing for a broad reform to reduce regulatory overlap between the Second Authority and the Cable and Satellite Council, arguing that the current dual system is inefficient and burdens commercial broadcasters. Karhi also seeks to replace the current council members with new appointees, some with political affiliations, which has sparked accusations of politicizing an independent regulator.

Following the Supreme Court’s suspension of some of Karhi’s appointments, seven council members resigned, leaving the council below the quorum required by law. Despite this, the court permitted the council to continue making decisions, but the government declared it would not honor these decisions, intensifying the legal standoff. The resignations were partly attributed to pressure from Karhi’s office, according to one member, while others cited personal reasons.

Key pending decisions include approval of the sale of controlling shares in Channel 13 to the Merit fund, backed by high-tech entrepreneurs including Asaf Rappaport. The council’s composition is crucial as it holds the authority to approve or delay such ownership changes, impacting the stability of media outlets facing financial difficulties.

The government’s refusal to recognize the council’s decisions challenges the authority of the Supreme Court and creates regulatory uncertainty for broadcasters and investors. This unprecedented clash raises concerns about the rule of law and the independence of regulatory bodies in Israel’s media sector.