National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir told police officers on Thursday that “command courage means implementing the policy of the minister and the police commissioner, and the policy of Israel’s elected government.”
Ben-Gvir, whose tenure as minister is the subject of petitions to the High Court of Justice, added: “In my view, command courage is not tested when part of the media and politicians from a very specific camp are embracing you. Command courage is doing what is right, what is true.”
Ben-Gvir made the remarks at a graduation ceremony for a police command and staff course, completion of which is a requirement for promotion to the rank of superintendent. “Command courage is doing what is right for governance and sovereignty, even if a small minority in the country, very powerful in the media, tries to intimidate and frighten you,” the minister said.
“Command courage is standing by the truth even when senior officials try to prevent you from carrying out your duties and getting to the truth,” he added. “Before your eyes must be the law, the truth and the policy. You must fight for and stand up for the independence of the police force even in the face of senior officials, whoever they may be. Do not be afraid of anyone.”
Since taking office, Ben-Gvir has faced criticism for allegedly interfering in police operations in ways that exceed his authority and undermine the force’s independence. On multiple occasions, the High Court of Justice and Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara have warned that he was acting beyond his legal powers.
In petitions calling on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to dismiss the national security minister, the attorney general is expected not to defend Netanyahu before the High Court if he does not remove Ben-Gvir.
Netanyahu would then be required to present a separate, private defense to the court explaining why he did not dismiss Ben-Gvir, despite what Baharav-Miara has described as “systematic harm by the minister to the proper functioning of the police and its professional independence, with regard to matters at the core of human rights in the state: improper interference in police handling of protests; improper use of appointment powers; interference with and influence over investigations of police officers and civilians, and active involvement in the operational activity of the police.”