Zulat, the Fair Regulation Movement headed by Ms. Liora Nir, and the Association of Ethiopian Jews have petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the appointment of retired judge Moshe Yair Drori, former vice president of the Jerusalem District Court, as head of the Israel Public Broadcasting Corporation’s (IPBC) hiring committee.
The petitioners, represented by Attorney Yifat Solel, claim that this appointment is based on Drori’s political views and activism and constitutes a severe infringement of the public’s trust, both due to his racist and misogynistic statements, his disregard for the principles of transparency, and his public declarations against the media.
The petition emphasizes that this is no mistake or cavalier appointment of a person who is not the best possible candidate, but rather a conscious and deliberate decision aimed at undermining public broadcasting and giving carte blanche to political meddling in the IPCB.
Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi has made it his goal to damage public broadcasting since the day of his appointment as a government minister (and even before, as an MK). The appointment in question is part of a broader agenda, a fundamental part of the regime revolution that the Israeli government attempted to promote but was largely blocked due to the Israeli public’s opposition and protests. Drori’s appointment follows the resignation of the previous committee head, who reportedly stepped down due to political pressures from the Communications Minister. This appointment, whose unsoundness cries to high heaven, is yet another attempt by Karhi to advance his political objectives, which contradict the purposes of the law and seek to undermine the independence of public broadcasting and its ability to deliver reliable information to the Israeli public.
The petition further claims that the appointment process failed to meet administrative requirements. To wit, the Review Committee of Appointments per the Government Companies Law-1975 failed to fulfill its duty, submitting an ill-considered opinion to the minister that did not address the adequacy of the appointment or offer advice on Drori’s suitability. Given that the requirements were not met, the matter must be sent back to the committee to complete its work as required by law.