Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government had a rare opportunity for self-reflection after the devastating Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. The massacre exposed serious failures in national security and preparedness. Yet, rather than addressing the internal fractures that left Israel vulnerable, Netanyahu and his allies have intensified their efforts to consolidate power, weaken judicial independence, and sideline those who challenge their authority.
For months before the Hamas attack, Netanyahu’s government was preoccupied with dismantling judicial checks on its power. Mass protests erupted in response to proposed legal overhauls designed to give politicians more control over judicial appointments and limit the Supreme Court’s ability to strike down unconstitutional laws. Critics warned these measures threatened Israeli democracy itself.
The war initially put these efforts on hold, but in recent months, Justice Minister Yariv Levin and Knesset Constitution Committee Chair Simcha Rothman have renewed their campaign with vigor. One of the most blatant acts of judicial defiance came in February, when Netanyahu, Levin, and Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana boycotted the swearing-in of Supreme Court President Isaac Amit. Their absence signaled an unprecedented show of disrespect toward the head of Israel’s judiciary, a position they had sought to fill with someone more aligned with their agenda.
The backlash against Amit didn’t end there. Far-right demonstrators protested outside President Isaac Herzog’s residence, attempting to intimidate the judiciary. The Supreme Court had gone more than a year without a permanent president due to the government’s attempts to change the selection process, which would have allowed them to install a more favorable figure. When that effort failed, Netanyahu and his allies simply ignored Amit’s legitimacy.
Meanwhile, the broader effort to control the judiciary has resumed. Levin and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar have pushed sweeping reforms that expand political influence over judicial appointments and limit the High Court’s power. These changes are nearly identical to the ones that sparked mass protests in 2023, suggesting that Netanyahu’s government has learned nothing from the turmoil its policies created.
Critics argue these efforts are not just about ideology but also about protecting Netanyahu himself. The prime minister is still facing a corruption trial, and weakening the courts could help him evade justice. By eroding judicial independence, the government is also entrenching its hold on power, even as public trust in its leadership erodes.
One of Netanyahu’s biggest obstacles is Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara. Since taking office, she has been a staunch defender of the rule of law, blocking attempts to appoint unqualified political loyalists to senior government positions and insisting on accountability for the security failures of October 7.
Her insistence on a state commission to investigate the events of October 7 has put her in direct conflict with Netanyahu’s administration, which has resisted such inquiries. She has also consistently reminded ministers that they must operate within the boundaries of the law—an approach that has made her a primary target for removal.
Government officials have made no secret of their desire to fire Baharav-Miara and replace her with someone more compliant. Such a move would remove one of the last major legal barriers to Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul and corruption trial.
Attorney General Baharav-Miara isn’t the only official in Netanyahu’s crosshairs. Ronen Bar, the head of Israel’s internal security agency, Shin Bet, has also found himself under attack.
Bar took responsibility for intelligence failures leading up to the October 7 attack, admitting that his agency failed to prevent the assault. While he has signaled that he intends to step down at the appropriate time, Netanyahu’s allies are trying to hasten his departure.
The reason? Shin Bet is investigating serious breaches of security within the prime minister’s office. If Bar remains in his position, his agency’s findings could prove damaging to Netanyahu and his inner circle. Rather than allow an independent probe into these failures, Netanyahu’s allies would prefer to replace Bar with someone who will ignore any wrongdoing close to the prime minister.
Beyond the judiciary and security services, Netanyahu’s government is also working to silence civil society organizations, particularly those advocating for human rights, peace, and the rights of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories.
A new bill proposed by a ministerial committee would impose an 80% tax on donations from foreign governments to domestic nonprofits. The measure specifically targets organizations that receive funding from European countries and other international donors—funding that many peace and human rights groups rely on.
The bill would also prevent courts from considering petitions filed by organizations classified as receiving the majority of their funding from foreign political entities. Right-wing organizations, which are largely bankrolled by private donors, would not face similar restrictions.
This move is part of a broader effort to suppress dissent and shield the government from scrutiny. Human rights groups in Israel have long documented abuses in the Occupied Territories and have played a key role in holding the government accountable. By cutting off their funding and limiting their legal avenues, Netanyahu’s government seeks to reduce their influence and make it harder for them to challenge government policies.
Taken together, these actions represent a coordinated effort to weaken the institutions that traditionally act as checks on government power. Netanyahu’s administration is working to reduce judicial oversight, remove independent officials who challenge its authority, and silence organizations that could hold it accountable.
While Israel has long claimed to be the only democracy in the Middle East, its government is now pursuing policies that push it closer to authoritarianism. The erosion of judicial independence, attacks on civil society, and efforts to limit transparency are hallmarks of regimes that prioritize political survival over democratic principles.
For Palestinians, these developments are particularly alarming. Israel’s legal and civil society organizations have provided some of the few avenues available to challenge discrimination, abuses in the Occupied Territories, and state policies that limit Palestinian rights. As those institutions are weakened, Palestinians face an even greater uphill battle in seeking justice.
Israel’s political trajectory under Netanyahu is clear: an increasingly authoritarian government propped up by religious extremists, willing to undermine its own institutions to maintain power. The events of October 7 should have served as a wake-up call for a more unified and accountable leadership. Instead, Netanyahu and his allies have doubled down on their efforts to dismantle democracy and entrench their rule.
