Israeli Supreme Court Rules Government Can Close Army Radio but Voids Decision Over Improper Motives
The Israeli Supreme Court unanimously invalidated the government’s decision to shut down Galei Tzahal (Army Radio) but clarified that the government does have the authority to close the station without needing new legislation. The ruling, delivered by justices Daphne Barak-Erez, Alex Stein, and Yechiel Kasher, rejected claims that primary legislation was required for such a closure, affirming the government’s power to make this decision independently.
However, the court struck down the closure because it found the government’s decision was based on improper considerations. Specifically, the justices concluded that the decision was motivated by dissatisfaction with the station’s content, which they deemed an illegitimate reason. The court emphasized that the government failed to provide any alternative justification after a conditional injunction was issued.
Justice Yechiel Kasher, who authored the ruling with the agreement of the other two judges, stressed that it is undemocratic for authorities to silence a broadcaster simply because they dislike the opinions expressed. The court made clear that while the government may lawfully close Galei Tzahal in the future, any such decision must be based on legitimate, objective grounds rather than political or personal displeasure with the station’s broadcasts.
The ruling does not comment on the content of Galei Tzahal’s programming itself but focuses solely on the legality and motivations behind the government’s closure attempt. This decision leaves the door open for a future closure if proper procedures and reasons are presented.
Summary: The Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the government has the authority to close Galei Tzahal without new legislation but invalidated the recent closure decision because it was driven by improper motives related to dissatisfaction with the station’s content.
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.