MK Sharren Haskel Summoned for Testimony in State Comptroller Election Probe
Sharren Haskel, chairwoman of the Israel Ahead party and member of the Knesset, has been summoned to testify at Lahav 433 regarding the recent elections for the State Comptroller. This follows instructions from Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and State Attorney Amit Isman to investigate whether Haskel or the Likud party submitted a false affidavit to the Supreme Court concerning video recordings taken during the secret ballot in the Knesset.
Last week, Haskel submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court stating that she was required to show Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu footage of her vote in the State Comptroller election, which the court later invalidated and ordered a new vote. She claimed that Likud's candidate was presented as the one whom members of the New Hope faction had to support without reservations or independent opinion. She further stated that during the repeated vote, New Hope members were asked to record themselves voting and present the footage to Netanyahu as proof.
Likud members Milvitsky and Kraei, who documented the vote, denied any directive to breach ballot secrecy or to film the vote. Likud's affidavit to the Supreme Court asserted that the recordings were made voluntarily by the MKs without any demand. The conflicting accounts prompted the Attorney General to order an open testimony from Haskel to clarify who gave the instructions and what they were.
Depending on Haskel's testimony, a criminal investigation may be launched to determine if a false affidavit was submitted to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had invalidated the initial election between Netanyahu's lawyer Michael Regev and retired Supreme Court Justice Yosef Elron, citing a significant procedural flaw and ordering a new vote, which has yet to take place and may not occur before upcoming elections. The invalidation followed revelations that several MKs filmed their votes, violating the legally mandated secrecy of the ballot.
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.