Israel’s Supreme Court Pauses Netanyahu’s Attempt to Fire Spy Chief

Israel’s highest court on Tuesday gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government a deadline to find a compromise over his firing of one of his top intelligence chiefs, part of a courtroom battle that could lead to a constitutional crisis.

The attempt to fire Ronen Bar, the Shin Bet chief, has further polarized an already divided Israel. Supporters of the government view Mr. Bar as disloyal to Mr. Netanyahu, but critics consider his removal a dangerous precedent that undermines the independence of democratic institutions.

The hearing, which was broadcast live in Israel, opened with unruly scenes as hecklers, including a lawmaker from Mr. Netanyahu’s conservative Likud party, forced the judges to pause the proceedings and then resume them without a public audience. The lawmaker, Tally Gotliv, had to be forcibly removed from the courtroom.

The hearing lasted almost 11 hours and ended with the issuing of an interim order against Mr. Bar’s dismissal. The judges gave the attorney general and the government until April 20 to come up with a “creative solution.”

The court stipulated that Mr. Bar was to remain in his job for now.

What’s the case?

Last month, Mr. Netanyahu fired Mr. Bar, saying that he no longer trusted him. Critics say Mr. Netanyahu fired Mr. Bar to try to seize greater power by purging a dissenting voice from Israel’s security establishment.

As head of the Shin Bet, Mr. Bar helped to spearhead Israel’s war in Gaza and to oversee the occupation of the West Bank. He was also one of a handful of senior officials who led cease-fire negotiations with Hamas to release dozens of hostages taken during the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel that ignited the war.

The decision to fire Mr. Bar came after the Shin Bet began investigating Mr. Netanyahu’s aides for potential security breaches over their ties with the Gulf state of Qatar. Mr. Netanyahu accused Israeli investigators who detained his advisers of holding them as “hostages.”

Israeli legal experts said that if the sides failed to reach a compromise, the Supreme Court could strike down Mr. Bar’s removal. That would leave Mr. Netanyahu’s government with the choice of either swallowing a bitter defeat or rejecting the top court’s ruling.

What’s the bigger picture?

Mr. Netanyahu’s critics view the firing of the independent-minded Mr. Bar as part of a broader process of edging Israel toward autocracy. They say by removing Mr. Bar, Mr. Netanyahu is seeking greater control over the powerful domestic intelligence agency.

Israel maintains a decades-long military occupation in the West Bank, where millions of Palestinians have few civil rights under a two-tier legal system. But inside Israel’s internationally recognized borders, the country remains a democracy with a robust judiciary and a freewheeling press.

Since his return to power in 2022, Mr. Netanyahu has advanced a number of changes intended to weaken checks on executive power. His government proposed a controversial judicial overhaul that would have removed much of the Supreme Court’s ability to restrain government power.

Mr. Netanyahu argued that his proposals were the will of the majority who had elected the current coalition. But they prompted mass protests by opponents who worried it would make the country less free.

What happened in court?

The chief justice, Isaac Amit, described the decision to sack Mr. Bar as “unprecedented.”

Zion Amir, a lawyer representing the government, said in his opening argument that the court was being dragged into intervening in a decision reached unanimously by a democratically elected government and that the court lacked the authority to overturn the firing.

Eliad Shraga, a lawyer representing one of several watchdog groups that petitioned the court against Mr. Bar’s dismissal, said that Israel was one second away from collapsing as a liberal democracy and that only the judges could stop the countdown.

How could the court rule?

The government had originally set April 10 as Mr. Bar’s last day on the job. The Supreme Court had already frozen his dismissal but said that Mr. Netanyahu could interview potential replacements as it prepared to hear the case.

Mr. Netanyahu argues that the law empowers him to fire the head of the Shin Bet. But legal experts say there are a number of issues that might lead the justices to order that Mr. Bar stay in his job, at least until a further review.

The Shin Bet has been investigating Mr. Netanyahu’s office, meaning the justices could nullify Mr. Netanyahu’s decision if they find it was motivated by a conflict of interest. They might also decide that his proposed rationale — mistrust — does not constitute grounds for firing a civil servant.

How could this lead to a constitutional crisis?

Mr. Netanyahu has frequently clashed with the Supreme Court and said that it has no right to intervene in major decisions. He has yet to say whether he would respect the ruling if the justices decide to strike down Mr. Bar’s dismissal.

Rejecting a Supreme Court decision would be a tectonic move, potentially paralyzing a major security agency at a time of war and throwing the balance of power in Israel further into doubt.