Israel's Second Authority chair, council members ask High Court to reject appointment petitions

Newly appointed Second Authority Council chairwoman Dr. Yifat Ben Hay-Segev and council members are urging the High Court of Justice to reject petitions challenging their appointments. In preliminary responses filed Sunday, they argued the challenges are politically driven and legally unfounded. These petitions are part of a series of challenges against the government's March appointments to the Second Authority Council, the body responsible for regulating Israel's commercial television and regional radio broadcasters, including major news channels.

“

the challenges are politically driven and legally unfounded.

The petitions were initiated by several prominent organizations, including the Union of Journalists in Israel, the Israel Television News Company, the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, the Israel Press Council, and the Association for the Preservation of Legal Values. Earlier this month, Justice Alex Stein temporarily halted the council's activities, preventing it from convening or making decisions, after the state missed its deadline to respond. Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara subsequently advised the court that the appointments should be canceled due to serious legal flaws in the process.

“

the appointments should be canceled and returned for renewed review, arguing that the process suffered from serious legal flaws.

Dr. Ben Hay-Segev, in her response, stated that the petitions aim to tarnish her reputation and prevent her from holding public office, especially "at the height of her career." She asserted that her qualifications were never questioned in previous public appointments, and criticism only emerged after she testified in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Case 4000 trial. She emphasized that her appointment was lawful, following consultations, legal review by the Communications Ministry, and approval by the appointments vetting committee, which had already examined claims regarding her past roles and disputes.

“

at the height of her career

The council members filed a separate response, characterizing the petitioners and potentially the Attorney-General’s Office as using "pseudo-legal" tools in political battles, treating the appointed members as "collateral damage." They maintained that all appointments met legal requirements, including committee approval, and noted that six members were entering a second term. The response also defended specific members, such as attorney Kinneret Barashi and Dr. Haim Shine, against challenges based on their public statements or political views, arguing these should not automatically disqualify citizens.

“

collateral damage