High Court Justice Isaac Amit Accuses Minister Ben Gvir of Politicizing Public Support for Police

High Court Justice Isaac Amit claims Itamar Ben Gvir’s support for police is "conditioned on politics" during a hearing on the minister's potential dismissal.

By: AXL Media

Published: Apr 15, 2026, 9:06 AM EDT

Source: Information for this report was sourced from Times of Israel

Judicial Critique of Selective Ministerial Advocacy

A senior justice of the High Court has delivered a sharp critique of the National Security Minister’s public relationship with law enforcement personnel. Justice Isaac Amit asserted during a hearing on Wednesday that Minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s frequent expressions of support for police officers are not universal but are instead contingent upon the political optics of their actions. Amit noted that while ministerial support for the rank-and-file is theoretically positive, the current pattern suggests that such backing is reserved exclusively for officers whose conduct aligns with a specific ideological agenda.

Specific Instances of Alleged Bias in Public Statements

To support his assessment, Justice Amit provided a list of contrasting scenarios involving police conduct and ministerial reaction. He pointed out that Ben Gvir has been quick to offer public defense for officers who use force against anti-government protesters or those involved in the killing of Arab suspects in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, or Bedouin towns like Tarabin al-Sana. According to the justice, these instances of unwavering support stand in stark contrast to the minister’s reaction when police interact with other demographics, suggesting a bifurcated standard of professional loyalty.

Contrasting Reactions to Enforcement Against Haredi Communities

The court highlighted the minister's critical stance toward officers when enforcement actions target his own political or religious base. Justice Amit specifically cited the annual Lag B’Omer celebrations at Mount Meron, where police have previously clashed with Haredi pilgrims. In those instances, the justice observed that the minister’s typical support for the force vanished, replaced by immediate accusations of misconduct against the officers involved. This perceived inconsistency served as a primary point of contention during the legal debate over whether the minister is improperly influencing police behavior through public rhetoric.