Attorney Amit Bachar, head of the Israeli Bar Association, convened an emergency meeting with senior legal figures in response to recent government actions, including the dismissal of the head of the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and the proposed dismissal of the attorney-general. The meeting also addressed upcoming legislative changes to the Judicial Selection Committee, which is scheduled for a vote next week.
Among those in attendance were former Supreme Court justices Hanan Melcer and Yoram Danziger, former attorney-general Avichai Mandelblit, Tel Aviv University president Prof. Ariel Porat, former Constitution Committee head Uriel Lin, and Prof. Suzie Navot of the Israel Democracy Institute.
‘A real danger to democracy’
Bachar expressed deep concern over the recent developments, stating: “These moves, when they accumulate together, constitute a real danger to democracy and the security of Israel and to every citizen in the country. The appointment of the head of the Shin Bet and the attorney-general on behalf of the government is already a de facto coup d’état and leads to serious concerns about the cancellation of the general elections or harming the proper process in order to ensure the survival of the government at all costs.”
Earlier in the day, Bachar spoke on 103FM with Anat Davidov, warning of the broader implications of the Shin Bet chief’s dismissal. “The public needs to understand that the warning bells are the bells of truth,” he said.
Regarding the legal procedure for removing the Shin Bet head, Bachar noted: “It’s not just a matter of procedure. The head of the Shin Bet is appointed by law—the government appoints him for a fixed period of five years, and it is also entitled to dismiss him, but the dismissal, like any dismissal of a senior official, is subject not only to administrative law and law in general, but to reasonableness and logic, and one must look at the overall picture.”
Legal and security ramifications
Bachar argued that removing the Shin Bet head under current circumstances was reckless, particularly given the government’s ongoing legal reforms and the security agency’s involvement in sensitive investigations. “Firing the head of the Shin Bet under these circumstances of a government that is very intensively promoting a legal revolution and a fundamental change of democratic foundations unilaterally, a government cannot arbitrarily and randomly do this at all—certainly and certainly when the Shin Bet is conducting a very sensitive investigation surrounding very serious conduct related to sensitive security conduct with Qatar,” he said.
“If the government wanted to fire the head of the Shin Bet, it would have had opportunities, and this timing is just an additional severity that, in my opinion, will not pass the High Court. This is completely reckless conduct. I just left an emergency meeting of the leaders of law firms together with leaders in the academic world, and there is not even a thought that this is legal or appropriate,” he added.
‘We are already in a constitutional crisis’
In response to a question about whether Israel was heading toward a constitutional crisis, Bachar stated: “We are already in a constitutional crisis. All the red lines have been crossed, and the public needs to understand that the warning bells are the bells of truth. If we allow the dismissal of the head of the Shin Bet and the dismissal of the legal advisor to the government, this is the embodiment of all the elements of a coup.”
He further warned that control over key institutions—the judiciary, the attorney-general, and the Shin Bet—could lead to a serious erosion of democratic safeguards. “The fear that there will be no proper elections is a real fear. The legal revolution is intended to weaken the control elements, so that they can put people in key positions there. Can you imagine for yourself that tomorrow they will appoint Zvi Sukkot and Itamar Ben-Gvir to head the Shin Bet, and who will prevent that?”
The emergency meeting concluded with participants voicing concerns over the potential consequences of these legal and governmental changes, emphasizing the need for legal oversight and constitutional stability.