The State Comptroller's Office buckled down on what it said was its duty to investigate the government’s failures of the October 7 massacre - and demand the retrieval of the documents it needs in order to do so, from the IDF and the political echelons.
“The position of the Comptroller is that his duties - including that of public service - require him to lead an investigation into how all the relevant parties functioned [at the time of the massacre] - civil, governmental, and military - including and especially when it comes to core issues,” wrote the office in its Sunday letter.
It added that all of the arguments that the IDF Public Defender raised were already presented to the High Court of Justice, and were even settled and agreed upon. It further charged that since these “exceptions” in the comptroller’s authority were already granted, it is suspicious that the Public Defender's office should be so opposed to these requests.
While at its core, this is a disagreement over authority, the context of a lack of a professional and proper investigation into the failures of the October 7 massacre is the fire fueling this debate.
Petitions against the Comptroller's involvement in October 7 inquiries argued to the court that State Comptroller Matanyahu Engleman’s findings have the potential to influence or sabotage a future State Commission of Inquiry (SCI), that the fact that it is happening during active military operations could influence how those are carried out, and that this process is unprecedented.
Engleman argued that these impediments directly affect his ability to do his job in an objective manner, that time is of the essence - as the war drags on and it will be more complicated to call up people for testimony - and that what this does is effectively bend the needs of his office to that of the individuals and groups he wishes to investigate, rendering his objectivity obsolete.
Reaching mutual understandings how to conduct investigation
On March 27, the petitioners and the State Comptroller's Office issued a statement saying that they reached mutual understandings of how such an investigation would take place. The court was asked to nullify all the existing injunctions.
About a month ago, Engleman requested from the IDF and from the IDF Public Defender for several sensitive documents pertaining to the military's readiness in the days both before and after Hamas's October 7 massacre attack.
Walla reported that documents he requested specify what actually happened in real time, what was done by the army, and the breadth and depth of data that was transferred from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's military secretary, Avi Gil, to the IDF, during the attack.
According to Walla, which gained access to the documents, Engleman asked for several operational records dating from October 5 through October 8. These included transcripts of conversations, situational assessments, and status updates passed on from the general command to relevant government bodies.
The state comptroller also requested access to the personal and operational schedule of then-IDF chief of staff Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Herzi Halevi. From Gil, Engleman requested his schedule, calls, situational assessments, discussions and consultations, including anything that was passed on to Netanyahu.
Similar requests encompassing the same timeline were made to the Intelligence Corps, Unit 8200, Southern Command, and the Israel Air Force.
The State Comptroller's Office said at the time, “Nothing will stop us from turning over every stone to arrive at the truth.”
About two weeks later, the IDF Public Defender's Office said that Engleman broke protocol and was extending beyond the authority of his office in these requests.
It then turned to the Attorney-General's Office to request that his authority not be extended this far - to “core issues” relating to national security and policy.
It added that an investigation, such as the one Engleman is pursuing, is reserved for an SCI - precisely because the issues at hand are so sensitive.
Engleman's office said at the time that that is precisely the reason for his pursuit of these materials - because there is no imminent plan for an SCI. The nature of the investigation of the October 7 failures has been the subject of debate from about since the Israel-Hamas War began.
Chief purpose to restore public faith in government
An SCI is a public committee established by the Knesset. Its chief purpose is to restore public faith in the government.
Ordinarily, the Supreme Court president makes the appointments and is considered the highest authority on issues demanding such a probe; once the government establishes the committee, it cannot have any further involvement with it.
The other route to opening an SCI is through the direction of the state comptroller, who can order its establishment by the Knesset State Control Committee. This method is less common.
Some political figures, at the start of the war, said that an SCI was necessary and the only way to properly investigate the government’s failures. Since then, the tone has changed drastically to one of distrust of such a committee, partly because of who would appoint the figures: Supreme Court Chief Justice Isaac Amit.
President Isaac Herzog, in an effort to meet these demands and usher the process, proposed in March that both moderate activist Amit and staunchly conservative Deputy Chief Justice Noam Sohlberg be charged with forming the committee. Other suggestions included a committee appointed by Members of Knesset, but that has been shot down due to what is seen as the politicization of the process.
The issue has yet to be resolved, while bereaved families await answers that only an investigation of an objective-enough caliber could provide, about the fates of their loved ones.