Minister Itamar Ben Gvir Rejects Judicial Authority as ‘Puppet’ Rule Ahead of High Court Ouster Hearing

Outside his dismissal hearing, Itamar Ben Gvir defends his right to change police policy and slams the Attorney General before a crowd of supporters in Jerusalem.

By: AXL Media

Published: Apr 15, 2026, 3:26 AM EDT

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

Ben Gvir Asserts Executive Mandate Over Police Policy

Speaking to reporters and a crowd of supporters in Jerusalem, National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir openly acknowledged and defended his role in reshaping the Israel Police. Addressing the core of the legal petitions against him, Ben Gvir stated that Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara is correct in her assessment that he is actively changing police operations and deciding policy. He framed these actions not as unlawful interference, but as the fulfillment of his ministerial duties, receiving applause as he asserted that he would not serve as a puppet for the State Attorney’s Office.

Supporters Rally Against Perceived Judicial Dictatorship

The atmosphere outside the High Court building was charged with political tension as several hundred protesters gathered to voice their support for the embattled minister. Demonstrators used blowhorns and brandished signs vowing to end what they described as a judicial dictatorship, mirroring the minister’s own rhetoric regarding judicial overreach. The rally provided a visible backdrop of populist support for Ben Gvir as the legal proceedings inside the building sought to evaluate his suitability for office.

Legal Petitions Target Alleged Erosion of Police Independence

The nine-judge panel is currently reviewing multiple petitions that demand Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu terminate Ben Gvir’s appointment. The legal arguments center on the claim that the minister has systematically overstepped his authority by interfering in sensitive police decision-making processes. Specific concerns have been raised regarding Ben Gvir's influence over the handling of public protests and the conduct of active investigations, actions that petitioners argue have fundamentally undermined the professional independence of the national police force.