Baharav-Miara called on Israel’s High Court of Justice to revoke Gofman’s appointment to the position of Mossad chief. According to her, “The Prime Minister’s decision suffers from extreme and blatant unreasonableness."
She added that “the Elmakayes operation affair casts a heavy shadow over Gofman’s integrity, and there is no choice but for the court to intervene in the Prime Minister’s decision and accept the petitions."
Baharav-Miara also noted that current Mossad chief David Barnea had submitted to her a letter regarding Gofman’s appointment, relevant to the committee’s examination of his integrity.
On Friday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu submitted his response to the petitions seeking to disqualify Gofman’s appointment. Netanyahu chose sharp and forceful language, placing his executive authority and security judgment above judicial criticism by the High Court, arguing that this is a fateful decision that the court lacks the tools to properly assess.
In his response, Netanyahu argued that the reasonableness of his decision as Prime Minister is “dozens of times superior" to that of the court or any other body.
According to Netanyahu, he knows Gofman firsthand and is convinced that he is the most qualified candidate for the mission during wartime. Netanyahu emphasized that no flaw had been found in Gofman’s character, stating that “his integrity was combed through with an iron comb and found pure."
The Prime Minister also sharply criticized the petitioners, accusing them of “a lack of self-awareness and a lack of security responsibility."
Netanyahu claimed that some of the motives behind the petitions are political and improper, and that the petitioners are effectively seeking to deny the public the democratic authority entrusted to the government to determine who will implement the country’s security policy.
In a particularly controversial point in his response, Netanyahu clarified that even if a flaw had been found in the candidate’s integrity, the Prime Minister still has the authority to weigh that flaw against the candidate’s professional advantages in light of the country’s needs and challenges.
However, he immediately qualified that statement by asserting that in Gofman’s case no such flaw exists, and that he meets the highest ethical standards.