In an unprecedented move, Israel’s government voted unanimously on Monday to dismiss Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, who is overseeing the corruption prosecution of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The decision, however, was swiftly suspended by the country’s High Court, which issued a temporary freeze pending a review of its legality. This marks the first time in Israel’s 78-year history that a sitting government has attempted to remove its top legal official, escalating tensions over the independence of the judiciary and executive power.
Netanyahu’s coalition accused Baharav-Miara of abusing her authority by obstructing key government decisions, including efforts to oust the head of Israel’s domestic security agency, Shin Bet. While Netanyahu did not participate in the vote due to a declared conflict of interest—stemming from his ongoing criminal trial—allies argued the attorney general had overstepped her role. Baharav-Miara, who remains in office pending the court’s ruling, denounced the decision as “unlawful.” In a defiant statement, she vowed to continue her duties impartially, warning that the move jeopardized “the rule of law, equality, and the system’s ability to combat government corruption.”
The High Court’s intervention prevents the government from appointing a replacement or interfering with Baharav-Miara’s work until its final decision. Legal experts described the standoff as a critical test of Israel’s institutional checks and balances. The attorney general has been central to Netanyahu’s protracted corruption trial, which includes charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust. If convicted of bribery, the prime minister faces up to a decade in prison, with lesser sentences for the other charges. Multiple hearings in the case have been postponed recently, with courts approving Netanyahu’s requests citing classified diplomatic, security, and health reasons.
Opposition leaders swiftly condemned the dismissal effort, framing it as part of Netanyahu’s broader judicial overhaul plan. The proposed reforms, which sparked months of mass protests in 2023, aim to grant the government greater control over judicial appointments and limit the Supreme Court’s authority. Critics argue the changes would erode democratic safeguards, enabling Netanyahu to evade accountability. “This is not about governance—it’s about a personal and political campaign to concentrate power and undermine the justice system,” said one opposition lawmaker.
The controversy unfolds amid deepening polarization in Israel. Proponents of the judicial reforms accuse activist judges of excessive interference in policymaking, while opponents warn of democratic backsliding. With the High Court yet to rule on the attorney general’s dismissal, the outcome could set a pivotal precedent for the balance of power in Israel’s political system. As the standoff continues, observers warn of further institutional instability, with Baharav-Miara’s fate symbolizing broader struggles over legal integrity and governmental authority.
