The battle over the leadership of the Mossad escalated Sunday after Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara submitted a sharply worded response to the High Court calling to revoke Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s appointment of Maj. Gen. Roman Gofman as Mossad chief

In her submission to the Court regarding petitions challenging Gofman’s appointment, Baharav-Miara claimed that “the prime minister’s decision suffers from extreme and blatant unreasonableness.”

The petitions stem from an incident during Gofman’s tenure as the IDF commander of the Bashan Division in the Golan. According to allegations, Gofman carried out an ‘influence operation’ in which he instructed two subordinate officers to pass classified information to a 17-year-old, Ori Elmakayes from Ashkelon, who operated a Telegram news channel. Elmakayes was later arrested by the Shin Bet and police—who were unaware that Gofman had recruited him—and charged with serious security offenses.

Gofman denied direct responsibility, saying he was unaware that Elmakayes was a minor and had instructed that only non-classified material be passed to him. Senior defense officials, including IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir, backed Gofman’s account. They appeared before the appointments committee and expressed full confidence in Gofman, describing the affair as “an operational mishap” rather than an ethical failure, disqualifying him from promotion. Some said that senior officials in the Military Intelligence Directorate attempted to “sacrifice” Gofman to deflect blame from themselves in the classified information scandal.

Three of the four members of the advisory committee for senior appointments — known as the Grunis Committee — concluded that no flaw had been found in Gofman’s integrity and approved his appointment as Mossad chief. They said that the material they reviewed showed that Gofman was not aware of the identity of the blogger involved in the affair, acted according to instructions from security officials, and might even have committed an offense had he acted differently.

They further stated that Gofman acknowledged a technical error in his conduct and received a command-level reprimand, but nevertheless demonstrated integrity and responsibility. The committee also argued that established legal precedent leaves no basis for High Court intervention in its decision and suggested the petitions should not have been filed in the first place.

In addition, the committee noted that senior appointments had previously been approved by majority vote alone, including the appointment of former Police Commissioner Kobi Shabtai despite opposition from the committee chairman at the time, without legal petitions being filed.

Baharav-Miara sided with the minority opinion issued by former Supreme Court president Asher Grunis, who chaired the advisory committee and concluded that Gofman should not be appointed. As part of her submission, Baharav-Miara asked the court to review a classified document signed by outgoing Mossad chief David Barnea, which she said also served as a basis for her legal position. Barnea was reportedly strongly opposed to Gofman’s selection.

Baharav-Miara wrote to the Court that “in light of the integrity-related flaws regarding Gofman identified by the committee chairman in his opinion, there is no alternative but for the honorable court to intervene in the prime minister’s decision regarding Gofman’s appointment as head of the Mossad and to accept the petitions.”

Coalition officials sharply attacked the attorney general’s position.

Ofir Katz of Likud wrote: “Opposition leader Gali Baharav-Miara is engaged in a campaign of hunting outstanding, heroic, and worthy officers simply because this government appointed them. Her position should be ignored, and the appointment should proceed.”

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir responded: “Gali, they are applauding you in Tehran. They could not have dreamed of a better ally than you. While Israeli hero Roman Gofman fights the enemy, Gali is fighting the State of Israel and endangering its security.”

On Friday, Netanyahu submitted his response to the High Court regarding the petitions seeking to disqualify Gofman’s appointment.

Netanyahu used unusually sharp language, placing his own operational authority and security judgment above the court’s criticism and arguing that this was a fateful decision beyond the judiciary’s expertise to evaluate.

In his response, Netanyahu argued that the reasonableness of his decision as prime minister was “dozens of times superior” to that of the court or any other body.

The prime minister stressed that no blemish had been found in Gofman’s character, saying that “his integrity was examined with iron combs and found pure.”

Netanyahu slammed the petitioners, saying that they are effectively attempting to strip the public of the democratic authority entrusted to the government to determine who implements the country’s security policy.

(YWN Israel Desk—Jerusalem)