Israeli Supreme Court Orders Yehuda Eliyahu to End Tenure as Israel Lands Authority CEO by July 19
The Israeli Supreme Court has ruled that Yehuda Eliyahu's tenure as CEO of the Israel Lands Authority (ILA) must end on July 19. The decision was made by justices Yael Wilner, Ofer Groskopf, and Khaled Kabub following petitions challenging Eliyahu's appointment. Earlier this week, the court suggested canceling Eliyahu's appointment and reconstituting the selection committee. However, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich sought to keep Eliyahu in office until a new committee completes its work, making the ruling a significant setback for him.
Eliyahu was appointed ILA CEO in May amid controversy. Three petitions argued that his close 27-year friendship with Smotrich raised concerns of conflict of interest and improper motives behind the appointment. The selection committee's scoring of candidates weakened claims that Eliyahu was uniquely qualified, as only three of five members gave him the highest rating. Other top scores went to Kobi Yellovitz, a real estate executive, and Shuli Avni Shoham, head of the Corporations Authority.
The court accepted claims that two committee members, Meiran Prozner and Prof. Idit Solberg, were likely conflicted. Prozner, head of the Budget Department at the Finance Ministry, was selected in a process involving Eliyahu, raising concerns about impartiality. Solberg chairs a company owned by her husband that provides consulting services to government ministries, including the Housing Ministry, which oversees the ILA. The appointment was signed by Smotrich, Housing Minister Haim Katz, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The ruling annuls Eliyahu's appointment and the committee's recommendation. The selection committee will be reformed, replacing Prozner and Solberg due to conflict concerns. Until the new committee completes its work, an interim CEO will be appointed under civil service law. The committee will interview Eliyahu and the other two leading candidates, Avni Shoham and Yellovitz, with the option to consider additional candidates.
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.