The heated frontal confrontation between National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Gali Baharav-Miara is once again reaching the doorstep of the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Minister of National Security submitted, through his attorney, Attorney David Peter, an urgent request to the High Court of Justice, in which he accuses Baharav Meyara of "a series of blatant violations" of previous judicial decisions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The submitted request stated that within less than a day of the court's decision, the legal advisory bodies acted in direct violation of the decision that determined that the dialogue to formulate the procedures would take place in the previous format and in cooperation with the Prime Minister's representative - and held a working meeting without coordination, without the Prime Minister's representative and without the relevant participants, as the Supreme Court determined.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The minister's office clarifies that "this is a case of forceful conduct" that goes beyond the court's decision and the agreements reached in the hearing, and that it is not possible to have a real dialogue when one side unilaterally changes the rules of the game.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The request also claims that the legal advisor is trying to expand her powers in the area of \u200b\u200bpolice appointments, contrary to the established outline. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Among other things, an attempt was made to turn legal advice into a screening factor even before the recommendations reach the minister - a step that was not determined in the court's decision and is not anchored in law or procedures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In addition, the court is asked to clarify that in appointments at the rank of superintendent, the authority remains in accordance with the long-standing practice - a joint decision of the minister and the commissioner, based on the commissioner's recommendation, and not solely in accordance with the recommendation of the general command staff.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was also written that the court's decision did not affect the minister's authority to appoint, and that the requirement to update the advisor seven days in advance pertains to the stage after the minister's decision - and not to an earlier stage within the work of the police.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Minister Ben Gvir's office: "The advisor and her people have apparently gotten confused again, but they are no longer conducting the meetings. With one hand, the advisor tells the court that she has no confidence and that it is hopeless - and then when a decision is made, she returns to exactly the same place where she failed, the minister will not allow his powers to be violated or facts on the ground to be determined contrary to the court's decision."<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The heated frontal confrontation between National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Gali Baharav-Miara is once again reaching the doorstep of the Supreme Court. The Minister of National Security, through his attorney, Attorney David Peter, submitted an urgent request to the High Court of Justice, in which he accuses Baharav-Miara of "a series of flagrant violations" of previous judicial decisions. The request that was submitted states that within less than a day of the decision [\u2026]","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":1043890,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[8838,44139],"class_list":["post-1061283","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-1","tag-8838","tag-44139"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n