Israeli Gov’t Drops Inquiry into Oct 7 Events
Israel Delays Inquiry into Oct. 7 Attacks, Citing Gaza Operation
Table of Contents
- Israel Delays Inquiry into Oct. 7 Attacks, Citing Gaza Operation
- Israel Delays Inquiry into Oct. 7 Attacks: Your Questions Answered
- Why Did Israel Delay the Inquiry into the October 7th Attacks?
- What is the Government’s Stated Rationale for the Delay?
- What Alternative Actions is the Government Taking Regarding the Inquiry?
- What Concerns Were Raised by the Attorney General?
- How Have Key Government Figures Reacted to the Decision?
- What are the Key Differences in Opinion Regarding the Inquiry’s Structure?
- How Have Opposition Figures and Affected groups Responded?
- Here’s a Summary of Key Reactions:
JERUSALEM – The Israeli goverment decided Monday to postpone the establishment of a commission of inquiry into the Oct. 7 attacks,citing the ongoing military operation in Gaza.Instead, the government plans to collaborate with the Knesset to draft legislation for a commission that reflects diverse viewpoints and garners broad public trust. A response to the Supreme Court regarding the matter is expected within 90 days.
Legal Advisor’s Concerns
The government’s decision came roughly an hour after a letter from Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara urging the formation of an investigative body. Baharav-Miara stated that delaying a national commission of inquiry “causes damages and harms the search for truth.” Her request mirrored petitions to the Supreme Court, which had requested the government’s response.
Government Debate
During government discussions, Agriculture Minister Avi Dichter, a former head of the Shin Bet, argued against establishing a commission during wartime.”Even if we now establish a commission and say that it will begin to work in 60 or 90 days, it will not be a plus, but a madness,” Dichter said.
communications Minister Shlomo Karhi suggested public distrust in the Supreme Court contributed to the decision. Karhi stated that while a majority favors a national inquiry, there is concern about the Supreme Court’s role in composing the commission. “The Supreme Court should be the subject of an anquesting for security damage, and not to direct the inquiry. We must allow knesset to develop a law to establish a commission of investigation as large as possible. The date. “
Amichai Shikli advocated for a joint Knesset commission, while Nir Barkat proposed requiring a two-thirds majority in the Knesset to establish such a body. Miki Zohar echoed this sentiment, suggesting a commission chosen by a supermajority of Knesset members, rather than the Supreme Court president, but defined as a national commission of inquiry to reassure the public.
Zeev Elkin proposed collaboration between Supreme court President Yitzhak amit and Vice-President Noam Sohlberg in establishing the commission, expressing trust in Sohlberg. This proposal, similar to one previously discussed following a suggestion from President Isaac Herzog, had reportedly received Amit’s agreement.
Reactions to the Delay
The October Council, representing approximately 1,500 bereaved families and hostage families, criticized the government’s decision. The council released a statement saying, “The Israeli government openly admits that it will draw up a bill to establish an alternative accommodating investigation… We will not allow you to design and establish an accommodating commission of inquiry. The interviewee cannot appoint its own investigator.”
Opposition Leader Yair Lapid also criticized the delay, drawing parallels to past instances were prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu allegedly avoided investigating failures. “The only importance of the unmisal of a national inquiry commission is that the catastrophe of October 7 will happen to us and again,” Lapid said. “If we do not invest what has led to the disaster - we will not be able to learn from lessons and guarantee that this will not happen again… This time, a national commission of inquiry will end up being established.”
Israel Delays Inquiry into Oct. 7 Attacks: Your Questions Answered
This article provides in-depth answers to common questions about the Israeli government’s decision to postpone the inquiry into the October 7th attacks.
Why Did Israel Delay the Inquiry into the October 7th Attacks?
The Israeli government decided to postpone the establishment of a commission of inquiry into the October 7th attacks, citing the ongoing military operation in Gaza as the primary reason. They plan to collaborate with the Knesset to draft legislation for a commission.A response to the Supreme Court regarding the matter is expected within 90 days.
What is the Government’s Stated Rationale for the Delay?
The official reason given for the delay is the ongoing military operation in Gaza. The government believes that focusing on the war effort takes precedence at this time.
What Alternative Actions is the Government Taking Regarding the Inquiry?
Instead of immediately establishing a commission of inquiry, the government plans to:
Collaborate with the Knesset to draft legislation for a future commission.
Aim for a commission that reflects diverse viewpoints.
Strive to garner broad public trust in the commission.
Provide a response to the supreme Court within 90 days regarding the matter.
What Concerns Were Raised by the Attorney General?
Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara urged the formation of an investigative body. She stated that delaying a national commission of inquiry “causes damages and harms the search for truth.” Her request mirrored petitions to the Supreme Court, which had requested the government’s response.
How Have Key Government Figures Reacted to the Decision?
Government figures expressed differing views about the delay, and some of the key arguments are:
Agriculture Minister Avi Dichter: he argued against establishing a commission during wartime, viewing it as a hindrance.
Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi: Suggested public distrust in the Supreme Court contributed to the decision and that the Supreme Court shoudl not direct the inquiry.
Amichai Shikli: Advocated for a joint Knesset commission.
Nir Barkat & Miki zohar: Proposed requiring a two-thirds majority in the Knesset to establish a commission. Zohar suggested a commission chosen by a supermajority of Knesset members.
Zeev elkin: Proposed collaboration involving the Supreme Court President and Vice-President in establishing the commission.
What are the Key Differences in Opinion Regarding the Inquiry’s Structure?
There seem to be multiple opinions on the optimal structure of the future inquiry commission. Key areas of debate include:
Who should appoint the commission? Some favor appointment by the Supreme Court, while others prefer the Knesset.
What should the commission’s mandate be? There are differing views on the scope and focus of the inquiry.
When should the inquiry begin? Some officials have suggested that starting the inquiry during wartime could be counterproductive.
How Have Opposition Figures and Affected groups Responded?
Opposition figures and affected groups have widely criticized the delay.
The October Council (representing bereaved and hostage families): They expressed strong disapproval of the government’s decision, stating concerns about the government’s intentions for the inquiry.
Opposition Leader Yair Lapid: He criticized the delay, drawing parallels to past instances where investigations were avoided and stating the catastrophe of October 7th could happen again.
Here’s a Summary of Key Reactions:
| Group | Reaction |
| ————————- | —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— |
| Attorney General | Urged the prompt formation of an investigative body, highlighting concerns about the delay’s impact on uncovering the truth.|
| October Council | Criticized the delay, expressing concerns regarding the government’s intentions and the potential for a biased examination. They said, “the interviewee cannot appoint its own investigator.” |
| Opposition Leader Yair Lapid | Condemned the delay, suggesting it could lead to a repeat of the October 7th events, emphasizing the necessity to learn from the failures and prevent future incidents. “If we do not invest what has led to the disaster – we will not be able to learn from lessons and guarantee that this will not happen again… ” |