Court ruling9/25/2026

High Court of Justice Orders Appointment of Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation Council Members

Israel’s High Court of Justice ordered that four members of the Israeli Public Broadcasting Corporation Council assume their positions, despite the opposition of Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi. The Court also temporarily extended the term of the Corporation’s director-general, Golan Yochpaz, to prevent the organization from becoming paralyzed.

Key facts

•Court: Israel’s High Court of Justice—Bagatz
•The judgment was issued on September 24, 2026
•Petitioner: the nonprofit organization Hatzlacha
•Four petitions filed beginning in 2022 were considered
•The appointments of the four Council members are valid regardless of the minister’s signature
•The minister was given one week to sign the documents

Why the Matter Reached the Court

Beginning in 2022, the nonprofit organization Hatzlacha, through attorney Elad Mann, filed four petitions over the shrinking composition of the Corporation Council. According to the petitioner, further delays in the appointments could have deprived the Council of the ability to function fully. The communications minister did not accept the Appointments Committee’s recommendations regarding some of the candidates and preferred to wait for the possibility of appointing the next Council in full.

What the High Court of Justice Ruled

The Court ruled that the terms of the four Council members in dispute begin or are extended for a new term as of the date of the judgment—September 24, 2026. Karhi must sign their appointment documents within one week. Even if the minister does not do so, the appointments will take effect directly by virtue of the judgment.

The Director-General’s Term

Director-General Golan Yochpaz’s term was due to end in November 2026. The Court temporarily extended it until a functioning Council can convene and select a new director. Justice Ofer Grosskopf ruled that this step was necessary to achieve the objective of all the petitions—preventing the Corporation’s operations from ceasing—even though the petitioners had not initially requested such relief.

Why the Minister’s Objections Were Rejected

The Court noted that the Council must not be left without the necessary professionals until all its members are replaced: such an approach is contrary to the legislature’s intent. The minister’s general statements about the candidates’ possible political ties were insufficient because the Appointments Review Committee had already examined the issue. The minister could have submitted his specific objections to the Committee but did not do so.

The Significance of Professional Recommendations

The judgment confirms that the minister or the government retains discretion in appointing officeholders, but they may not act arbitrarily. Rejecting the recommendations of a professional committee requires a specific and reasoned explanation. Political disagreement alone with the candidates is insufficient grounds for refusing to appoint them.

What this means for you

For citizens, the judgment reduces the risk of disruptions to Israeli public broadcasting due to the absence of a functioning Council or director. More broadly, state authorities cannot disregard the recommendations of professional appointments committees without substantive reasoning. In the event of a delay, the Court may take the steps necessary to preserve the operation of a public institution.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings