High Court Cancels Minister's Removal of KAN Search Committee Chair

Justices stated that the law permits removal of the search committee chair before the end of the term only under limited circumstances, such as failure to perform the role properly, and only after consultation with the president of the Supreme Court.

The court held that this authority must be interpreted narrowly. Disagreement with the chair’s decisions or the conduct of the process does not meet the required threshold. The ruling addressed five petitions concerning the prolonged delay in completing appointments to the KAN council.

The council is required to have 12 members and is responsible for determining the public broadcaster’s policy, approving broadcast schedules, appointing the director-general, approving the budget and setting ethics rules. After five council members completed their terms in November 2024, the council was left unable to function properly.

Karhi had argued that Munitz compromised her independence by relying on legal advisers, that an improper threshold requirement had been added for choosing additional search committee members, and that she had involved an unauthorized outside figure.

The court rejected each of those grounds. The justices said consulting with the Communications Ministry’s legal advisers did not constitute a failure to perform duties, noting that legal advice forms part of the ordinary work of an administrative body in public appointments.

Public officials are generally required to act according to binding legal advice. The court acknowledged that setting threshold conditions earlier in the process would have been preferable but found the issue did not justify removal. The appointments vetting committee had already examined the matter and concluded the process should not be canceled on that basis.

The court also found no evidentiary basis for the claim that Munitz had improperly involved an external person, noting that Munitz denied the allegation.

The decision canceled Karhi’s removal of Munitz and left in place the search committee’s prior actions. The court ordered the appointments process to advance for four pending council candidacies, including the appointment of Aliza Dayan Hamama and the proposed extensions of terms for Michal Raphaeli-Kaduri, Prof.

Menachem Ben-Sasson and Amir Sabhat. The vetting committee must complete its review by May 31. If it approves the candidates, their names must be transferred to Karhi, who must make a decision within seven days. The court did not order the minister to appoint the candidates but made clear that the process cannot remain stalled.

The search committee had been operating with two members. The justices determined that the committee’s previous actions remain valid. The court also left in place temporary orders extending the terms of some sitting council members until their appointment processes are completed.

Karhi criticized the ruling after it was issued. He said the decision was “on ice” and that he would not appoint the candidates recommended by Munitz.