Maj. Gen. Gaby Ashkenazi. On his way to being next chief of staff
Photo: Shalom Bar Tal
Justice Dorit Beinish.: Appointment is reasonable
Photo: Gil Yohanan
High Court: Appoint chief of staff before war report
Justices reject petitions demanding not to appoint chief of staff until Winograd Commission finishes it work. 'In a security reality in which the State of Israel is today, it is unfit for IDF to function without a full-time chief of staff,' Justice Beinish writes
High Court justices rejected Monday petitions issued by the Movement for Quality Position and the Almagor Terror Victims Association against
appointing a new chief of staff before the Winograd Commission, which is investigating the failures of the second Lebanon war, finishes its work.
The Movement for Quality Government and Almagor petitioned the High Court, claiming that the appointment of a new chief of staff is extremely unreasonable and necessitates the court's intervention since the candidates for replacing Dan Halutz are involved in the Winograd Commission's investigation.
The High Court decision and the Tirkel Commission's decision today to authorize Gaby Ashkenazi's appointment to chief of staff paves the way for the 19th IDF chief of staff to take position.
Morality of IDF
Yael Dayan
New chief of staff must prepare army for war, but also stress moral values
In addition, they claimed that the commission is examining the personal responsibility of the heads of the political echelons such that it is unreasonable that they be responsible for such making such a fateful decision before the Winograd Commission submits its findings.
Supreme Court President Dorit Beinish wrote in her ruling that appointing a chief of staff before the Winograd Commission publishes its conclusions is a reasonable appointment. Beinish also wrote, "In the security reality in which the State of Israel finds itself today, it is unfit for the IDF to function without a full-time chief of staff, and there is no reason for the court to intervene."
It was also written in the ruling: "The fighting that took place in the north was indeed difficult and painful, and the question of the responsibility of the political and defense echelons is currently being examined by the Winograd Commission. However, the responsibility for the State's security rests on the shoulders of the ruling administration."
During the court discussion, the petitioners brought up the claim that the appointment of a permanent chief of staff is likely to affect the considerations of the Winograd Commission.
Justice Beinish criticized this claim in her ruling, writing, "It would have been best had this claim not been brought forth at all. The commission is strong enough to do its work professionally, and without any diversion."
