After Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara’s attempts to thwart the appointment of Roman Gofman as Mossad chief failed miserably, it was believed that the High Court would finally give a stamp of approval to the appointment that they had no business interfering with in the first place.

Instead, the Court ruled on Tuesday that the advisory committee for senior appointments must reconvene and complete the review process it conducted regarding the appointment, claiming that its work “was deficient.”

It should be noted that the composition of the committee has meanwhile changed, since a new Civil Service Commissioner, Doron Cohen, has entered office and now serves as a committee member by virtue of his position.

The court instructed the committee to hear testimony from petitioner Ori Elmakayes, the former underage blogger at the center of the case. It should be noted that Gofman was not aware of Elmakayes’ identity at the time of the incident, which is why the committee members did not feel obligated to hear his testimony.

The court also instructed the committee to hear the testimony of G., the military intelligence officer who questioned Gofman about Elmakayes’ case. The petitions against Gofman claimed that he lied to G. about whether he was aware that Elmakayes was a minor. However, according to G.’s affidavit, he did not even question Gofman about that detail, adding that both Gofman and he himself were unaware of Elmakayes’ identity.

Due to the tight timetable, the committee is required to notify the court by Thursday afternoon whether it will act in accordance with the instructions, and it has been given one week to complete its work. The court will then decide how to proceed with the case.

It should be noted that Prof. Talia Einhorn, a member of the advisory committee for senior appointments, publicly posted her support of Gofman’s appointment and slammed Baharav-Miara for her intervention saying that the material that the committee reviewed proved Gofman’s integrity, and in a barb aimed at Baharav Miara, wrote: “From what emerged during and after the High Court hearing, it appears that serious flaws in the integrity of others were revealed, while Gofman’s integrity remains intact.”

Prof. Einhorn made the following points (among others):

1. The committee proved that Elmakayes’ arrest did not stem from the information he received from the intelligence officer in the division but from classified information he received from other units, for which he was also sentenced to imprisonment.

2. Consequently, Maj. Gen. Gofman could not have done anything to intervene in the arrest proceedings, and the claim that he allegedly abandoned Elmakayes is a baseless fabrication.

3. Only the intelligence personnel in the division, and not Gofman, knew Elmakayes’ identity, even months after his arrest. This was conclusively proven by the material reviewed by the committee.

4. Consequently, there was no reason to summon Elmakayes to the committee, as he never claimed any direct connection to Gofman.

(YWN Israel Desk—Jerusalem)