Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara told Israel’s High Court of Justice on Monday afternoon that the government has violated a Supreme Court ruling on military conscription, which required it to enforce the draft of ultra-Orthodox men under existing law—at least until any new exemption law is passed, such as the one the government is currently promoting.
In a landmark decision in November, the Supreme Court ruled that the government must implement a more equitable draft policy, including conscripting ultra-Orthodox men into the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The court ordered the government to develop “an effective policy for drafting Haredim” within 45 days, and to stop granting financial benefits to those evading military service.
“As a rule,” the justices wrote, “the continued provision of benefits—whether directly or indirectly related to evading the draft—should not be permitted. This includes benefits given to yeshiva students as such, when their enrollment serves as a means of draft evasion.” The court also ordered criminal proceedings to begin against Haredi draft evaders.
3 View gallery
Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara with Justice Minister Yariv Levin
(Photo: Alex Kolomoisky)
“The government has not taken steps to implement the ruling or the practical remedies directed at it,” Baharav-Miara wrote. “Nor has it expressed any intention to comply with the decision, thereby violating the court’s ruling. This blatant violation is particularly serious in light of public calls by government ministers to defy certain judicial orders—calls that have gone unrebuked by either the government or the prime minister.” She added that the ruling addresses a “deliberate and ongoing violation of the law that severely harms the principle of equality, which the court ordered the government to address.”
Baharav-Miara cited Justice Noam Sohlberg’s warning that the ongoing mass draft evasion sanctioned by the government not only undermines equality but also poses a real threat to national security. Therefore, she said, there is "reason to instruct the prime minister and the government to immediately implement the order that required broad complementary actions in the civil and economic spheres.”
She further recalled Sohlberg’s comments that the court’s role is not to design an enforcement regime or to dictate specific steps, but rather to affirm the government’s general legal obligation and offer guiding principles. Nevertheless, he noted, “If this violation continues, we may in the future be required to go even further.”
3 View gallery
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz
(Photo: Koby Gideon/GPO)
According to Baharav-Miara, the government’s conduct “poses a serious threat to the democratic system in Israel, including the principle of separation of powers—especially when the violators are the prime minister and the government itself. This conduct harms one of the pillars of Israel’s democratic framework—the separation of powers—and destabilizes the system of checks and balances essential for a functioning democracy. When the executive branch does not consider itself bound by judicial orders, it strips the judiciary of its ability to fulfill its constitutional role as a check on governmental authority, opening the door to unrestrained rule by force.”
She added: “This concern is amplified by public statements made by some government ministers urging defiance of certain judicial orders, without any condemnation or distancing from the prime minister. Such statements undermine the rule of law, delegitimize the entire judicial system, and bear directly on the matter at hand. All of this is occurring in a context where the government appears to have no genuine intention of implementing the ruling or the remedies directed at it.”
Meanwhile, Cabinet Secretary Yossi Fuchs asked the High Court on Monday evening for an extension to implement the ruling, claiming that “the Attorney General is pushing toward a constitutional crisis and a clash between branches of government, while attempting to block the government from obtaining more time.”
Fuchs stated that “the government expects its legal advisors—who are supposed to help promote its policies—to initiate the extension request themselves and to oppose contempt motions. All the more so, we expect the legal advisory system to cooperate and seek solutions, rather than inflame disputes where none exist. It is therefore expected that the Attorney General not portray the government as violating the ruling when it has clearly explained that this is not the case.”
He further accused the Attorney General’s Office of hypocrisy. “The legal advisory establishment’s brazen attempt to portray the government’s conduct as a deliberate defiance of a judicial order is especially serious, given that it is coming from the Attorney General," he said. "There is likely no institution in Israel more accustomed to taking the law into its own hands and ignoring judicial instructions—particularly deadlines—than the legal advisory system itself. Anyone following its work knows that it treats judicial deadlines as mere suggestions.”